Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1993.volume.13/vol13.iss151-200

Text File | 1993-03-22 | 1MB | 26,524 lines

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08803;
          4 Mar 93 19:38 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15852
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:58:33 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32380
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:58:01 -0600
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:58:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #152

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 4 Mar 93 16:58:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 152

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cincinnati Bell ISDN Tariff :-( (Ralph Hyres)
    The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (James Borynec)
    Potential for Credit Card Fraud Using Cellular Phone (Paul Barnett)
    Information Wanted on Caller ID (Amy Crowder)
    Teletype Model ASR/33 Docs Needed (Robert L. McMillin)
    Format of Cellular Control Channel Signal? (James Gustave)
    Looking For a T1 Card (Eric Miller)
    Is There an FAQ? (Janet M. Swisher)
    Annoyance (Serial) Calls (Morris Galloway Jr.)
    AT&T Satellite Transmissions (Jason Garner)
    Moving a Phone Line Within Apartments (Hon Wah Chin)
    Telecom Toll Data Wanted (Bill Bennett)
    Blocking of Phone Numbers With Caller ID (Bob Baxter)
    More Musings About UK "Phoneday" (Bob Goudreau)
    CLASS Question (Mark Rudholm)
    Looking For a Device to Handle Three-Way Calling (Chris Faylor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: bears![e-mail]
Date: 4 Mar 93 18:11:51 GMT
Subject: Cincinnati Bell ISDN Tariff :-(


I was happy to hear that Ameritech through their Ohio BOC Ohio Bell
was agressively marketing ISDN.  I was hoping that Cincinnati Bell
would offer a similar package.

Ohio Bell's package is roughly $50/month for Basic Rate ISDN with two
Circuit-Switched voice lines (I presume these offer measured service.)

Cincinnati Bell, however, is not with the program.

Their offering seems to be priced more like a typical 'Centrex'
offering.  It isn't National-ISDN-1 compliant, either.

The configuration I would want (flat rate service on B-channel line,
measured on another B-channel) isn't even available, owing to a
general tariff restriction on mixing classes of service unless they
are for 'different purposes'.

I need flat rate and two lines, which is what I pay $40/month for in
analog form now.  This tariff requires me to pay nearly $100/month
(38.25 + 25 + 25 + .24 (911 charges), + 1 3.50.).  When I consider
capital costs for new phones or an ISDN terminal adapter, I'm better
off buying two V.32bis modems for $450 and waiting for the next
generation of digital service.

Ohio Bell's tariff is much better.  Mitch Kapor must have talked to
them :-)

Here are the rates:-(

                Initial        Monthly        USOC
                (Install)
1. BRI Line

a via Qualified Copper        70        38.25

b via Electronic Facilities    70        229
(presumably if > 18,000 feet away from CO)

2 ISDN Bearer Services

a B-chan Circuit Switched    25*        25
    Voice or Data
    (flat rate)

b (measured)            25*        5

c B-chan packet switched    25*        125
    data

d D-chan packet switched    25*        4.50
    data
* This is a 'subsequent install' charge, it is included in the $70 if
you request it all at the initial install.

3 Optional Features

Install Charge (initial)    5
Install Charge (subsequent)    15

a Circuit-Switched

1 hunting                    3
2 six-party conf. call                12
3 call pickup                    2
4 additional DN                    5
5 Additional Call references            5
6 Electronic Key Telephone Service        10 (is this 'Centrex'?)

b Packet-Switched
1 X.25 hunting                    5
2 Closed User Group Member            1
3 Additional Logical Channels            3
4 Permanent Virtual Circuit            4

I disclaim responsibility for errors, though I tried to be accurate in
my typing.  Contact Cincinnati Bell Telephone if you want real
information.


Ralph (a disappointed potential ISDN customer)

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

From: [e-mail] (James Borynec; AGT Researcher)
Subject: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 22:19:38 -0700


I just read a startling report: "The Geodesic Network II: 1993 Report
on Competition in the Telephone Industry" By P.W. Huber, M.K. Kellogg,
and J. Thorne.  The Geodisic Company, Washington D.C.

The central thesis of this (thick) report is that the economics of
fiber and the economics of radio make long distance a "natural"
monopoly and that local access is now "inherently competitive".

They argue this point long, hard, and (I believe) convincingly.

Here are some choice quotes:

"... All serious analysts, along with top FCC officials, recognize
that the long distance industry is now characterized by umbrella
pricing, under a canopy maintained by the FCC and AT&T.  The
commission spends most of its time making sure that AT&T does not
lower its prices too fast.  MCI and Sprint appear repeatedly before
the Commission and then in Court to challenge any attempt at serious
price cutting."

"The gap in prices between AT&T and its competitors has steadily
narrowed from 10-20 per cent in mid 1984 to about 5 percent in 1987 to
still smaller margins today."

"In the marketplace, long distance competition is finished."

"Although the price of fiber in the loop has dropped to about $1500
per access line (about the same price as copper), radio already
appears to be cheaper -- about $1000 plus the cost of subscriber
equipment.  With relatively modest additional investments in digital
technology, the capacity of cellular systems will increase roughly
ten-fold, driving the cost down to perhaps as little as a couple of
hundred dollars per local circuit."

The report is written in an easy-to-read style and should be read by
anyone who has an interest in the future of telecommunications.  Even
if you disagree with their conclusions (for philosophical or fiscal
reasons), the sheer volume of relevent industrial information makes it
a valuable reference.

Copies cost about $100 and are available from the publisher (The
Geodisic Company) 1-800-257-0938, or [phone].  Electronic
versions are also available.


Jim Borynec  [e-mail]
Disclaimer:  I have no connections to the Geodesic Company, and I
won't profit if you buy their book.


[Moderator's Note: We have known for a while now that MCI and Sprint
have been repeatedly trying to keep AT&T from lowering its prices.
My feeling is long distance rates would be at least a cent or two less
per minute -- making them actually less expensive in many cases than
their two nearest competitors -- if it were not for resistance from
MCI and Sprint trying to keep the prices up. After all, their entire
fortunes were built on their fraudulent advertising campaigns saying
how they could save telephone users money on long distance calls, were
they not?  You know how that goes ...  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Barnett)
Subject: Potential For Credit Card Fraud Using Cellular Phone
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 93 06:43:50 CST


I was making a purchase at a trade show, and gave them one of my bank
cards.  I was nearly struck speechless as I watched him pick up a
handheld cellular phone and proceed to call for authorization.
Fortunately, I recovered in time, and cut him off just as the call
began:

Me:  "Are you calling for credit card authorization?"

Him: "Yes."  (puzzled look on his face)

Me:  "I do not want you to recite my card number over THAT phone."

Him: (still looking clueless)

Me:  "You will broadcast that number to everyone within several miles
     that has a scanner.  You might as well stand up on the table
     and shout it out to this crowd."

Him: "I have to get authorization for this purchase."

Me:  "Then find a pay phone or borrow a land-line phone."

Him: "There's no phone in here, and I can't leave the booth."

Me:  "I'll go elsewhere, thank you."

I went to another vendor, and paid a slightly higher price, after
agreeing that he would use a pay phone.  He didn't have a cellular
phone anyway, but it took him a while to find a phone he could borrow.

I was surprised that the credit card companies didn't have some sort
of rule against this.  So I called American Express and the issuer of
my MasterCard, and both customer service reps understood the problem
(once I explained it), but neither was aware of any policy to the
contrary.  I filed a "complaint" or "comment" or whatever they called
it, and maybe something will happen as a result.



Paul Barnett
MPP OS Development     (214)-497-4846
Convex Computer Corp.  Richardson, TX

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

From: Amy Crowder <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Wanted on Caller ID
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1993 21:05:56 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois


I am doing research on caller ID and the privacy issue.  I would
greatly appreciate any information about new systems, such as RS-232,
that are being used.

Thank you!

Responses may be sent to [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Perhaps Amy means the presence of an RS-232 port on
a display to send the information in readable form to a computer or
terminal.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 04 Mar 93 18:52:59 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Teletype Model ASR/33 Docs Needed


A friend of mine has a Teletype model ASR/33 and needs docs on the
beast.  Can anyone in net.land lend a hand?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (James Gustave)
Subject: Format of Cellular Control Channel Signal?
Date: 04 Mar 1993 20:36:04 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz


Could someone please explain the format of the signals used on the
cellular control channel?  Thanks.


james speth  email for pgp compatible public-key   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Miller)
Subject: Looking For a T1 Card
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 13:26:06 GMT


Hi,

I'm looking for a T1 card to plug into a PC.  I have found some cards
with a VME bus.  I am happy with them.  Unfortunately, the
manufacturer does not make PC (ISA bus) versions.  If you know of a
manufacturer or supplier of these cards, please send me email.  My
address is:   [e-mail]


Thanks,

Eric

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

From: [e-mail] (Janet M. Swisher)
Subject: Is There an FAQ?
Date: 4 Mar 1993 15:38:24 -0600
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin


Is there an FAQ for this group?  I have a couple of simple questions
that would probably be answered by it, if it existed.

1) Way back when, I heard that you should never tell your local phone
company that you use a modem on your phone line, as they could then
charge you a much higher rate.  I have the impression this is no
longer true.  What is the status of this?  (Note: this is *not* a
question about a "modem tax".)

2) I have two phone lines in my house.  I want to rewire one of my
outlets so that it offers plugs for both lines, not just one.  How do
I go about doing that?


Thanks.


[Moderator's Note: The Telecom FAQ is available in the Telecom Archives
which can be accessed using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Morris Galloway Jr.)
Subject: Annoyance (Serial) Calls
Organization: Clemson University
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 12:40:54 GMT


We've been experiencing an annoying pattern of calls recently.  Early
in the morning (7-8am), calls are coming in to one or two of our
dormitories.

When answered, there is silence, then a hangup.

Often, the same thing happens to each room on a floor (the numbers are
consequtive).

Aside from a malicious crackpot, is there any computerized dialing
equipment that could produce these symptoms? I've asked the residents
about fax tones, but apparently there is just silence.

We have reported the problem to Southern Bell, but no solution so far.

Any clues?

Thanks,


Morris Galloway      [e-mail]    1-803-833-8217
Presbyterian College   Clinton, SC  29325


[Moderator's Note: The fax or modem on the other end (if that is what
it is) might remain silent until it hears one of its own kind from
your end. Some are configured that way. Is there dead silence from the
other end, or mostly silence with background room noise, ie a person
there who is not speaking up?  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 02:13:52 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Jason Garner)
Subject: AT&T Satellite Transmissions


Perhaps a year ago it was possible to tune one's television satellite
dish to channels 21 or 22 while fixed on Telstar 301 and using a
shortwave receiver in sideband mode, monitor long distance calls of
AT&T.  The same was true for Sprint on the same and another satellite.
Other satellites for which this was possible include Spacenet 2,
Westar 2 and Comstar D4.  Does anyone know whether this is still
possible?  If so, what percentage of my calls go over the airwaves in
this fashion?


Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are not opinions at all.  They
are fact.


[Moderator's Note: In an earlier message in this issue, the writer was
concerned about his credit card number being read over a cell phone.
As we all know, *nothing* is secure or private as you point out here.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 10:30:30 PST
From: [e-mail] (Hon Wah Chin)
Subject: Moving a Phone Line Within Apartments
Reply-To: [e-mail]


While moving from one unit in an apartment building to another, I
wanted to have access to my phone line from both places.  I did this
from the building's side of the demarc.  Now that I'm out of the old
apartment I called PacBell to get the records changed to reflect the
situation.

After talking to the rep I get the feeling that they would have done
the transfer at the CO and charged me $35.  It looks as though my
attempt to do the switch "make before break" didn't work.

It looks as though I will have to back out my wiring changes and ask
for a regular transfer of service.  Any hints about how to minimize
the no-service window?


Hon Wah Chin

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telecom Toll data wanted
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 21:59:34 GMT


I'm researching telecom toll charges worldwide for comparision with
local rates here in New Zealand. Could someone please email me the
following information.

1. Sample toll charges between major US and European towns.

eg. New York to Boston, NY to LA, London to Manchester, London to
Glasgow.  London to Berlin. Etc.

2. Provide some information about discount structures -- ie, do rates
fall in off peak period? By how much?

3. Are there usage discounts? For example, if you spend x dollers do
you get a volume discount.

I'll be posting the results of this non-scientific survey.


Thanks.

Bill Bennett

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

Date: Thu, 04 Mar 93 22:34:33 -0400
From: Bob Baxter <[e-mail]>
Organization: Fraternity of Fun Folks
Subject: Blocking of Phone Numbers With Caller ID


Hi all,

I have had Caller ID for several months now, with good success.  It's
a wonderful way to screen out telemarketers. :-)

Anyhow, I seem to remember reading someplace, whether it was a New
York Telephone pamphlet, or perhaps an old Digest, that if you had
Caller ID, you could block out either:

a) A selected phone number(s);
b) A number that is marked private would not even let my phone ring.

I'm aware about the CLID info being sent between the first and second
ring, but I'm almost positve I read something here last year that this
could be done.  If it matters, I'm calling from Long Island - (516
NPA).


Thanks,

Bob Baxter    Internet: <[e-mail]>
<[e-mail]>   America Online: <BOB THE DJ>


[Moderator's Note: Caller-ID by itself blocks nothing. You can
purchase or write software to do what you want with the call. Telco
does offer a service called "Call Screeing" which (independent of
Caller-ID) lets you block calls from numbers specified. If those
numbers call, you won't get any ring at all, in fact the call will not
even leave the CO.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:09:25 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: More Musings About UK "Phoneday"


One thing I've wondered about is how close to capacity the UK's
toll-free number space (0800-XXXXXX) has become.  If it is getting
full, then the upcoming Phoneday, which will cause all the geographic
STD codes to start with "01", offers a unique opporunity to expand the
free-phone number space by an order of magnitude in a completely
upward-compatible fashion.

The key to this plan would be changing the free-phone STD code from
0800 to just 080, and allowing the non-STD-code part of the number to
expand from six to seven digits (thus increasing the number pool from
one million to ten million).  All existing 0800 numbers wouldn't have
to change one bit: 0800 XXXXXX would simply become 080 0XX XXXX
instead.  Nine million new numbers would then be available in the
range of 080 100 0000 through 080 999 9999.  There would be no problem
with collisions with STD codes 0801 through 0809 (if any of them are
even in use today), because they will change to 01801 ... 01809 as
part of the Phoneday cutover.

Any comments from the UK readership?


Bob Goudreau        Data General Corporation
[e-mail]    62 Alexander Drive
[phone]        Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 13:27:47 PST
From: silver![e-mail] (Mark Rudholm)
Subject: CLASS Question


This is something that I imagine someone at AT&T or Bellcore can address.

Yesterday, March 2, I had Call Return (*69) and Busy Call Forwarding
added to my line, a 1AESS (213-930).

Busy Call Forwarding is basically useless because it does not work AT
ALL unless Call Waiting is explicitly disabled (*70).  If I am already
using Call Waiting (i.e. talking to party B while party A is on hold)
and another call comes in, they get a busy.  If my phone is ringing or
I am placing a call that hasn't supervised yet, callers will get a
busy.  Kinda pointless, I think, especially since I got it because of
those times when Call Waiting doesn't work (phone ringing, placed call
hasn't supervised yet, etc.)  Does 5ESS do any better?  I'm not
interested in switching to DMS but I am curious if it is any
different.

My next problem is with Call Return (*69).  It seems to work (well, if
you ignore the fact that half of greater L.A. is GTE who hasn't
apparently heard of SS7 yet) O.K.  I have a line at my parent's home
that I use as an RCF, it isn't a REAL Pacific Bell RCF but just a line
with Call Forwarding on it and no sets connected to it.  It is set to
forward to my home (213-930).  This line is also on an SS7 equipped
1AESS (213-261).  Anyway, the Distinctive Ringing and Selective Call
forwarding at my home work properly (as they should) on calls
regardless of whether they dialed me directly or if they went through
the 261 forwarding.  The problem is that Call Return does not work
this way.  When I try to return a call that comes through the 261
line, I get the recording "We're sorry, this feature cannot be used to
call the number you are calling at this time, please hang up now and
try your call again in a few minutes."

Thinking it odd that Selective Forwarding and Distinctive Ringing
should work properly when Call Return didn't and knowing that the
CLASS features shouldn't be affected by forwarding (as opposed to ANI
delivery) I called Pacific Bell to ask about it.  Well, surprisingly
the person who took my call understood what I explained.  She said
that all CLASS features, including Call Return should work properly on
calls forwarded through another SS7 equipped Pacific Bell switch.  She
agreed then that there was a failure if this was not happening.  She
transfered me to Repair.  I put in an report with a brief description
of the problem and basically told them to have someone at the CO call
me so I can explain it.

What I want to know is if this is just an implementation error on
Pacific Bell's part or if this is how it is supposed to work.


Mark D. Rudholm      Philips Interactive Media of America
[e-mail]    11050 Santa Monica Boulevard
[phone]      Los Angeles, CA  90025


[Moderator's Note: Regarding 'forward on busy' and call-waiting, it
will not work unless the line is 'truely busy' which only occurs when
you suspend call-waiting (or when you 'suspend' it permanently by
having telco remove the feature from your line.) I think the problem
with call return on the 261 line is the switch is trying to place an
outgoing call on a line not equipped for outgoing calls. The 261 line
is only set up for incoming calls. It thinks 'here is 261-xxxx placing
a call to <last number> ...' and realizes that is impossible since 261
is for incoming calls only.  An interesting bug, to be sure.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Faylor)
Subject: Looking For a Device to Handle Three-Way Calling
Organization: Boston Business Computing, Ltd.
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 22:13:49 GMT


I'm looking for a device that will initiate a conference call using
the phone company's three-way calling service.

I'd like the to call two numbers and connect them together, keeping
the phone off-hook until one of the two parties hangs up.  This action
would ideally be able to be initiated remotely by calling the device
and issuing commands to it.

Is there anything like this out there anywhere?


Chris Faylor        Boston Business Computing, Ltd.
[e-mail]    "I am not here."

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #152
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15906;
          4 Mar 93 23:10 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15609
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 4 Mar 1993 14:30:15 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26619
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 4 Mar 1993 14:29:34 -0600
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 14:29:34 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #151

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 4 Mar 93 14:29:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 151

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Ben Burch)
    Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Tad Cook)
    Re: Toll Stations in California (Don Lynn)
    Re: 1-800 Collect Callbacks (Justin Leavens)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Aninda Dasgupta)
    Re: WTC Blast (Jeffrey Jonas)
    NYTel and the Bombing (Dave Niebuhr)
    News Clips re: WTC (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (Brad Hicks)
    Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (Max J. Rochlin)
    Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (Al Stangenberger)
    Re: A Little More TWX History (Harold Hallikainen)
    Address Correction For Moderator's Note (Frank Carey)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ben Burch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week"
Organization: Motorola, Inc.
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 17:15:39 GMT


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

> The interviews are mastered onto Digital Audio Tape.  A typical
> 30-minute program occupies 15 Mbytes of disk space.  UUNET

Just what the internet needs; Hundred of folks FTPing 15 MB files on a
regular basis.  This is a really nifty concept, but it would be a
better idea if it waited for the high bandwidth "superhighway" backbone.


Ben Burch   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week"
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1993 19:37:19 GMT


    Seems that distribution of audio over internet is going to
take an awful lot of bandwidth and be real costly.  Is it worth it?  I
keep looking at my phone bill and wish there was an easy way to just
pay by the bit (sending ASCII at my relatively slow typing speed)
instead of having to pay for a pair of 64 kbps circuits every time I
phone someone.

    Also, what sort of compression is to be used in this audio
distribution system?


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: hpubvwa![e-mail] (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week"
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1993 16:23:41 GMT


There is an article about internet talk "radio" on the front page
of this morning's (3/4/93) {New York Times}.


Tad Cook     |  Phone:  [phone]  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544
Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   [e-mail]
             |  Internet: [e-mail]           or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 10:50:56 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Toll Stations in California


In David Esan's list of all non-dialable California phones, I was
surprised to see one that I have actually seen.  A few others that I
probably was by, but didn't notice.  The only phone in Nevada Falls,
California (Population Zero), is a phone for use by backpackers with
emergencies.  The phone was in a weatherproof box on a post a few
hundred yards south on the trail from the top of Nevada Falls, which
some of you may know is two or three miles, and about 2000 feet climb,
out of Yosemite Valley, in the beginning of the back country
wilderness of Yosemite National Park.  The phone is so incongruous
there that you can't miss it.

I have never been interested in making a phone call when hiking there,
so did not open the box to check it out.  Was not clear if
non-emergency use was allowed.  Should I have called Domino's rather
than carrying my lunch ten miles, as I did last time I was there?
Probably even get it free for missing the guaranteed delivery time.
There are no structures and no tents allowed in the area of this
phone, so I guess we could say it is the smallest town served by the
phone company.  From the report of a friend who was in the area
earlier this week, I can tell that the phone is inaccessible now,
unless you have snowshoes, so you probably don't want to check out
Nevada Falls 1 right now.

I must have walked past the phone Vernal Falls 1, about a mile and
1000 feet closer to a road than Nevada Falls 1.  There's a restroom
and a drinking fountain there, so it's practically a metropolis by
comparison.

Glen Aulin 1 and Merced Lake 2 are undoubtedly at the High-Sierra
Camps of the same names, also in Yosemite Park.  These consist of one
or two permanent buildings and a bunch of tent buildings erected every
summer, to serve backpackers and equestrian campers who wish to eat
and sleep in relative comfort, though at least a day's hike away from
the nearest road.

I will have to try to find and check out one of the numerous
non-dialable phones next time I am in Idlewild, a town of cabins in
the San Jacinto Mountains, in the Palm Springs vicinity.

Gaviota is on a major US highway (101), not all that far from Santa
Barbara, a sizable city, so I'm not sure why its fossil phone has not
been replaced.  Since the phone is Gaviota 43, it implies that they
DID get rid of at least 42 of them.

This message may seem to wander off the topic of telecom, but let me
justify this by saying that it is in understanding the locations that
we can see why these anachronisms, non-dialable phones, still exist.

Anybody want to start a movement to declare a few of these phones as
historical monuments? :-)


Don Lynn

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: 1-800 Collect Callbacks
Date: 3 Mar 1993 14:18:04 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(James Olsen) writes:

>  Sec. 64.714  No Disconnection for Failure to Remit pay-per-call Service
>  Charges.

>    No common carrier shall disconnect, or order the disconnection of, a
>  telephone subscriber's basic communications service as a result of that
>  subscriber's failure to pay interstate pay-per-call service charges.

   The problem that is left is that if a slimy IP charges you for
something that legitimately you should not have been charged for, and
you cannot get the IP to reverse the charge, the balance stays on your
account and then is reported to Equifax as a deliquent balance. Then
see if you can get new phone service established in a new
residence ... not likely.

   It still boggles my mind that the second most powerful collection
agency (referring to the collective Phone Company) in the country can
be used by any patch of slime to do what they wish. I think the whole
concept of "putting the charge on the phone bill" for any service
other than phone company charges is insane. I can't use $15 worth of
stamps on a package to buy a compact disc mail order, I can't put my
grocery charges on to my gas bill, and I can't pay for pool
maintenance on my water bill. If IPs can use the telco billing
procedures, why can't I order Chinese food for delivery and put *that*
on my phone bill ...


Justin Leavens    Microcomputer Specialist   University of Southern California

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

From: [e-mail] (Aninda Dasgupta)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Organization: Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff, New York
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 22:43:09 GMT


I'm not sure if anybody mentioned this in the Digest, but the blast at
the WTC took most TV stations out in NYC and the vicinity.  On the way
home from work that day, I couldn't get anything but CBS Radio, coming
live from the site. When I reached home, I turned on the TV to see if
they were showing any gory sights, but only CBS TV and a (Telemundo?)
station from NJ were on the air. My landlady's son, who works for CBS,
said that all the other TV stations had their transmitters on top of
the WTC.  CBS radio reported that the authorities had to actually
remove some of the TV and radio antennae in order to make space for a
helipad for the rescue helicopters to land on top of the WTC. [Some
transmitters may have suffered from the power cutoff.]  CBS TV
apparently transmits from the Empire State Building.

However, CBS radio also reported that one of the first persons to be
rescued from the top of the WTC, by helicopter, was a pregnant CBS
employee who was up on the WTC roof to repair the transmitter/antenna.
CBS probably maintains transmitters on both the WTC and ESB. I
couldn't tell if the cable operators were able to get feeds from the
TV stations that were off the air, because I don't subscribe to CATV
(I refuse to aid any monopoly) and I am also not sure if the rest of
the country got to see Peter Jennings or Tom Brokaw for the evening
news, but we were able to get only Dan Rather.

The CBS people were very good in reporting the developments non stop
that night, both on radio and on TV.  I was constantly wondering when
they would take a commercial break, but hats off to them, they kept
their cameras glued to the WTC towers. Even their weather and traffic
helicopters were kept hovering around the WTC, reporting on (and
possibly aiding in directing) emergency vehicle movements to and from
the site.

Two days ago, while dropping off my car at a basement parking garage
in a high-rise building next to Rockefeller Center in NYC, the
attendant jokingly asked me if I had a bomb in my trunk.  And
yesterday, while driving into Canada from the I-87 border in New York,
the customs official kept a straight face and asked us if we were
running away from the WTC blast. Then he burst out in a guffaw. Can't
blame him, it was 3 in the morning and he probably needed some
lighthearted banter for entertainment at the lonely border post, with
nothing but the miles of snow-covered landscape for company. But, the
blast has certainly affected people, all the way from NYC to a remote
border post on the NY-Canada border.


Aninda DasGupta ([e-mail]) Ph:[phone] Fax:[phone]
Philips Labs\n 345 Scarborough Rd\n  Briarcliff Manor\n NY 10510

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 11:05:02 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas)
Subject: Re: WTC blast


There's a new newsgroup dedicated to the World Trade Center (WTC)
blast, but that's on another system so I can't find the name.  It was
curious that somebody posted that they first learned about the
"incident" from the TELECOM Digest, so thanks for the swift
turnaround.

I just came to work today via the PATH train WTC station.  Except for
the roped off area, it looks like business as normal on the concourse.
Most of the Path tracks are open as are the turnstiles, and most of
the stores are open with no apparent damage.

Two vacant stores are being used for the police, and for organizing
people to visit their offices to retrieve stuff.  After all the press
coverage, I'm amazed at how much is reopened again.  You'd think the
place was destroyed, but a lot is really back to normal.

I'm glad to have read in TELECOM Digest that Teleport was barely
damaged.  I guess it's more a RISKS item at how all the backup and
emergency systems were knocked out at once.  Just as the Hinsdale fire
demonstrated how not to build a facility, the WTC bomb demonstrated
that we need to protect our infrastructure from un-natural as well as
natural disasters.  There are many lessons that relate to telecom
here, sad to say.


Jeffrey Jonas    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 3 Mar 93 14:04:06 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: NYTel and the Bombing


New York Telephone announced in {Newsday} and other papers that they
have installed many more lines in wake of the bombing of 2 World Trade
Center and limited emergency office space.

1,700 new regular lines and 176 T1/T3's in addition to call-forwarding
and other features to 4,083 lines.  150 technicians have been added to
the immediate area to expedite whatever else needs to be done.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: News Clips re: WTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 08:05:33 GMT


While not directly related to telecom, the explosion at WTC has lots
of interesting ramifications.

I've put together a series of news clips from the incident.  If anyone
would like them, please send me email with something like:

  "wtc news request"
 in the subject line.

Note that I'm not a listserv, and don't even play one on TV, so it may
take a bit till I get it out to you.  Also, there are roughly
100K/day, and at this point, I have three days worth online.


email address: [e-mail]
twice the usual disclaimers apply...


[Moderator's Note: Here's the latest news: The White House announced
Thursday morning that the FBI has made at least one arrest in the WTC
matter. Someone in is custody who was seen on a videotape taken in the
garage. The FBI says a search is underway for 'others', but they won't
say how many or who, nor will they identify the person they did arrest
overnight Wednesday/Thursday morning.  PAT]

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 4 Mar 93 16:35:44 GMT
Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards


It isn't just old foggies (grin) like Gordon and Pat who remember
punched cards; not only did the community college where I took my
first computer course (in 1978) still use punched cards (on an IBM
360/30), but as late as when I graduated from college in 1982 the ACM
computer programming competition was still using ANSI 66 (?) Fortran,
pre-Fortran-IV, and you HAD to punch your own decks and submit them in
batch via the official card readers.  (How much have things changed?)
I'm pretty proud of the teams I was on; Taylor was the only
undergraduate school in our region to send a team, and the only school
to send a team that had no keypunches for us to practice on, and we
still took third place in the region two years in a row.

And yes, Gordon's memory is correct; the bottom edge of the card is
called the "nine edge," but I thought that the top two rows were
labelled "B" and "A", not "11/10" or "X/R".  Different card stock?
But this all brings back to mind this little ditty that I learned in
my youth:

THE BALLAD OF THE UNKNOWN PROGRAMMER

"No program is perfect," / They said with a shrug. / "The customer is
happy, / What's one little bug?"

But he was determined. / The others went home. / He dug out the
flowcharts, / Deserted, alone.

Chain smoking, cold coffee, / Logic, deduction. / "I've got it!" he cried,
/ "Just change one instruction!"

Then two.  Then three more. / As year followed year, / New employees would
say, / "Is that guy still here?"

He died at the keypunch / of hunger and thirst. / Next day, he was buried,
/ Face down, nine-edge first.

His wife, through her tears, / Consoling her fate, / Said, "He's not
really gone, / He's just 'working late.'"


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Max J. Rochlin)
Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 18:30:21 GMT
Organization: QueerNet


Ya know, you can still order the ANSI Standards documentation (which
just went "FINAL" last year).  I've misplaced my copy so I can't give
you the order number.  The title has the words Holerith Codes in it.


[e-mail]  |   Max J. Rochlin   |  {uunet,sgi}!unpc!max

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

From: [e-mail] (Al Stangenberger)
Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards
Date: 3 Mar 1993 20:11:03 GMT
Organization: U.C. Forestry & Resource Mgt.


Here at Berkeley, the first successor to the keypunch was a Teletype
and paper tape.  Editing paper tape was a pain, but bypassing the card
reader and saving a half-hour walk to the computer center was worth
it. (That was half-hour to submit the deck, and possibly another trip
later to pick up the (hopefully correct) output. We really felt great,
even at 110 baud!  (circa 1967).

I have the last surviving card reader at Berkeley.  Get to know some
interesting people through referrals -- there are still lots of decks
hidden away in files.  Possibly the last IBM cards punched on campus
were done on a 1939-vintage IBM model 01 hand-operated keypunch when I
had to make new control cards so my reader could talk to a revised
operating system. The cards were alphabetic, so each column had to be
multi-punched by hand.


Al Stangenberger                    Dept. of Forestry & Resource Mgt.
[e-mail]          145 Mulford Hall - Univ. of Calif.
uucp:  ucbvax!ucbviolet!forags      Berkeley, CA  94720
BITNET: FORAGS AT UCBVIOLE          [phone]  FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: A Little More TWX History
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1993 20:00:48 GMT


    Thanks for the interesting history of Teletypewriters!  Back
in high school I used a model 15 with model 14 tape "typing reperf"
and "transmitter distributor" on amateur radio.  A friend and I also
set up a local teletype network.  We ran about a mile and a half of
single conductor wire through the trees of the neigborhood.  We then
fed this wire against ground, running a 60 mA current loop.  We made a
motor control circuit for each end.  When I wanted to leave a message
on his machine, I'd supply loop current, which would start both
motors.  To shut down, I'd drop my loop power supply which would cause
both machines to "run open" for a while, 'til a capacitor across a
current sense relay discharged, shutting down the AC to the motor.

    I also remember the very complicated wiring inside the model
15.  There was a huge wiring harness that seemed to allow for infinite
options.  I finally ripped it all out and brought out six wires.  Two
for the keyboard, two for the "selector magnets" (series for holding
magnets at 60 mA, parallel for pulling magnets at 60 mA, or series for
holding magnets at 20 mA), and two for AC power to the motor.

    The previous article spoke of various codes used on Teletypes.
I recall seeing machines that LOOKED like model 15s, but used a six
level code.  These were used by press wire services.  The sixth bit
allowed for upper and lower case.  At my college newspaper, they had
one of these printers and a tape punch running all the time.  When the
editor found an article of interest, he/she would go searching through
the punched tape looking for the article.  Articles were identified by
a number that was punched to be readable in the holes on the tape (and
garbage on the printer).  This tape was then sent to mechanical
Linotype machine where the article was cast in lead.  They'd then pull
a proof from the lead type, put it in the paste-up for the page.  Then
they'd photograph the page, make offset plates and print the paper.
Watching that Lintotype cast the type to be used just once was pretty
amazing!

    The previous article also mentioned the use of model 15s in
radio and TV station wire service use in the 1950s.  Here in SLO Town,
they were used through the mid 1970s.  These were eventually replaced
with Extel dot matrix printers, the first dot matrix printer I ever
saw.

    Finally, I still have a model 33 with tape punch, reader and
internal Bell 103 modem sitting back in a corner here.  When I got it,
I was thinking of taking info out of our old CP/M PC board CAD system
and generating drill tapes for the PC house.  The machine is still
sitting in the corner.  We now don't even plot our boards.  We just
take a disk with the Gerber photoplot file and drill file across town
to the PC house.  We give them a disk and back come PC boards.  Pretty
neat!

    It's amazing to see the changes I've seen in the electronics
industry ... but then, I'm getting older ...


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

Date: Wed,  3 Mar 93 10:23:44 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Address Correction
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


> Readers with factual information about schemes like this should
> probably write Frank Carey to discuss it; he invited such email at
> fec.arch2.att.com.  PAT]
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Won't work!

Should be:   [e-mail]


Frank Carey at Bell Labs       908/949-8049


[Moderator's Note: Sorry about that. Frank did include the latter
address in the text of his message. When I went back to reference it
the next day, I grabbed the 'from' address instead.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #151
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26220;
          5 Mar 93 3:50 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06582
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 00:46:44 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22438
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 00:46:02 -0600
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 00:46:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #153

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 5 Mar 93 00:46:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 153

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Federal Agents Raid Computer Porn Ring in 40 Places / 15 States (J Schmidt)
    Arrest Made in WTC Bombing ([e-mail])
    Australian Prime Minister on Optical Network to Homes (Tom Worthington)
    Caller ID in Texas (Charles Mattair)
    Wiring a Headset to 2500 Set (Maxime Taksar)
    Fighting the COCOTS (Scott D. Green)
    Explain This Phenomena (Sandy Kyrish)
    GSM Question (Steven Shulman)
    Voice Mail Delays (Peter Bachman)
    Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Randy Gellens)
    Access to the Data SuperHighway (Ralph Hyre)
    Trying to Locate 2600 (Mark Ellis)
    Request For Info on D.C Loops (Guturu Venkateswar)
    Telecom Humor (Don Lynn)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1993 00:20:04 EST
From: JOHN SCHMIDT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Federal Agents Raid Computer Porn Ring in 40 Places / 15 States


The following came over AP this evening:
AP v2725     Computer Porn                      03-04  7:02 p

Customs Agents Break Up Gigantic Computer Porn Ring

      (Miami) -- Federal agents have staged raids in 40 locations
across the US in what's being called the nation's biggest crackdown
on child pornography.

     The investigation -- called "Operation Longarm" -- was based in
Miami.

     US Customs officials say the raids in 15 states targeted an
international computer network that allegedly transmits high-quality
images through computer bulletin boards.

     No arrests have yet been made.  But if agents verify possession,
suspects can be charged with federal counts that could put them in
prision for 15 to 20 years.

(end)

NOTE: WBAU's AP contract allows us to use AP material for broadcast or
other educational use, so consider yourselves educated and don't use
this posting for commercial purposes ...


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]

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 17:31:44 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Arrest Made in WTC Bombing


The FBI has arrested a suspect in the bombing.  Apparently the
individual was apprehended when he attempted to get his rental deposit
back from the rental agency.  He had reported the van as stolen the
day of the bombing.

Links are being made to the radical Muslim group that was credited
with the recent assasination of the NYC rabbi last Nov/Dec.

For more info ... listen to the TV / Radio. This is just a *byte*


Guy


[Moderator's Note: Talk about dumb. Here, it seems to me, is a man who
was obviously not clear on the concept. As of Thursday evening, there
is supposedly a second person under arrest, but the government is not
giving out any names or details yet.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Worthington)
Subject: Australian Prime Minister on Optical Network to Homes
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 01:19:44 GMT


"We will establish an expert group which will include representatives
from AOTC, OPTUS, industry and unions to develop a technical and
commercial blueprint for extending the optical fibre network to the
majority of houses, businesses and schools in Australia. Already AOTC
has laid over 1 million kilometres of optical fibre cables. Australia
is in the forefront of this technology. Extending the optical fibre
network to the majority of businesses and residences capitalises on
the significant investment we have already made. It will create a
platform for the delivery of a large range of services and the
development of new industries. Extending the network to our schools
and other education institutions will further our efforts to raise
standards.

"An innovative and vibrant telecommunications industry will be of
pivotal importance to the Australian economy in the decades ahead. It
will provide jobs directly in the major operators of
telecommunications services and in many supporting industries.

"But it requires a leadership that supports Australian manufacturing.
It requires AOTC to remain in public ownership. Without public
ownership, services to consumers will be threatened. And without
public ownership the jobs of all those in supporting manufacturing
firms will be threatened.  This would especially be the case if AOTC
were to come under foreign control which would be the inevitable
result of the Opposition's desire to sell AOTC quickly."

                    ----------

 From page 20 of "Advancing Australia, Building on Strength",
Australian Labour Party Document, 1993 Federal Election, presented by
Paul Keating, Prime Minister of Australia, at Bankstown on Wednesday
24 February 1993.

For further details contact Phillip Tardif, Office of the Minister for
Science & Technology, ph: [phone], fax: [phone]

Posted as a community service by: Tom Worthington, Director of the
Community Affairs Board, Australian Computer Society Incorporated,
e-mail: [e-mail].

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 10:53:05 CST
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Caller ID in Texas
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


Quoting from the {Houston (TX) Chronicle}, 4 March 1993.  [] comments
are mine.

Copyright (c) 1993, Houston Chronicle Publishing Company
Reprinted with permission.

Bill to allow Caller ID clears its first hurdle

Ross Ramsey
Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau

Austin - Legislation that would legalize Caller ID was approved by a
Senate committee Wednesday, after a way was worked out to accommodate,
at no charge, those who don't want their identities revealed to the
people they're calling.

Caller ID allows a person to see the name [unlike most states, SWBs
tariff included the name.  PUC said this would be interpreted as
listing name] and number of the caller before picking up the phone.
Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. [SWB] sought to offer the service in
Texas but was turned down last year when the Public Utility Commission
[PUC] decided the service would violate the states wiretapping
statutes [they actually decided SWB could offer CNID on a business to
business basis but SWB wasn't interested].

The legislation that was approved by the Senate's State Affairs
Committee ammends the wiretapping law to allow the service.  But phone
companies would have to offer free "per-call blocking" to customers
who want to make calls without broadcasting their names and numbers.

Those customer would dial in a special code before dialing the number
of the person they're trying to call.

Phone companies also would have to offer free "per-line blocking,"
which would prevent the broadcast of a person's name and number on all
calls.  Customers who want that second option would have to send a
letter to the PUC saying they have a "compelling need" for it.  Those
customers would not have to prove their cases or even say what their
compelling needs are.

"I just want somebody to think before they sign a document and send it
in," said Sen. Teel Bivins, R-Amarillo, the bill's sponsor.

Another provision of the compromise prevents companies from capturing
the names and numbers of people calling them and selling the lists
they generate, unless they have permission from every single person on
the list [yeah, right].

In addition, the bill's sponsors plan to add an ammendment that would
prevent the public from learning the name of the people who have
requested per-line blocking.  Without that ammendment, the letters
Texans send to the PUC stating a compelling need would be public
documents [and subject to retrieval under the Texas Open Records Act].

Bivins' bill was originally opposed by Sen. Peggy Rosson, D-El Paso, a
former utility commissioner.  But after changes were made to allow
free per-line blocking, Rosson signed on as a co-sponser.

She remains unenthusiastic about the service, but some of her
constituents want it, she said.

"They think that it is going to stop the Sears siding salesmen from
calling at 5 p.m. while they're eating dinner, and it's not," she
said.  "But if they think it's going to help, and we can make it so
it's not going to hurt, then I think we should go ahead."


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

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

Subject: Wiring a Headset to 2500 Set
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 93 14:45:05 PST
From: Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS <[e-mail]>


Heres what I have:

Functional headset (Plantronics StarSet) with 1/4" phone plugs
Functional WECo 2500 set
Functional Plantorics "JackSet"
Appropriate connection technology to hook 'em all together.

What I'd like to do:

Hook 'em all together, so I can use my headset.  (Preferably such that
I can use the headset while the handset is on hook.  I can probably
figure this out anyway, since the JackSet is pretty straighforward in
its switching capability).

Is there anyone who's familiar enough with a 2500 set to tell me where
I should connect which wires from the JackSet?

In fact, if there's a good text geared toward someone with only slight
basic electronics knowledge on how and what the network inside one of
these does, I'd much appreciate hearing about it.


Maxime Taksar   KC6ZPS   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott D. Green)
Subject: Fighting the COCOTS
Date: 4 Mar 93 16:04:34 GMT


So what is the best strategy for dealing with COCOTS that block 10xxx,
or 800 numbers (or time them out after a ridiculously short time), or
won't let you reach the LEC operator?  I have, at various times:

-  spoken with the proprietor.  Result:  "I don't know what you're talking
about".

-  spoken with AT&T.  Result:  "There isn't much we can do.  Try the 800
number.  If that doesn't work, find another phone."

-  spoken with BellAtlantic's Private PayPhone Service (sic) Center.
Result: "We can't do much.  Have you filed a complaint with the PUC?"

-  dialed the offending phone with modem, but I couldn't break carrier
tone (at a variety of baud settings).  Anyone want to divulge a good hack
for these bandits?

My expectation was that AT&T or Bell would have an active interest in
seeing to it that I could reach their services.  I was surprised that
there was so little concern.  Anybody have a proven method for
encouraging equal access compliance?


scott

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 19:02 GMT
From: Sandy Kyrish <[e-mail]>
Subject: Explain This Phenomena


My kitchen phone's DTMF keypad is intermittently on the blink.  One
morning I decided to see if I could dial a number by flashing the
switch-hook (trying to emulate rotary dialing).  I decided to dial my
other number, which begins with 886.  Well, I pressed the switch-hook
eight times, then waited and pressed it eight times again ... just
then, I heard the ring tone, and a female voice, sounding very
"residential", said "Hello?"  O.K., I admit, I panicked and hung up
the phone.  And I did not try redial or anything.  I waited for the
phone bill, to see if I would be charged with any special service I'd
inadvertently tripped, but none.  So -- what happened and why?  Sorry,
no prizes given.


[Moderator's Note: What happened was your 'pressing the hook eight
times' was not properly synchronized, and the eight probably got taken
as four 2s, or two 3s and a 2, or maybe a 3 and two 2s and a 1, or
similar. You could have wound up calling 332-1133 or any number where
a total of 16 pulses would be used. Pressing the hook rapidly is not a
very reliable way to dial unless you are really coordinated and good
at it. The taps of your finger were probably not precise.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven Shulman)
Subject: GSM Question
Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads).
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 12:43:38 GMT

I know that this is really general, but if ANYONE has got info for me
on what GSM is and how it works, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE mail me.


Thanks in advance,

Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (peter bachman)
Subject: Voice Mail Delays
Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 15:06:50 GMT


Has anyone ever experience voice mail dealys of over three days? I
signed up for NYTEL's free offer and have been using the service for
month or so. I periodically check to see if messages that I know have
been left are on the voice mail mailbox. Suddenly they have been
delayed, and the record is now three days! Perhaps the system crashed
and they had to back it up? Of course I am used to people leaving
messages in the wrong mailbox, so I usually check them all. I thought
this was a real good thing until this happened.


Peter Bachman     usual disclaimers.


[Moderator's Note: What do you mean you 'check them all'? How do you
have access to the mailboxes of other users?  I had something strange
happen today: when calling to check my voicemail, I dialed my number
and the phone rang three times in the usual way, then there was the
usual click indicating the call was being transferred to voicemail,
It then came a busy signal!  It is very rare for all incoming DID
ports into voicemail to be busy.  PAT]

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 04 MAR 93 18:39
Subject: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls


I know this has been discussed before, and I thought it was a
switch-settable option, but GTE only permits one call at a time to be
in processes through a normal Call Forwarded ("Programmable Call
Forwarding") line.  This is really annoying, as I intended for people
to continue using my old (GTE) number, even though I am receiving
calls at my new (PacBell) number.  The new number has Call Waiting,
but it is no good since GTE is single-threading the calls.  When I
complained, I was told that business class service permits multiple
calls, but residence class only permits one.  Nasty!


Randy Gellens                [e-mail]
A Series System Software                 if mail bounces,  forward to
Unisys Mission Viejo, CA                         [e-mail]
Opinions are personal;   facts are suspect;   I speak only for myself


[Moderator's Note: The same service from Illinois Bell allows multiple
call forwarding to the extent the receiving phone can handle the
calls, ie. three lines in hunt can get three forwarded calls. But the
version called 'remote call forwarding' which is a permanently config-
ured arrangement in the CO will only forward as many calls as you have
'paths' you are paying for.  PAT]

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

From: bears![e-mail]
Date: 5 Mar 93 00:34:45 GMT
Subject: Access to the Data SuperHighway


> As the project is outlined, however, the Administration would spend
> money primarily on developing advanced supercomputers and software
> that would link them over a high-speed fiber optic network, and on
> demonstration projects at hospitals, schools and libraries.  For the
> most part, the actual construction of a network that is widely
> available to the public would be left to private companies.

I am willing to donate my money to ensure univeral access, but I have
no interest in 'investing' into prototypes and demonstrator projects
at places where the general public will not be involved.  My model of
this is more akin to Usenet (with better user interfaces, and maybe
even better content ;-).

Everybody else seems to want to build to the 'telephone' model -- the
circuit-switched, one-user-at-a-time or per-connection model of the
other online services.

Broadcast medium, like packet radio, are inherently suited to sharing
information that has a wide community of interest.  Television,
whatever it's other faults, serves this purpose.  Users already
probably own personal computers, so local processing is feasible and
desirable.

I worked on a project TEN YEARS ago that proved this.  We used an FM
subcarrier to broadcast digital information throughout the Boston
area.  We limited the subscriber base not because of technical
considerations (we could serve one million users as easily as ten),
but because we had to obtain a license for our digital information
sources.  Users would filter out information they didn't want, and
store what they wanted on their PC's local disk drive.

The schools I attended were fortunate to have good ARPAnet/Internet
links -- universal access should be what we're are spending public
money for.  We should harness the educational capabilities of these
networks on a massive scale.


Disclaimer: I'm REALLY speaking for myself now.

Ralph Hyre ([e-mail])
Alumni: Boston Community Information System Project ('bits for the people')

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Ellis)
Subject: Trying to Locate 2600
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 02:15:53 GMT


Would someone let me know if the magazine 2600 is available anywhere?

Is something like it available at an FTP site?


Mark Ellis             %  MegadethPearlJamLynchMob  %  Happy, Happy, Happy
[e-mail]  %  AliceInChainsQueensryche  %       Joy, Joy, Joy


[Moderator's Note: You bet. The editor is a regular participant here
and I suspect you will hear from him soon.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (GUTURU VENKATESWAR)
Subject: Request For Info on D.C. Loops
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Computer Science, Stillwater
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 18:50:09 GMT


I would like to know how the DC loop is maintained in the telephone
line with the subscriber?

The above question is based on my understanding that there is codec
and T1 multiplexer between the subscriber and the cental office (CO)
and more so we cannot get a physical wire connection as it would not
justify the codec and T1.

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 10:46:39 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telecom Humor


Single Slices, a comic strip dealing with boyfriend/girlfriend topics,
had this a few days ago:

First panel: he is talking on cordless phone, he says, "Hey Ralph, you
should see this new cordless phone Corine bought me.  She's so
thoughtful ..."

Second panel: she is listening to radio that is saying, "... she's so
thoughtful."  Caption: Thoughtful Corine bought herself a scanner.

Thought this group would enjoy that.


Don Lynn

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #153
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28494;
          5 Mar 93 5:03 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07896
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 02:19:21 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28368
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 02:18:53 -0600
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 02:18:53 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada


Paper forwarded by to telecom by Sid Shniad, Burnaby BC
<[e-mail]>:

       THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS WORKERS' UNION, FEBRUARY 1993

             THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT
AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY IN CANADA

"A TRADE DEAL SIMPLY LIMITS THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE U.S. OR OTHER
 SIGNATORY GOVERNMENT MAY RESPOND TO PRESSURE FROM THEIR CITIZENS."

         --Michael Walker, Executive Director of the Fraser Institute

INTRODUCTION

  The North American Free Trade Agreement will have a potentially
devastating effect on major sections of the Canadian economy,
including the telecommunications industry.  Yet neither our political
leaders nor the members of the general public have been given
sufficient substantive information on which to base a reasoned
assessment of the agreement's contents.  What is shaping up instead is
yet another public relations exercise on the part of the federal
government, designed to overwhelm popular opposition that is based on
concerns about the agreement and the detrimental effects it is likely
to have on our society.

   It has been our experience that the federal government's secretive,
selective airing of issues related to NAFTA is entirely consistent
with its handling of other policy matters, including those affecting
the Canadian telephone industry.  In this area, as in so many others,
the federal government is taking its lead from the corporate sector,
ignoring arguments raised by people who point to the disastrous
effects that telephone deregulation has had south of the border.

   What are those effects?  Since the early 1980s, as deregulation
tore apart the American phone system, the US experienced an
unprecedented series of local price increases, cutbacks in service,
and the loss of tens of thousands of jobs as competing telephone
companies narrowed their focus to satisfy large corporate customers
located in major urban centres.

   Aware of the disastrous effects of telephone deregulation in the
States, an alliance of Canadian unions, consumers, community groups,
antipoverty organizations, and provincial governments has attempted to
stave off similar developments in this country.  Instead of taking the
concerns expressed by members of this alliance to heart, however, the
Conservative government has chosen to go through the pro forma motions
of consultation before proceeding with its predetermined agenda.

   The handling of Bill C-62, the federal government's draft
telecommunications legislation, illustrates what it is that we are
talking about.  The government chose a period in late February 1992,
when the country was preoccupied by debate on the constitution and the
federal budget, to table Bill C-62.  If passed, this sweeping piece of
legislation would effectively deregulate this country's telephone
system.

   It would be difficult for the public to participate in a full
airing of this comprehensive piece of legislation under the best of
circumstances.  But the fact that the government tabled it in the
midst of the turmoil over these other matters forces us to conclude
that the goal was to sneak the legislation through Parliament with a
minimum of debate.

   This was not the government's first dubious venture into the field
of telecommunications deregulation.  Even before Bill C-62 was tabled,
the Cabinet put enormous pressure on the CRTC to allow a new class of
companies, known in the industry as resellers, to function without
regulatory supervision.  The Commission ultimately succumbed to this
pressure, liberalizing the terms it applies to resellers.

   As a result, resellers' operations are having a devastating effect
on the industry's regulated rate structure.  If their operations
expand even faster as a result of being deregulated, it will be a
matter of time until the existing regulatory regime unravels and it
becomes impossible for government to exercise meaningful control over
Canada's telephone industry.  Given the text of Chapter 13 in NAFTA,
we conclude that this is exactly what the government intended.

A HISTORY OF THE GOVERNMENT'S PROMOTION OF TELEPHONE DEREGULATION:

   The Canadian law governing telecommunications is the Railway Act.
It requires all companies to file tariffs with the CRTC and have these
tariffs approved before a new service can be offered.  In the mid-
1980s, the CRTC chose to disregard this part of the law when it
allowed CNCP to sell certain services without filing tariffs.

   The CRTC and CNCP were taken to court over this matter, on the
grounds that the regulators violated the Railway Act.  The court
challenge was successful; CNCP was required to file tariffs and the
CRTC was instructed that it could not exempt the company from this
requirement.

   A unanimous decision of a three-judge panel of the Federal Court of
Canada, written by Justice Louis Marceau, stated the issue clearly:

   [T]he very scheme of the Act is at stake and a reconsideration
   of the scheme must come from Parliament, not from this Court
   or the Commission's own conception of how the statute should be
   rewritten in light of changed circumstances.

   Justice Marceau's statement captures the essence of the issue.
Opponents of telephone deregulation do not believe that it is in the
public interest.  It is our position that if the government deems it
desirable for Canadian telecommunications to be deregulated, then such
a change should be made through legislation that has been subjected to
the scrutiny of full Parliamentary hearings and passed by the House of
Commons.

   We were not pleased when the government brought forth Bill C-62.
But the fact that it was before Parliament gave us and other opponents
of telephone deregulation the opportunity to analyze its weaknesses
and organize opposition to it.  We have pointed out that this draft
legislation was designed to enshrine telecommunications deregulation
in legislation and to reduce the status of the CRTC to that of a
rubber stamp for federal Cabinet decisions.  While we believe that
such sweeping changes to the regulatory framework governing Canadian
telecommunications should be subject to the scrutiny of the
Parliament, the manner in which the federal government has handled the
bill has made a full debate of its merits impossible.

   Despite the federal government's attempts to ram the legislation
through, the Parliamentary committee on communications and culture,
which is reviewing Bill C-62, received such a volume of substantive
criticism of the draft legislation that to date, the legislation has
not been brought for second reading.

   The promotion of telephone deregulation in Canada has taken many
forms.  In Telecom Decision 1985-19, which turned thumbs down to long
distance telephone competition, the CRTC ruled that the above-
mentioned resellers were not "companies" under the Railway Act and
that they were not, therefore, obliged to file tariffs for regulatory
approval.  In 1991, following on the earlier Federal Court decision in
the CNCP case, application was made to the CRTC, asking it to review
and vary this part of its 1985 decision.

   In June of last year, the CRTC issued Telecom Decision CRTC
1992-11, which reversed the earlier finding.  In this latest decision,
the Commission found that resellers are "companies" under the terms of
the Railway Act after all.  It ordered them to file tariffs.

   These challenges to the actions of the government and the CRTC were
part of the ongoing campaign to prevent the introduction of American-
style telecommunications deregulation in Canada.  Given the
degradation of service, the increase in the cost of service, and the
massive loss of employment that has rocked the US phone industry over
the past 10 years, Canadians have been anxious to avoid a repetition
of that experience in this country.

   The federal government's promotion of telephone deregulation are
clearly opposed to the popular effort to ensure that the development
of our world class telecommunications industry continues to reflect
the needs of Canadians in all walks of life and in every part of the
country.  Instead, the Conservative government has repeatedly
intervened to compromise what little independence the CRTC has
exhibited, in order to speed the introduction of telephone
deregulation that will benefit the largest corporate users of
telecommunications services.

   Order in Council P.C. 1988-265 illustrates the singlemindedness
with which the current government has promoted the deregulation of
Canada's telecommunications sector.  In that order, the Governor in
Council overturned a CRTC decision against the Call-Net company, in
which Call-Net's operations had been found to be in violation of
Commission regulations.

   The fact that Call-Net was operating illegally was not in dispute.
In fact, the Regulatory Impact Statement written by the Department of
Communications and appended to the Cabinet decision acknowledged as
much, stating that "It is considered in the public interest to allow
Call-Net to continue operating in contravention of existing regulatory
policy."

   In short, despite the fact that both the CRTC and the federal
Cabinet have chosen to ignore the spirit of Justice Marceau's
enjoinder, the TWU continues to believe that if it is deemed desirable
for the Canadian telecommunications system to be deregulated, this
should occur through legislative changes deliberated and passed by
Parliament.

NAFTA:  ENSHRINING TELEPHONE DEREGULATION IN AN INTERNATIONAL TREATY

   The text of NAFTA shows that while Bill C-62 was being deliberated
in Parliament and while a range of matters related to
telecommunications were still before the CRTC and the courts, the
Conservative government's trade representatives were signing off
clauses in NAFTA that will introduce de facto telecommunications
deregulation in Canada regardless of what Parliament decides.

   Chapter 13 in the new North American Free Trade Agreement deals
with telecommunications.  Paragraph 2 (c) of Article 1303 in the new
deal specifies that "A Party [i.e. Canada, the US, or Mexico] shall
not require a person providing enhanced or value-added services [i.e.
telecommunications companies] to file a tariff."

   This passage makes it illegal for the Canadian government to
require resellers providing enhanced or value-added services to file
tariffs.  So if NAFTA comes into effect in its present form, any
company that adds a technical bell or whistle to its services and then
labels them "enhanced" or "value-added" will place itself beyond the
regulatory scrutiny of the CRTC.  This provision of NAFTA complements
what the Cabinet was doing by issuing unilateral deregulatory
decisions and promoting Bill C-62.

   Clearly a major purpose of agreements like the Canada-US Free Trade
Agreement and NAFTA is to tie the hands of our courts and our elected
representatives in the manner described by Michael Walker of the
Fraser Institute.  The purpose of provisions like those contained in
Chapter 13 is to make it impossible for our elected governments to
ensure that Canada's telecommunications industry continues to operate
in the public interest.

   This section of NAFTA grants foreign companies access to or use of
Canadian telecommunications networks and services on "reasonable and
nondiscriminatory terms and conditions."  In other words, these terms
and conditions can be no less favourable than those accorded to
Canadian companies.  This neutral-sounding terminology establishes
formal equality between the mouse and the elephant--Canada's telephone
companies and American giants like AT&T.

   But sections of Chapter 13 go even further, limiting the terms and
conditions that Canadian governments can impose on telecommunications
companies in the future.  While cross-subsidization between transport
services will still be allowed under NAFTA, our legislators will be
required to ensure that prices charged for telephone services are
based on the economic costs "directly related to providing such
services."

   Read together, these two passages mean that while our government
can still require our phone companies to cross-subsidize certain
services, our governments will not be able to require foreign-owned
resellers to make the same kind of contribution payments that are so
necessary to support universal service.  Since the category of
reseller includes foreign subsidiaries of giants like Cable &
Wireless and AT&T, the threat posed by this clause is clear.

   Paragraph 6 in this Chapter goes further, preventing Canada from
imposing any condition on foreign resellers' access to the use of
Canadian networks unless such a condition is necessary to safeguard
the technical integrity of the network or phone companies' ability to
provide service to the public.  In other words, Canada will not be
able to restrict foreign resellers' operations or their ability to
connect to our private and public networks unless we can demonstrate
that such connections would pose a technical threat to Canada's phone
companies or impair their ability of to provide service!

   Now that wide open resale of virtually all services has been
permitted by the CRTC, this part of NAFTA will give foreign companies
like AT&T and Cable & Wireless the right to demand the same regulatory
treatment that is currently enjoyed by Canadian companies like
Call-Net and Cam-Net.

   Consider that fact in light of the following.  In June of 1992, the
CRTC gave Unitel permission to compete in the sale of long distance
voice service in Canada.  During a telecommunications conference that
was held in Toronto in the fall of 1992, Unitel president George
Harvey and other industry executives were asked what they planned to
do in the event that foreign companies were given access to the
Canadian telecommunications market on the same terms as those that the
CRTC granted Unitel.  The atmosphere at the conference immediately
changed from jovial to somber.

   "That's a very worrying scenario," Harvey admitted, explaining that
foreign companies like AT&T could price phone service at levels below
cost as part of a strategy designed to gain market share in Canada.
"Taken to an extreme," he stated, "it's a scenario in nobody's
interest."

   Harvey was referring to the fact that the existing American
telecommunications industry has more than enough spare network
capacity to handle all Canadian traffic right now.  All it needs is
the authority to proceed.  And it appears that NAFTA will provide
just such authority.

   In January 1993, it was announced that AT&T was going to purchase
a 20% share in Unitel.  This move seems to have quieted Mr. Harvey's
fears.  But the question remains:  what will happen to other Canadian
carriers when foreign telecommunications companies have the same
status in Canada that Unitel has?

   Canada's courts have found that the Railway Act requires resellers
to be regulated.  Will giant foreign companies be able to circumvent
regulation in Canada simply by adding "enhancements" to their basic
service package?  These NAFTA provisions appear to grant foreign
telecommunications companies the right to compete in Canada as
resellers, free from regulation and contribution payments, with no
responsibility to file any tariffs and no need to cost-justify rates.

   In short, if NAFTA is signed, it will be open season on the
Canadian telecommunications industry for powerful foreign
telecommunications giants.  These corporations will be free to do
their thing in this country.  And future Canadian governments will be
prevented from applying the kind of policies which ensure that this
all-important industry meets this country's communications needs.

CONCLUSION

   There has been a great deal of news lately about the disaster that
has befallen the Canadian airline industry.  Recently, as the federal
government was confronted by the impending collapse of Canadian
Airlines, it agreed to put up $50 million in loan guarantees for cash-
strapped PWA, Canadian's parent company.

   There are several aspects of this crisis in Canada's airline
industry that are of relevance to us here.  First of all, the trouble
in that sector stems from the same ideologically-driven deregulation
agenda that is being followed in the telephone industry.

   Not long ago, Canada enjoyed some of the best airline service in
the world at prices that were generally affordable.  This was a major
accomplishment, given the size of the country and its relatively small
population.  Now, after the industry has been ravaged by the effects
of deregulation, service has been cut back sharply, thousands of jobs
have been lost, the government is being forced to bail out one of the
two major survivors, and one of the conditions of the bailout is that
CAI will cut back further on service and raise its prices still more.
The situation is so grave that there is serious talk, at long last, of
reregulating the industry.

   Clearly, there is something fundamentally flawed in the
deregulation model.  Yet the federal government continues to pursue it
as if the evidence of flaws did not exist.

   Which brings us to the subject of telecommunications.  Canada's
telephone system and the services related to it are world class.
NAFTA will enshrine the deregulation of Canadian telecommunications in
an international trade agreement, making it impossible for our future
lawmakers to draft laws and regulations that conflict with the
provisions of this agreement.  Before this key sector is put at risk
by the application of the same deregulatory ideology that has
destroyed our airline system, our legislators should do everything in
their power to prevent NAFTA from being passed.

A POINT-BY-POINT ANALYSIS OF NAFTA CHAPTER 13:

Article 1302: Access to and Use of Public Telecommunications Transport
Networks and Services:

  -- Paragraph 1 obliges each Party to guarantee that companies have
  access to and use of public networks, including private line
  circuits, for the conduct of their business on a "nondiscriminatory"
  basis.

  -- Paragraph 3(a) requires that the services offered by operators of
  public networks be priced in a manner that "reflects economic costs
  directly related to providing such services."

  -- Paragraph 3 also says that "Nothing in this paragraph shall be
  construed to prevent cross-subsidization between public
  telecommunications transport services."

  ANALYSIS: Paragraph 3 allows Canadian telephone companies to set
  prices for some services (e.g. long distance) higher than the cost
  of providing them in order to subsidize the provision of services
  (e.g. local) that lose money.  But if American resellers want access
  to Canadian public networks, Canada can't charge them prices that
  contribute to this cross-subsidization.

  The end result will be that foreign companies will be able to use
  our network to bleed off business from Canada's phone companies,
  undermining their ability to cross-subsidize.

  -- Paragraph 4 says that companies must be allowed to use public
  networks for the movement of information within or across borders,
  including intracorporate communications, and to have access to
  information in data bases located in any of the three countries.

  ANALYSIS: Taken together, Article 1302 Paragraphs 1 and 4, and
  Article 1310 (Definitions) mean that American companies must be
  allowed access to information in Canadian data bases from south of
  the border.

  This poses a direct threat to data processing jobs in Canada, to say
  nothing of Canadian sovereignty.  Furthermore, if American companies
  ship this data across the border and then change its "format,
  content, code, or protocol," they will be able to turn around and
  claim status as enhanced service providers whose operations cannot
  be regulated. This poses a threat to the Canadian telecommunications
  industry and to tens of thousands of related jobs.

  -- Paragraph 6 says that aside from technical considerations, no
  condition can be imposed on access to and use of public networks
  unless this is necessary to safeguard companies' ability to comply
  with their responsibility to make service available to the public.

  -- Paragraph 7(a) says that restrictions on resellers can only be made
  if these restrictions are necessary to protect access by the general
  public to telephone networks and services.

  ANALYSIS: No conditions can be imposed on access to or use of our
  networks or services unless it can be established that such access
  poses a technical threat to our network or that it would threaten
  the provision of service to the public.  Outside of these narrow
  considerations, there can be no restriction on resale and sharing or
  on the interconnection of privately leased or owned circuits.

  In other words, under NAFTA, transnational corporations will be able
  to provide their own data and enhanced service needs and to offer
  public telecommunications services!

  -- Paragraph 8 says that "nondiscriminatory" access (see Article 1302,
  Paragraph 1) shall be "on terms and conditions no less favorable
  than those accorded to any other customer or user" of similar
  services.

  ANALYSIS: Paragraphs 6 and 7(a) permit Canada to restrict resellers
  in certain limited circumstances.  But Paragraph 8 requires that
  such restrictions be applied to all companies equally.  Since Canada
  has opened up its long distance voice market to domestic resellers
  like Call-Net, Paragraph 8 prevents us from imposing different
  conditions on foreign resellers, like Cable & Wireless or AT&T.

Article 1303: Conditions for the Provision of Enhanced or Value-Added
Services:

  -- Paragraph 2(b) says that none of the three countries can require a
  company providing enhanced or value-added services to cost-justify
  its rates.

  ANALYSIS: Article 1302, Paragraph 3(a) requires that the services
  offered by operators of public networks be priced in a manner that
  "reflects economic costs."  In other words, their prices must be
  cost-based.

  But Article 1303 Paragraph 2(b) says that countries cannot require
  resellers to base their prices on their actual costs.  So while the
  members of Telecom Canada must justify the price of their services
  by proving that they are cost-based, Cable & Wireless -- a subsidiary
  of the giant British Telecom -- would be free to charge whatever it
  wants for its services.

  This provision of NAFTA offers international competitors the
  opportunity to pursue a ruthless, price-cutting, money-losing
  strategy in the Canadian market.  In case there is any doubt where
  all this could lead, just think of what has happened in our
  deregulated airline industry.

  -- Article 1303, Paragraph 2(c) says that resellers providing enhanced
  service cannot be required to file tariffs.

  ANALYSIS: Again, this part of NAFTA could be directly at odds with
  Canadian law.  It could prevent the TWU from forcing the likes of
  Call-Net and Cable & Wireless to be regulated.  This will give these
  companies a tremendous advantage over Canada's telephone companies,
  which are obliged to file tariffs and have them approved.


END text of TWU paper











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29356;
          5 Mar 93 5:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16420
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 01:47:30 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03057
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 01:47:01 -0600
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 01:47:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #154

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 5 Mar 93 01:47:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 154

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever (Terence Cross)
    Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever (Bernard Rupe)
    Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings (Dale Farmer)
    Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings (Paul Gatker)
    Re: OSPS and ANI Failures (Al Varney)
    Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back (John Higdon)
    Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back (Randy Gellens)
    Re: Looking for Distinctive Ring Discriminator (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: The Future of Videophones (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: National Data Superhighways - Access? (Dan J. Declerck)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Jack Lowry)
    Re: Mini PBX on PC Card? (Steve Forrette)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 08:55:45 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Terence Cross)
Subject: Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever


Daniel E. Ganek <[e-mail]> wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Terence Cross) writes:

>> Ericsson has been awarded a contract worth over USD 150 million for a
>> large expansion of the mobile telephone network in the Guangdong
>> province, China.

> Can a US cellular phone be used in China? If so, how difficult is it
> to setup an account or set-up some sort of roaming aggreement?

I don't think US phones will work.  I think there are two issues here:
there must be a billing arrangement with the foreign roamer (e.g.  an
on-line transaction system (VLR) between Chinese PTT and US mobile
carrier or perhaps the visitor could become a Chinese PTT subscriber)
and the foreign roamers phone must be compatible with the system in
use.

The system in Guangdong will be the sophisticated digital GSM (Global
System forMobile communication).  If the foreign man has a GSM phone
then he is half way there.  I don't think GSM is used in the US, yet.


rgs,

Terence Cross

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

From: [e-mail] (Bernard Rupe)
Subject: Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:05:22 GMT


Daniel E. Ganek <[e-mail]> writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Terence Cross) writes:

>> Ericsson has been awarded a contract worth over USD 150 million for a
>> large expansion of the mobile telephone network in the Guangdong
>> province, China.

> Can a US cellular phone be used in China? If so, how difficult is it
> to setup an account or set-up some sort of roaming aggreement?

No.  China uses the TACS system while the US uses AMPS.  By the way,
Motorola has around 70 cellular systems going in to China this year
alone, worth more than the Ericsson contact listed above.


Bernie Rupe                 1501 W. Shure Drive  Room 1315
Motorola, Inc.                  Arlington Heights, IL 60004
Cellular Infrastructure Group    [phone]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings
Date: 4 Mar 1993 17:48:13 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


John Castaldi ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Does anyone know where I can get a database (hopefully in ASCII) of
> all white pages listings. I would like to load this information on our
> Vax to try to save money on 411 calls.  Any info would help.

There is a vendor that markets something called PhoneDisk USA (your
spelling may vary) What it is is a list of all published phone numbers
for the USA.  There is a eastern disk, western disk, business disk,
and I believe a Canada disk.  It is a subscription service and you get
new ones every so often.  (it is a CD-ROM) If you want to try one out,
outdated ones are featured in Drew Allen Kaplans wonderful catalog of
neat gizmos.  I believe it has name, number, address, and business
catagory for the business listings.  It includes a database search
engine on the disk also.


Dale Farmer

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Gatker)
Subject: Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 04:10:22 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Castaldi) writes:

> Does anyone know where I can get a database (hopefully in ASCII) of
> all white pages listings. I would like to load this information on our
> Vax to try to save money on 411 calls.  Any info would help.

> [Moderator's Note: *All* white pages listings? ...

> The reason 411 and/or 555-1212 is as cheap as it is is because
> everyone is sharing the costs of a lookup clerk, the hardware, etc in
> common.  PAT]

 In NYC 555-1212 is free information for out of NYC information. But
411 is not cheap!  Just to find out a local number they charge $.45
per lookup whether they find a number for you or not.

 The solution is to make a list of every possible area you may need to
get a number for and order the entire book from NYTel. I'm pretty sure
they send it for no charge. Of course it would be nicer if they sent a
CD-ROM!

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

Date: Thu,  4 Mar 93 11:41:21 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failures
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Floyd Davidson) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <john@zygot.
> ati.com> writes:

>> On Mar 1 at 23:23, Andy Sherman writes:

>>> could show up on [an OSPS] screen with an incoming call were
>>> the messages ONI FAILURE and ANI FAILURE.  In those cases you hand to
>>> ask the customer for the number and then complete the call.

   But did you then ask "YOUR number, please?", which is confusing on
Operator-assisted 0- calls.  What is the sequence of questions when
the caller says "I want to make a collect call", for example?

>> So my question is this: What happens when it is my Trailblazer or fax

>> automatic devices is increasing exponentially, feeble attempts to
>> "rescue" a call via operator intervention would seem to be a complete
>> waste of time and resources.

>> I guess what I am trying to say is, "why bother?" Just let the call
>> die; why take up more time?

   As pointed out earlier, YOUR calling habits are not typical.  There
are entire NXXs out there that might see one modem call per week.
(OK, maybe only 200 DNs are assigned to the whole NXX, but still ...)
And towns where a FAX only exists at the local service (gas) station,
for public use at cheap rates.  And these are the old switches that
are most prone to ANI failure (assuming ANI was ever installed).

   You seem to assume that ANI is available everywhere.  There are
still (very few) CDO and independents that use LEC/AT&T Operator
Services to do all the work, including identifying the calling party.
This is also needed for calls from (non-GTE anyway) eight-party lines.
While ANI failures (or mutilated ANI digits) might not be worth
saving, there are still lots of calls from stations that don't do ANI.
So the ability to do ONI is still needed.

   To complete a FAX or modem call over such lines (they are usually
not allowed on two-party or eight-party lines, for other reasons), the
modem typically provides a way for one to MANUALLY dial calls, and
force a connection (via "ato" on some), while the FAX typically allows
for the same MANUAL dialing and connection completion.  The modem
capability is also useful (thanks, Hayes) from hotel rooms where the
"bong" for calling cards is very unpredictable or where only Real
Operators(tm?)  collect the card numbers (as for some Toronto airport
coin phones).

> Routing ANI failures to an operator doesn't just result in a call
> completion, it also generates 1) better customer relations, and 2)
> trouble tickets which should lead to corrective action.

> And, in fact there are ONI only exchanges still out there.  We
> (the Fairbanks Toll Center) had a trouble ticket opened by an upset
> customer last week because he kept getting an operator ... and in
> our most pleasant manner someone (NOT me) explained that in Clear,
> Alaska you get an operator every time because it is the last known
> place in the world where the telephone company won't put in modern
> equipment, and we expect it to always be that way ...

   I wouldn't bet on Clear being the ONLY place.  There's around 1500
non-RBOC TELCOs in the continental USA, and most are just (rightly)
trying to use cheapest equipment that does the job.  Maybe that's some
old SXS CDO, or a cheap PBX-like box.  If the number of toll calls is
a few dozen/day, why put in that ANI stuff?

In article <[e-mail]> tim gorman <71336.1270@C
ompuServe.COM> writes:

> 1. For regular direct dialed calls there are two types of AMA
> recording offices, Local Automatic Message Accounting (LAMA) and
> Centralized Automatic Message Accounting (CAMA). CAMA offices, as the
> name denotes, provide billing for a number of subtending offices. It
> does this by having the subtending offices forward ANI as well as the
> called number.  Please note that this type of operation is not
> compatible with SS7.

   Tim, I'd like more info on this SS7 "compatibility" issue.
Bellcore has certainly provided for CAMA AMI interfaces in the SSP 800
service requirements and in the LEC and IXC SS7 Interconnection
requirements.  SSP 800 also supported ONI directly, and I thought ONI
POTS calls were also covered.  The Operator Services SS7 interface
isn't well defined (yet), but that's not how I read your statement.
If you meant that Caller-ID wouldn't work with CAMA (in spite of those
that wanted it as an alternative to SS7), then I concur.

> The other case where these CAMA operators are used is in providing
> toll service for four-party and eight-party customers. We, in Kansas,
> still have some four-party customers even out of some of our digital
> offices. There are CAMA Operator Number Identification (ONI) trunks
> from these four or eight party serving offices to our CAMA toll
> offices.

   But when you replaced the CDO in my home town, you forgot to
activate the "four-digit local calling" feature on the new switch
(grin).  And my dad's impression was that it was SWBT, not the PUC,
that forced him to private line service from 8-party.  Of course,
since the other parties all got their overhead lines replaced with
buried cable, he was (and is) the only party on the remaining pair of
overhead wires.  Kinda weird to see almost a mile of telephone poles
with one pair of wires on them (but arms for many more), and directly
below is a cable.

   Almost the same as the natural gas pipeline that runs down one side
of the road to the farm.  He doesn't own any property where the
pipeline is buried, so the gas company won't give him service.  But
his neighbors that own land on the pipeline-side of the road can get
service, even if their houses are on the opposite side of the road.
(Guess profits are better on out-of-state sales ...)


Al Varney - just my opinion, of course

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 11:39 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back


MPA15AB![e-mail] writes:

> In PacBell CW and 3W, hanging up on either virtual line disconnects
> everybody!

On my Pac*Bell service (5ESS) hanging up on either party in a CW
situation results in the remaining party ringing you back. This is
true on both Commstar and vanilla CW. And are you telling us that once
you have a 3W in progress, you can separate the callers and hang up on
EITHER one of your choice? My experience with 3W throughout history is
that a flash during the 3W call disconnects the third party. Does GTE
do this differently?

> [Moderator's Note: I don't know about PacBell, but IBT does it just
> the way you say GTE does: we can hang up on the party we were talking
> to and the one left on hold is rung back to us as a reminder that we
> left him on hold.   PAT]

That is exactly the way Pac*Bell does it as well. Always has been. I
have GTD-5 service at a mountaintop location. Except for the complete
sluggishness of the switch, the features work pretty much like those
at my home. And of course, three-way calling on a GTD-5 is unusable.
The only reason I have it is because it is part of a "smart" package.
I am sure that is the only way GTE could sell 3W.


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

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 04 MAR 93 16:40
Subject: Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back


I wrote:

> In PacBell CW and 3W, hanging up on either virtual line disconnects
> everybody!

John Higdon replied:

> On my Pac*Bell service (5ESS) hanging up on either party in a CW
> situation results in the remaining party ringing you back. This is tru
> on both Commstar and vanilla CW. And are you telling us that once you
> have a 3W in progress, you can separate the callers and hang up on
> EITHER one of your choice? My experience with 3W throughout history is
> that a flash during the 3W call disconnects the third party. Does GTE
> do this differently?

Sorry.  PacBell CW does indeed work as expected.  It is PacBell 3W
that works differently from GTE 3W.  I had gotten used to having both
work the same in GTE land, and really liked being able to "transfer" a
call from one phone to another by flashing for a 3W stutter dialtone,
then hanging up.  My phone would ring, and the caller would hear
ringback.


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] (Dave Ptasnik)
Subject: Re: Looking for Distinctive Ring Discriminator
Date: 4 Mar 1993 17:39:31 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


[e-mail] (Greg Trotter) writes:

> I subscribe to the distinctive ring service from my telco. Does anyone
> know of a device that can identify these different rings and separate
> the calls? I'd like to have a separate line for incoming calls to my
> computer; the traffic doesn't warrant another line. Any help is
> appreciated.

I recently surveyed several manufacturers of this equipment.  By far
the unit that I preferred was the SR2/SR3 by Multi-Link (606)
233-0223.  While it only recognizes a maximum of three ring patterns,
US West offers us four, I found it exceptionally reliable, and very
smart when dealing with unusual circumstances.  It also sorted out the
rings more quickly than competitors products, actually learning how
our telco sent the patterns, and adapting to the telco.  No
association with the company, other than as a satisfied customer.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 17:22:16 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: The Future of Videophones


>> I am working on a research project concerning the future of videophones
>> and videoconferencing.  Is there a future at all?

> I'll give you a future:

 ... my pretty, and your little dog, too!  <menacing cackling>

> Vice President Ozone Boy gets his "didn't inhale" associate and
> their Junketeers on Capital Hill to pass an energy tax so stiff that
> the fares on plane trips have to rise substantially.

ROFL!  Hey, is Ozone Boy any relation to Devo's General Boy? :-)

Funny, isn't it, that Mr. Clinton just a couple days ago promised to
help the aerospace companies.  I don't get it: clobber the airlines
with a fuel tax.  The airlines pass this on in the form of higher
prices to their customers, who will then fly less frequently.  Fewer
travelers means more airplanes parked out in the desert, and little
need for new airplanes.  Fewer new airplanes means big layoffs at DAC
and Boeing.  Did I miss something here?

Coming Up Next: Gee, the airlines are having trouble again.  I guess
we'd better re-regulate them -- it's for their own good.  Back to two
kilobuck fares for the El Lay to Noo Yawk run ...

> And then there's the sleaze applications which currently can be left
> to the imagination. :) The 900 Area Code and 976 dial-up telephone
> services are a $1 billion a year business, of which I'm sure that a
> nice chunk of this is in the "X Rated" class (and I don't mean stuff
> running under X-Windows!)  Anyone want to guess how much this stuff is
> worth with full video and sound?

A CE friend of mine who works for SGI tells me that the companies
spending the biggest bucks in Virtual Reality (tm) are the virtual sex
outfits.  It's hard to believe, but then again ...

Hey, tell you what -- I want a job in Quality Assurance!


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]
                         After June 25 : [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan J. Declerck)
Subject: Re: National Data Superhighways - Access?
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 15:48:55 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Jeffrey Jonas) writes:

>> I think it is clear that the access problem will get cleared up. The
>> question then becomes what do you do with all the information and get
>> it into a usable form;

> Why, Mr and Mrs. John Q. Public will use their wide screen digital
> HDTV surround sound Sear's/IBM TV connected to Prodigy! (Remember
> AT&T Sceptre, the TV terminal?)

> Jeesh -- just what I needed -- a combination Sega/Nintendo/Mac/PC
> compatible color high resolution surround sound stereophonic
> multimedia system with CD-ROM, keyboard, mouse, joysticks and power
> pad!

If you look at the hardware requirements for HDTV, you'd see a computer
(Multimedia) without a:

Keyboard (input device)
Disk Drive (semi-permanent storage device)

Adding the computer part shouldn't add more than a couple hundred
using today's prices. In five years, it'll probably be a wash.  The
hope I have, if this scenario were played out, is that television
would then become an interactive media, and thus, more educational.
Presently, its "talking heads".


Dan DeClerck     EMAIL: [e-mail]
Motorola Cellular APD   Phone: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (jack lowry)
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Organization: Prism Medical Systems
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1993 01:22:52 GMT


Molly Geiger ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I am looking for information on radio pagers.

> Would you rather use another form of communication than the pager?

I live and work in the Baltimor/Washington area. I've had a sky pager
and a local Baltimore/Washington pager. The worst thing about a pager
is finding a phone to answer the page. I used to do rather critical
support of a software product. I hated the pressure I felt to respond
when the pager went off.

The skypager had a few advantages over the local pagers I have had:

1. possibilty of retrieving missed pages. (upto 100 hours ago)
2. Blocking pages. (Don't bother me I'm...)
3. future pages. (page you at some time in the future)
4. The newer sky pagers can also tell you when you are out of range.

All of these functions where accessed through a 800 number and you
PIN.  If you travel between markets (The baltimore/Washington market
includes Phily and southern New Jersey with METROMEDIA) a sky page may
be the best bet.

> Would cellular phones be better?

Having had just a pager for about five years I just recently changed
jobs and now have a portion of my cellular phone access and all
business related phone bills covered I have found the phone to be a
great asset.  I purchased a handheld phone and I also carry a beeper.
Each has it's place; there are some area the beeper does not reach and
the phone does, and the beeper battery is not dead as often as the
phone battery is.

If this is business item (you'll get remiburshed for it) get both.
Then keep the phone number to youself and be free with the pager
number.


jack    wb3ffv!pribal!jackl

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Mini PBX on PC Card?
Date: 5 Mar 1993 05:13:03 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Simon Townsend)
writes:

> I've searched the FAQ, the archive index and my press clippings to no
> avail.

> I'm looking for a PC (ISA) based card that would provide a mini PBX -
> say 1/2 external and four internal lines, preferably with some added
> functionality / programmability via the PC.

There is a product called PCBX that does this, although they may not
have a published API.  It is made by a company in Orange County, CA,
also called PCBX.  I thin they may be in Tustin, but I don't have the
specific reference in front of me.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #154
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18614;
          6 Mar 93 3:45 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06402
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 6 Mar 1993 01:25:43 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27086
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 6 Mar 1993 01:25:03 -0600
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 01:25:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #155

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 6 Mar 93 01:25:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 155

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (Foster Schucker)
    Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (Ron Bean)
    Re: Telecom Advice For the Lovelorn (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Ohio Bell Making Your Life Easier (Stephen Friedl)
    Re: Toll Stations in California (Scott D. Fybush)
    Re: Potential For Credit Card Fraud Using Cellular Phone (Justin Leavens)
    Re: "Aggregator" Experience Sought (Steve Howard)
    Re: Access to the Data SuperHighway (Gary W. Sanders)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (J. Philip Miller)
    Re: OSPS and ANI Failures (Floyd Davidson)
    Re: Future of North American Numbering Plan (John Levine & Stefan Zingg)
    Re: Annoyance (Serial) Calls (Brad Houser)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill
From: tredysvr!nzkites![e-mail] (Foster Schucker)
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 93 07:01:02 NZT
Organization: Kiteflyers Roost


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> If the Information Provider chooses to place you with a collection
> agency (which is doubtful in my opinion, but it has been done), only a
> feeble attempt at collection will be made. There is a bottom line to
> be considered after all. Despite threats which may be made, this will
> not reflect on your credit in any way.

Pat, this is wrong and I'm living proof.  We had insurance that
covered medical type stuff, the agreements the providers had were that
they would accept the insurance payments as full payment.  In the
process of a two year period we racked up three providers that decided
to continue to bill the overage.  ($16, $11 and $800).  After a few
months they went into collection.  They now appear on my TRW credit
report.  I am in the process of refinancing and was told that I would
not be able to close until these bills were out of collection.  (This
means paid, since the collection companies want the money).  I was
also informed that my credit history will also show these accounts as
closed. but will carry the collections notation on them.

All in all the provider will get some money, no matter what is the
"correct" thing.


Thanks!!

Foster Schucker === nzkites.uucp === 215-458-8354 (voice)


[Moderator's Note: You are comparing apples and oranges here. First
off, a bill for $800 is a bit more worthy of collection activity than
a bill for $15.  You mentioned the two bills for $11 and $16, but
those by themselves would be of no importance. It is the $800 item
which has your potential lender concerned. Second, an information
provider on a 900 line has no signature on file; no written contract
of any sort. Not that written contracts are needed to make things
legal -- they are not -- but the lack of anything in writing along
with the tiny amount of the disputed item combine to make collection
very difficult and unprofitable at best. Your medical provider(s) on
the other hand have written, binding contracts with you. These may be
in dispute; there may have been verbal agreements contrary to some
provisions otherwise in the written agreement; there may be a dispute
regards the method and amount of payment, etc ... and certainly your
credit bureau report should contain a consumer statement from you
giving your side of the dispute which may or may not influence the
decision made by your lender.  I still maintain a $15 item from a
*telephone* information provider with nothing written to bind either
party is of no concern to credit grantors except possibly telemarket-
ers selling magazine subscriptions; bill collectors for the Columbia
Record Club (talk about a depressing job -- "did you mail in your
dollar ninety-eight for the fifteen records we sent you?" !) and the
like.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 18:25:30 -0600 (CST)
From: Ron Bean <nicmad!madnix![e-mail]>


[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> Recall that I had month after month of bogus calls to the UK on my bill
> not long ago. AT&T would not even consider the possiblity that I did
> not dial the calls, even though I DO maintain a 100% complete computer
> log of every single incoming and out going call on every one of sixteen
> lines in the house.

   This idea of keeping your own records brings up a couple of (unrelated)
questions:

   If you're being billed for calls that don't show up on your
computerized record, could you take AT&T to small-claims court?  (Who
has jurisdiction on an interstate call?)

   If your recording device sits between the demark and your inside
wiring, can it listen for tones (or pulses) on *both* sides of the
line and distinguish between calls dialed from inside your building
and those dialed from some other point between you and the CO? If such
a device does not exist, could one be built with available components
(possibly using a PeeCee)?


[e-mail] (Ron Bean)    uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod

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

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 07:43:53 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Telecom Advice For the Lovelorn


Jeff Hibbard <[e-mail]> writes about having to
compromise for the preservation of both his and his fiancee's
financial solvency (not to mention sanity).  Ready to move halfway
between their jobsites, in Normal, Il, he made a tragic discovery:

> This sounded like a fine idea until I discovered that Normal is in GTE
> territory!  Both Peoria and Decatur are served by Illinois Bell, and I
> have never lived in an area that wasn't served by Illinois Bell.

All you have to do is ask yourself, which is more important?  Your
fiancee?  Or your telephone service?

Now that you've made that decision, let's hope she'll give you the ring
back ... :-)

Seriously -- GTE provides (barely) adequate service for residential
customers.  If you run a business out of your home that has
specialized telecom needs, get an office elsewhere.  If you need to
make a call during a riot, find a pay phone.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]
                         After June 25 : [e-mail] or [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: They don't have riots in Peoria. I guess he is
going to have accept the fact that phone service in Normal is abnormal.
In the long ago days of exchange names, we had an exchange here called
NORmal (312-667). It was thus named because of its proximity to Chicago
State University (not to be confused with University of Chicago) which
we used to call Chicago Normal School.  Does that go back a few eons
or not? :)  The town of Normal also is home to a Normal School.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Friedl)
Subject: Re: Ohio Bell Making Your Life Easier
Date: 5 Mar 93 16:45:46 GMT
Organization: Software Consulting, Tustin, CA


> If you conduct business from your home phone but do not solicit
> business calls there (i.e. yellow pages advertising or business name
> listed in directory) then there is no big deal, and very few telcos
> will make an issue of it. They certainly will not listen in on the
> line to determine the nature of the calls, so they have no way of
> proving it either way.

Actually, they can use how you answer the phone as an indicator of
this.  If you say "XYZ Computer Company", then they can decide you
should be be a business line.  That's why I answer the phone "Hello,
this is Steve" on my main voice line.


Stephen J Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA |     [phone]
3b2-kind-of-guy  | I speak for me ONLY |   KA8CMY   | uunet!mtndew!friedl

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott D Fybush)
Subject: Re: Toll Stations in California
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 05:32:32 GMT


I was surprised to see one toll station gone from the list: Deep
Springs #1.  DS 1 was a State of California highway maintenance
station in the Deep Springs Valley, some 30 miles east of Bishop CA,
and a few miles west of the Nevada border.  The only other thing in
the valley is one of my alma maters, Deep Springs College.  Deep
Springs College was Deep Springs Toll Station #2, served by the same
wireline as DS 1 out of Bishop from the '20s until about 1985, when
they cut over to a privately-owned UHF radio system.  Deep Springs is
now served out of Contel's Bishop switch (619-872), and the sound
quality on the single phone line is generally pathetic once it's made
the two UHF radio hops.

I was last at Deep Springs in June 1989, and the highway maintenance
depot was still at Deep Springs #1 back then.  Perhaps they've closed,
or perhaps they've just taken the phone out.

The other toll station missing from the list is (or was) at the
intersection of Nevada 266 and US 95, about 40 miles east of Deep
Springs.  This was Lida Junction 3, a pay phone with no dial in the
parking lot of the, er, "Cottontail Ranch," a whorehouse (yes, they're
legal in rural Nevada!).  I think LJ 1 and 2 were inside, but I never
went in to check.

The Nevada Bell phone book (there's only one) had as recently as 1990
several pages of toll station listings.


Scott Fybush -- [e-mail] -- Deep Springs '88

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: Potential For Credit Card Fraud Using Cellular Phone
Date: 5 Mar 1993 15:53:28 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


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

[story deleted about how a merchant was going to verify a credit card
over a cellular phone]

> I was surprised that the credit card companies didn't have some sort
> of rule against this.  So I called American Express and the issuer of
> my MasterCard, and both customer service reps understood the problem
> (once I explained it), but neither was aware of any policy to the
> contrary.  I filed a "complaint" or "comment" or whatever they called
> it, and maybe something will happen as a result.

I get that same queasy feeling when I take airport shuttle vans back
and forth and hear them calling the card in over their dispatch radios.

And that's for a $15 fare ...

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

From: Steve Howard <breck1![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Aggregater" Experience Sought
Date: 5 Mar 93 16:13:22 MST (Fri)


> [e-mail] (Eric Pearce) writes:

>> I'm supposed to meet with a salesperson from First Federated
>> Communications later this week.

>> My concern is adding another party to the "soup".

> A very real concern, indeed. What you lose is the ability to deal
> directly with the entity providing your service. You are no longer the
> customer of a long distance carrier, but that of a third party who has
> no technical knowledge of or other interest in the quality of your
> service. The aggregator's sole purpose is to literally get between you
> and the carrier and collect money.

We have done business with somebody like an aggregator but with a nice
twist that gets around some of these problems ...

The Broker.

The Broker negotiates contracts with many of the IXCs.  I think that
they promise $X of business in exchange for price of $Y.  (I'm not
sure on this -- it is just a guess).  When you sign up with the broker
they set you up directly with the IXC(s).  The IXC then pays a cut to
the broker.

This worked out well for us ... the Broker gave us a list of several
possible IXCs and pricing combinations.  We selected one that was
close to what we were looking for.  He then went to that IXC and
"pushed" them for some final goodies.  We ended up paying ~$.14/min
8AM-5PM for switched calls in all 50 states with no commitments.  The
real advantage is when you have problems with the IXC -- You can call
the IXC directly or you can call the broker (this could have advantages --
I suspect that the brokers problems get resolved quickly -- the IXC
knows that the broker could easily sell one of his other IXC if things
don't get worked out! :-) ).  We haven't had any problems with our
IXC, so I haven't had push the broker on them.

If anybody would like the name/number of the broker I have been
working with, feel free to send e-mail or if there is enough interest,
I'll ask Pat to post it.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri,  5 Mar 93 14:08:40 GMT
Subject: Re: Access to the Data SuperHighway
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> bears![e-mail].
com writes:

> I am willing to donate my money to ensure univeral access, but I have
> no interest in 'investing' into prototypes and demonstrator projects
> at places where the general public will not be involved.  My model of
> this is more akin to Usenet (with better user interfaces, and maybe
> even better content ;-).

This super-highway networking is getting fun to watch on the news.
Everyone is trying to make sure that it has univeral access and will
be cost effective. Most articles seem to throw around $50 as the top
end and 20-30 as an average cost for access. No one however has taken
into account you still need to get your bits and bytes to the network.
So now I have access to everything under the sun for $20 month, but
its costing me per-minute to connect.


Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR)    [e-mail]
AT&T Bell Labs   614-860-5965

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 08:14:51 -0600 (CST)


[e-mail] (jack lowry) writes:

> If this is business item (you'll get remiburshed for it) get both.
> Then keep the phone number to youself and be free with the pager
> number.

I certainly agree with this advice.  The cellular phone is great for
returning a page when you are wandering.  A phone is not always easy
to find, and even when it is, it still may be easier to just use your
cellular than to try to figure out how to make a toll charge with many
corporations intricate billing arrangements.  In addition, the pager
generally allows you to screen calls based on the calling number and
prioritize whether you should interrupt your meeting to respond to the
call.  In most of my arrangments it would be disruptive to answer a
cellular call, but receiving a page is no big deal.  If you put it on
vibrate, no one will even notice.  I suppose that the next thing will
be to have caller-id and vibrating ring for cellular, but I am unaware
of those features being currently available.


     J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
     Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
      [e-mail] - [phone] [362-2694(FAX)]

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

From: [e-mail] (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failures
Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 15:06:56 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Floyd Davidson) writes:

>> Routing ANI failures to an operator doesn't just result in a call
>> completion, it also generates 1) better customer relations, and 2)
>> trouble tickets which should lead to corrective action.

>> And, in fact there are ONI only exchanges still out there.  We

Note that here I'm saying there are multiple ONI exchanges ...

>> (the Fairbanks Toll Center) had a trouble ticket opened by an upset
>> customer last week because he kept getting an operator ... and in
>> our most pleasant manner someone (NOT me) explained that in Clear,
>> Alaska you get an operator every time because it is the last known
>> place in the world where the telephone company won't put in modern
>> equipment, and we expect it to always be that way ...

> I wouldn't bet on Clear being the ONLY place.  There's around 1500

Hi Al.  Nahhh, we just told the customer that to put a little emphisis
on the point of it all.

> non-RBOC TELCOs in the continental USA, and most are just (rightly)
> trying to use cheapest equipment that does the job.  Maybe that's some
> old SXS CDO, or a cheap PBX-like box.  If the number of toll calls is
> a few dozen/day, why put in that ANI stuff?

Actually the telco in Clear (and for that matter a small telco
anywhere else that doesn't upgrade to a digital switch) isn't doing it
the easy way. The economics, for the telco, of installing one of the
little Redcom (or even a Harris, though those are a pain ...)  switches
is too good to miss.  They are cheap, reliable, and almost totally
maintenance free.  And most admin stuff can be done long distance with
a modem.

And in the case of Clear, which has an Air Force BMEWS radar station
located in "town", the number of LD calls is substantial!


[e-mail]   A guest on the Institute of Marine Science computer
Salcha, Alaska         system at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks.

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

Subject: Re: Future of North American Numbering Plan
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 93 14:27:55 +0100


A couple of days ago, I asked:

> Why can't you just add another digit to the phone number?

Thanks to all who answered. While I don't accept "convention" or
"required reprogramming" as a valid reason, John Levine pointed me to
a fact I didn't know. I think his reply is interesting enough to be
posted.

      ----------

In case nobody else has pointed it out, North American switching
systems have evolved a different switching protocol than is used
elsewhere in the world.  The CCITT standard used everywhere else
passes a digit at at time with per-digit handshakes.  The North
American standard buffers up a full ten digit number and transmits it
in a block.  (Before you ask, at the time this convention was invented
in the early 1950s there were probably more dial phones in North
America than in the entire rest of the world.)

So making phone numbers longer than the current ten digits would
require immense changes to every phone switch we've got.  Newer
switches use SS7 which could probably be changed with a software
upgrade, but there is still a lot of crossbar which would require
soldering in hundreds of new relays.

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

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

Internet: <[e-mail]> or <[e-mail]>
UUCP-net: ...gator!ixgch!stefan!stefan
Voicenet: +41 61 - 261 28 90
Papernet: Stefan Zingg, St.Johanns-Vorstadt 19, 4056 Basel, Switzerland

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Annoyance (Serial) Calls
Organization: Intel CTD
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 14:37:00 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Morris Galloway Jr.) writes:

> We've been experiencing an annoying pattern of calls recently.  Early
> in the morning (7-8am), calls are coming in to one or two of our
> dormitories.

> When answered, there is silence, then a hangup.

> Often, the same thing happens to each room on a floor (the numbers are
> consequtive).

> Aside from a malicious crackpot, is there any computerized dialing
> equipment that could produce these symptoms? I've asked the residents
> about fax tones, but apparently there is just silence.

Ever see the movie "War Games"?  It is fairly simple to write a
program that has a modem dial every number in a range and logs all
calls that answer as a modem.  A malicious person might then try to
break into that system later.  Since you say it happens consecutively,
that is probably what is happening.


Brad Houser      [e-mail]
[phone]  Fax: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #155
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21959;
          6 Mar 93 5:11 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25916
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 6 Mar 1993 02:48:25 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16362
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 6 Mar 1993 02:48:00 -0600
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 02:48:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #156

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 6 Mar 93 02:48:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 156

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Gary W. Sanders)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Roy Smith)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Carl Moore)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Scott D. Brenner)
    Re: WTC Blast (Darrell Broughton)
    Re: Things Really Went BOOM! (Mark Brader)
    Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Telecom Advice For the Lovelorn (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls ([e-mail])
    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Randy Gellens)
    Re: Costs to Telco: Leased vs Dial (Vance Shipley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri,  5 Mar 93 13:57:05 GMT
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Organization: AT&T


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

> couldn't tell if the cable operators were able to get feeds from the
> TV stations that were off the air, because I don't subscribe to CATV
> (I refuse to aid any monopoly) and I am also not sure if the rest of
> the country got to see Peter Jennings or Tom Brokaw for the evening
> news, but we were able to get only Dan Rather.

I was home that day and was scanning the skies and found local NYC TV
station on the satellite with news and information. I caught them
about 1pm shortly after the explosion and they were still on at 8pm
when I checked back. Since there transmitters were off the air for
over the air transmissions the station uplinked on satellite. Then
they contacted the local cable companys and had them pick up the
signal from satellite and resdistribute the signal to subscribers.
Many CATV people may not have even known that transmitter were
offline.


Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR)  [e-mail]
AT&T Bell Labs    614-860-5965

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

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 10:46:23 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Organization: New York University, School of Medicine


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

> However, CBS radio also reported that one of the first persons to be
> rescued from the top of the WTC, by helicopter, was a pregnant CBS
> employee who was up on the WTC roof to repair the transmitter/antenna.

    I know the dangers of electric fields is an open question, but
if I were a pregnant woman, I don't think I would want to be working
around a live high-power TV transmitter!


Roy Smith <[e-mail]>
Hippocrates Project, Department of Microbiology, Coles 202
NYU School of Medicine, 550 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016

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

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 11:44:06 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News


I don't know either about the rest of the country being able to
receive ABC or NBC at that time.  I wouldn't be surprised if they set
up alternate outlets if they were affected by the WTC.  The great
Nov.(?) 1965 blackout forced some news media to alternate outlets.

By the way, I notice the jokes from a parking attendant and a border
guard about a bomb and/or the WTC blast.  Please don't joke TO such
people about such matters, because the remark can be taken seriously
and you can get in trouble as a result.  There are signs in some
airports warning of this near the checkpoints for their terminal
concourses; and a few years back, a young man remarked (apparently a
joke) on a plane about a bomb, and the result was that the plane made
an unscheduled landing in Philadelphia and he was arrested.

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

From: [e-mail] (scott.d.brenner)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 23:17:59 GMT


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

> I'm not sure if anybody mentioned this in the Digest, but the blast at
> the WTC took most TV stations out in NYC and the vicinity.  On the way
> home from work that day, I couldn't get anything but CBS Radio, coming
> live from the site. When I reached home, I turned on the TV to see if
> they were showing any gory sights, but only CBS TV and a (Telemundo?)
> station from NJ were on the air. My landlady's son, who works for CBS,
> said that all the other TV stations had their transmitters on top of
> the WTC.  CBS radio reported that the authorities had to actually
> remove some of the TV and radio antennae in order to make space for a
> helipad for the rescue helicopters to land on top of the WTC. [Some
> transmitters may have suffered from the power cutoff.]  CBS TV
> apparently transmits from the Empire State Building.

I usually watch the NBC affiliate in NYC, WNBC -- channel 4.  Although
I worked late last Friday, and didn't get home until about 9 PM
(listening to WCBS radio all the way!), channel 4 *was* on the air
when I got home.  Then, periodically over the weekend, they'd run a
banner message at the bottom of the screen thanking local cable
operators who picked up their feed and rebroadcast (cablecast?) it to
their subscribers.  The message also said that the feed would termin-
ate on Monday morning.

A newspaper article I read earlier this week implied that the station
(and other local stations) was able to provide their signal to other
stations out in Long Island, who were then able to uplink the signal
to the satellite, from which the cable systems could pick up the
signal.

I don't care how they did it, but I was really pleased that they were
able to continue broadcasting.  It's amazing that they were able to
get it all set up so quickly.  I know it's not *really* related to
telecom, but if anyone can give a more detailed (but understandable)
explanation of the setup these stations used, I be interested.


Scott D. Brenner       AT&T Consumer Communications Services
[e-mail]               Basking Ridge, New Jersey

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: WTC blast
Date: 5 Mar 1993 22:50:56 GMT
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Jeffrey Jonas) writes:

> There's a new newsgroup dedicated to the World Trade Center (WTC)
> blast, but that's on another system so I can't find the name.  It was

It is alt.current-events.wtc-explosion.


Darrell

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Things Really Went BOOM!
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 93 06:54:10 GMT


> PATH has an 800 number for information.  Of course, it's always busy
> during a crisis like this.  This is the TELECOM issue that steams me.

TELECOM Moderator noted:

> [Regards traffic jams on the 800 number, it has been suggested the
> City of Chicago is considering a 900 number with no charge attached to
> calling it to be used for announcements to the citizens on a
> mass-calling basis. That night be a very good idea for the public
> transit system also.  PAT]

Well, it would keep the overload down, since people whose office
phones are blocked from calling 900 wouldn't be able to use it.
Somehow I don't think that was what Pat had in mind.  What technical
advantage would a 900 number give, as opposed to an 800 or just a
plain telephone number?


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: They realized people with 900 blocks on their phone
would not be able to use it, but the idea was to be able to service a
huge volume of callers at the same time with emergency reports. Many
900 services are set up to take thousands of calls at the same time. I
think they want to be able to send a message to television and radio
stations saying (something like) "there is a serious emergency affecting
residents of Chicago. Please dial 900-xxx-xxxx at no charge to hear an
emergency announcement by the mayor".  Of course, someone suggested
why not just make the announcement on the radio/television in that
case ...  it was an idea they've tossed around while building our new,
very modern, very high tech police communications center.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 03:37:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (James
Borynec; AGT Researcher) writes:

> I just read a startling report: "The Geodesic Network II: 1993 Report
> on Competition in the Telephone Industry" By P.W. Huber, M.K. Kellogg,
> and J. Thorne.  The Geodisic Company, Washington D.C.

> The central thesis of this (thick) report is that the economics of
> fiber and the economics of radio make long distance a "natural"
> monopoly and that local access is now "inherently competitive".

Well here's an opposing viewpoint!  Personally I think Huber is way
way out in right field, little more than a stooge of "Mad Monk Mark"
Fowler, Reagan's nuttiest FCC head.  He has an Agenda and won't let
reality get in the way.

As any regular reader of the EFF newsgroup would know by now, a
"natural monopoly" is a fairly clear concept which applies when the
economy of scale never maxes out, so a small vendor can never be
competitive with a big one.  Long distance, even per Huber's quote, is
almost exactly the opposite, a competitive commodity.  In economics, a
commodity has many vendors entering and exiting, and the price is
always near "cost", and nobody makes "economic profit" (greater than
required rate of return on capital invested).  That's just what LD
telecom is doing now, save AT&T's slipping umbrella.

Local wireline is a natural monopoly because it would cost too much to
string a second set of wires.  Indeed I foresee CATV and telephone
eventually sharing, not competiing over, optical fiber to the home.
Radio, however, is subject to a different constraint: Bandwidth.
Economics cannot create spectrum space, just determine how it's
allocated.  Radio bandwidth is orders of magnitude too low to handle
wireline applications in urban areas.  It's best for applications that
really benefit by it: Mobile, hand-held and rural.

The impact of MCI upon the industry was to bring economic reality to
an over-regulated (grant of "unnatural" monopoly) industry.  All the
posturing was just regulatory fiction; the reality was and is that
long distance subsidizes local service, and competition leads to less
cross-subsidy and more economically efficient allocation of resources.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 03:27:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(John Castaldi) writes:

> Does anyone know where I can get a database (hopefully in ASCII) of
> all white pages listings. I would like to load this information on our
> Vax to try to save money on 411 calls.  Any info would help.

 From my "Crazy Bob" flier from ERM Electronic Liquidators, Melrose MA
(orders 800 776 5865, otherwise [phone]):

USA 1993 Yellow and White Pages.  The complete 7-CD [ROM] set.  DOS.
ProPhone 1993.  90 million residential listings, 10 million business
listings, available 1 Feb '93.  A 7-disc set; contains 90 million
names, addresses and phone numbers for every one listed in every white
pages in the USA, plus zip code!  Search can be narrowed by city,
state, street, phone number, or zip.  Contains the SUA Yellow Page
listings - over 10 million businesses on one CD-ROM.  Information can
be searched by company name or telephone number, and narrowed down by
geographic location to find a business in seconds.  Includes the full
address with zipcode and "SIC" code.  New Spring '93.  $222.  The 1992
edition is also available on a 3-disk "starter set" for $77.

Now all it takes is a DOS server with a CD-ROM jukebox ...  I know
nothing about this set than what I've seen in the flier. I'm just a
customer; I bought my CD-ROM drive from them.  Cheap.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Ptasnik)
Subject: Re: Telecom Advice For the Lovelorn
Date: 6 Mar 1993 08:24:35 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


[e-mail] (Jeff Hibbard) writes:

> This sounded like a fine idea until I discovered that Normal is in GTE
> territory!  Both Peoria and Decatur are served by Illinois Bell, and I
> have never lived in an area that wasn't served by Illinois Bell.

> I only have one friend who lives in Normal, and talking to him hasn't
> been encouraging.  His stories of dealing with GTE repair service
> (something he's had to do fairly often) bear an amazing resemblance to

Having lived for 20 years in Peoria and two years in Normal, there is
absolutely no question what you should do.  GET THE H*** OUT OF
THERE!!  Downstate Illinois is a terrible mind sucking cesspool!  Go
anywhere but Seattle.  I love it, but I don't want any more people out
here.  Find your own nice place.

By the way, GTE owns Normal.  They used every dirty trick in the book
when I lived there selling telephone systems.  Messing with customer
service when a new (non-GTE) system went in, losing orders, etc.  I
can't even think about the games they played with local government
bids.  It's their way or no way.  A long distance company I worked for
had a switch in an Illinois Bell area, with FX's to Normal.  GTE
messed with us all the time.  Plus the FX's dropped out with great
regularity.  Not infrequently on Friday afternoon.  Even for
residences, their service was a joke.  Feature availability and
reliability was woefully inadequate.  Modem links at 1200 baud to
local boards were a joke.

At one time they had a BIG service center in Normal.  Is it still
there?  I was wondering if they consolidated it out of business.  It
was a major employer in town, and losing it would have been quite a
blow.


All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of -

Dave    [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 08:27:55 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Free Radical)
Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls
Organization: College of CS, Northeastern U


> [Moderator's Note: The same service from Illinois Bell allows multiple
> call forwarding to the extent the receiving phone can handle the
> calls, ie. three lines in hunt can get three forwarded calls. But the
> version called 'remote call forwarding' which is a permanently config-
> ured arrangement in the CO will only forward as many calls as you have
> 'paths' you are paying for.  PAT]

Wasn't there some trouble several years back with a variant of this,
Busy Call Forwarding?  Seems someone set up three payphones to have
this feature, each set to the next, and then had all three call the
next at the same time.  Ate up every trunk in the area, almost.  It
happened in Texas I think.


[e-mail] (Rogue Agent)


[Moderator's Note: Are we talking about how many links there can be in
the forwarding chain or how many calls can arrive at a number being
forwarded ONE LINK and handled at the same time?  I don't think IBT
lets you keep forwarding calls around and around forever if that is
what you mean.  Curiously, on a couple of exchanges here, if A
forwards to B and B forwards to C then a call directly dialed to B
goes on to C while a call reaching B via A stops at B and rings
through right there regardless of what B wants done with *his* calls.
On other (maybe most) exchanges here, under those circumstances, a
call to A would go right on through to C. But they seem to be clever
about it; the first time a previously 'passed through' point is found
in the link again, the forwarding stops and a busy signal is returned
to the caller.  In other words, you cannot go A > B > C > D > A > B >
C > D just to have the equipment running around in circles. As soon as
D is instructed to go to A, that's it. Trip's over. All electrons have
to get off the bus; the bus driver is at the end of the line! :)  PAT]

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 05 MAR 93 17:21
Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls


I kept complaining about only one call being forwarded at a time, and
finally they gave me to the GTE Consumer Action Group.  Someone there
took the information, and said I'd get a call back.  A few hours
later, a rep called me to say what I wanted should work, and they
would open a trouble ticket.  They just needed the PacBell number to
which the GTE line was forwarded (as if it had anything to do with
it).  The next day I got a call from GTE repair, telling me the
problem had been fixed.  When I asked what the limit was on
simultaneous forwarded calls, she said there was no limit.  I said
there had to be some limit for loop prevention, didn't there? but she
didn't understand.  I tested it, and it still failed.  So I called the
GTE CAG rep back, and said it was still broken, and suggested she
contact someone at the CO who understood how to operate a GTD-5.

Well, today I received a call from someone at the CO, who had been
given a totally incorrect description of the problem.  When I
explained it, he punched in my GTE number, verified that the customer
call forwarding queue was set to 1, and changed it to 2.  He said the
service office could have done the same thing.  I thanked him, and
before I could test it, I received a call from the GTE CAG rep, who
told me that she had contacted GTD-5 analyst, and was told that what I
wanted was possible, but not tariffed, so I would have to live with
only one call at a time.  She said I could order multiple numbers with
hunting and it would work.  I said that didn't make sense, and asked
to speak to the CO person who had called me earlier.  They said they'd
have him call me.

Finally, I got a chance to test it, and it works!  The CO guy did what
he said.  So I called the GTE CAG rep back and said everything was
fine, please don't do anything else.  She wanted to know what the CO
guy had done.  I was vague, saying he had changed the CCF parameters
for my line, because I was afraid she might be right about it not
being tariffed and would reset it to one.  She said she'd call him and
find out, because she needed to update my records to indicate what was
done.

Anyway, for now it works and I am happy.  Now, if only I could get
PacBell to make their three-way calling let me hang up on a vacant
side and get ring-back everything would be great.


Randy Gellens                [e-mail]|
A Series System Software                 if mail bounces,  forward to|
Unisys Mission Viejo, CA                         [e-mail]|
Opinions are personal;   facts are suspect;   I speak only for myself|


[Moderator's Note: Again, are we talking about the number of calls
which can be forwarded at one time from A > B or are we talking about
the extent to which A can be chained linked to B then to C and D, etc?
If the former, there is no problem with the number of circuits which
are available. As soon as the place to which calls are being forwarded
runs out of places to put them (i.e. two, three or how many lines in
the hunt group) then subsequent callers to the first number will get a
busy signal.  If we are talking about chains that run forever, then
the important thing is to stop the process when a previously visited
number is found again in the chain. If this were not the case, then
any call forwarding could be a potential problem because what would
happen if A forwarded calls to himself, ie *72 <number I am calling
from>?  Would an incoming call hit the CO and run in circles forever?
No -- we know it sees a place where it has already been (original pass
through A) and gives up, returning busy to the caller.  PAT]

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

From: Vance Shipley <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 1:50:17 EST
From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: Costs to Telco: Leased vs Dial
Organization: Xenitec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1993 06:50:12 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: Much of the additional cost would come from the
> expense of having certain common equipment in the central office
> unavailable for other customer's use. With dialup, telco is gambling

This is the assumption I have been making; that telco is somehow worse
off if you elect to have endless calls as opposed to just jumpering
copper.  I am beginning to suspect that they might just prefer to keep
everything on the switch.  Witness the following quote from the DMS
Feature Planning Guide describing ENET, Northern's current switching
fabric and the heart of their central office switch:

  "As the switching platform for the DMS SuperNode system. ENET is a key
  hardware element for implementing high-capacity, bandwidth-intensive
  services, such as Dialable Wideband Service.  The Enhanced Network
  (ENET) decreases expenses through network simplification and
  increasing revenues by enabling a range of future wideband services."

Network simplification has to be important to the telco, their manpower
costs are a high percentage of operating costs.  Also, as another poster
pointed out automated loop testing, etc. are not possible (or more costly
and difficult) on special service facilities.


  "With BCS34, the single-cabinet ENET, with a capacity of 64,000
  fully duplicated channels, will become the standard ENET
  configuration.  However, the dual-cabinet ENET (128,000 channels)
  will continue to be available for offices requiring higher
  capacity"

  "As a junctorless, non-blocking switching matrix, ENET does not
  require complicated engineering.  Unconstrained by traffic and
  load balancing, its provisioning is based only on peripheral link
  terminations.  ENET provides the platform for circuit-switched,
  channel-switched, or nailed-up digital service."

So the switch is non-blocking.  So if it's not taking up common
resources in the switch the telco shouldn't care how long your calls
are.  Now the other thing here is that if you live in area which has
unmeasured local service, as I do, and one day they change to
measured, odds are many of these dialup circuits will remain for a
while generating more revenue.


Vance Shipley, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #156
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00757;
          8 Mar 93 1:25 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23987
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 7 Mar 1993 23:01:18 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24610
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 7 Mar 1993 23:00:45 -0600
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1993 23:00:45 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #157

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 7 Mar 93 23:00:45 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 157

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: WTC Blast (John Schmidt)
    Re: Arrest Made in WTC Bombing (Graham Toal)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Brent Whitlock)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Things Really Went BOOM! (and Unrelated Topics) (Bob Frankston)
    Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (Timothy E. Buchanan)
    Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (Roy Smith)
    Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (David A. Fiske)
    Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back (John Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1993 18:22:07 EST
From: JOHN SCHMIDT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: WTC Blast


Since my daytime (paying) job is as a design engineer for ABC, I think
I can comment on the effects of the WTC blast on the networks.

The first area of confusion for many, particularly New Yorkers, is the
difference between the network, ie ABC, and the local station, ie
WABC.

ABC produces and/or distributes programs, such as One Life to Live,
World News Tonight, Roseanne, Nightline, etc. to its "affiliates"
There are about 220 affiliates who broadcast ABC programs in the USA.
Eight of these affiliates are owned by ABC (including WABC) and are
often referred to as "owned and operated stations, (or "O&O's").  The
rest of our affiliates are independently owned.

The ABC network provides programming for part, but not all, of the
day.  For instance, on weekdays, there is no network programming from
9AM until, I think, 11:00 am, none from 4 until World News Tonight (either
6:30 or 7:00 pm, depending on which of the two feeds an affiliate
takes) and then none until 8:00 pm.  There is no programming from 11:00
until 11:30 pm. (etc.)  Affiliates may broadcast most or all of the
programming ABC provides, either live or delayed on tape.  While ABC
cannot, by law, require an affiliate to broadcast a particular program
or programs, it can, and will, look to change affiliated stations
(when the affiliation contract is up, in most cases) if it feels the
station is not "clearing" enough network programming.

The local affiliate station, whether WABC in New York, or KSWO in
Lawton OK, fills the remaining time with either its own programming,
such as "Eyewitness News"; or "syndicated" programs it buys from a
distributor, such as "Jeopardy" or "Oprah".

All three networks transmit their programs to the affiliates by
satellite.  ABC uplinks on C band from the roof of its Network
Operations building in Manhattan.  NBC is on KU band, also with an
uplink in Manhattan, and CBS is on C band.  The last I knew, they
contracted with AT&T to uplink their programs from a site on Long
Island.  Their signals get to the uplink via AT&T coax and microwave
video circuits.

(Note, this all refers to the eastern/central time zone distribution,
west coast delayed programming is handled differently.)

None of this was directly affected by the WTC blast, so anyone
watching an affiliate other than the New York City stations did not
lose their signal.  Chicago saw Peter Jennings just fine.

WABC, and the other six New York City VHF TV Stations, as well as
several of the UHF sations, and a few FM stations, has its transmitter
facilities at the top of the World Trade Center.  These facilities
were moved there from the Empire State Building in the late '70s, I
believe.

When the bomb went off, WNBC (ch.4) and, I believe WNET (ch 13, PBS)
dumped immediately, apparently due to loss of power.  Reports say 5 of
the 8 13KV feeders from Con Edison to the complex tripped at the time
of the initial explosion.  There are emergency generators, jointly
owned by all the broadcasters, but these did not function.  The
generators are in the sub-basement near the bomb site.  Some reports
indicate they were flooded, others indicate the cooling water lines
were severed, causing them to immediately shut down, still others say
the power and control lines were run through the blast area.  I
haven't heard a specific answer yet.

Some time later, the Fire Department asked Con Edison to open the
remaining feeders, as they were concerned that the initial blast might
have been electrical in nature, and they were afraid that firefighters
might be injured by the live electrical systems.  This forced the
remaining stations off the air.

When power was restored, around 11:30 pm, all except WNBC and WNET
were able to resume broadcasting (transmitters operate by remote
control, and, as the WABC chief engineer told me, much to his relief,
it came back on when they pushed the button on the remote control.)
WNBC and WNET were on the next day, so I guess they were able to
switch their feeders around.  Incidentally, Con Ed reported it had all
8 feeders back in service by Monday morning, so I guess none of them
were in the immediate blast area.

While ABC, CBS and NBC transmissions were not directly affected by the
blast, all three networks have microwave ENG relay receivers and
transmitters there, as well as 440 Mhz transmitters used for "IFB"
communications (feeds the earpiece the talent wears, which allows them
to hear what's on the air, and directions from the control room), and
News Room communications two way radios.  When these died, it made a
mess of news department communications.  (We all have other microwave
relays, and the two ways are a "voting" system with multiple
repeaters, but WTC is the best site, because of its height, and
obviously it was right where all the action was.

WCBS still maintained their old transmitter, as a backup, at Empire
State, so signed on from there, capturing most of the non-cable New
York audience.

Most of the FM stations broadcast from Empire State, not World Trade,
and were not affected.  A couple of those who were have alternate, low
power backup transmitters at other sites, and so were able to resume
broadcasting from those sites.  Contrary to someone else's post, there
are no plans to move other FM stations to WTC, in fact they are
installing a new FM master antenna at Empire State to replace the
current one which was installed in the '60s and does not meet current
FCC RF radiation standards, particularly on the 102nd floor
observation area.

All the New York TV stations have direct video circuits to Manhattan
Cable, so the Manhattan Cable customers never lost signals.

Shortly after WABC went off, the ABC Network took a copy of WABC's
feed, and put it up on one of the Network satellite transponders.
This non-scrambled feed was made available for other cable systems to
downlink and feed to their subscribers. CBS and NBC made similar
arrangements.  WOR (ch 9) and WPIX (ch 11) are already on satellite as
"super stations", so all they had to do was run their signals "in the
clear".

Also, the various stations made other arrangements with unaffected
broadcasters.  WNBC got WLIW, ch 21 on long island (normally a PBS
station) to pick up their signal.  I believe WABC was on Channel 68
(and 67, translator), normally a Home Shopping Network station, whose
transmitter is at Empire State Building.  WNET got WNYE, channel 25,
owned by the New York City Board of Education, transmitting from
Brooklyn, to take their feed.

As an interesting sidelight, someone told me that B-Q cable
(Brooklyn-Queens) took the satellite feed of WNBC, but never switched
back.  When WNBC killed the satellite feed later in the weekend, they
were off BQ cable for some hours until someone pulled the patch and
restored the normal receiver.  Most cable systems rate right in there
with GTE when it comes to service ...

I hope this gives people a better idea of what went on in TV land.  By
the way, where was I when all this went on?  I had been on vacation in
Trinidad (at Carnival) and got back home at 9:30 Friday morning, after
taking a "red eye" charter flight.  I went to bed, and woke up about
3PM.. spent the rest of the afternoon and evening watching TV and
listening to the radio.


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]

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 17:16:50 GMT
From: Graham Toal <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Arrest Made in WTC Bombing


> [Moderator's Note: Talk about dumb. Here, it seems to me, is a man who
> was obviously not clear on the concept. As of Thursday evening, there
> is supposedly a second person under arrest, but the government is not
> giving out any names or details yet.  PAT]

Perhaps, PAT, it's just *too* stupid to be believed.  What are the
chances that if the FBI followed up on *everyone* who had a vehicle in
that basement (some thousands I'm sure), they'd find *somebody* with a
dubious past.

At which point it becomes a post hoc ergo propter hoc insinuation of
guilt ...


Graham (remembering how many quick arrests under public pressure in
Britain have led to gross miscarriages of justice).

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1993 21:22:25 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]> writes:

> I don't know either about the rest of the country being able to
> receive ABC or NBC at that time.  I wouldn't be surprised if they set
> up alternate outlets if they were affected by the WTC.  The great
> Nov.(?) 1965 blackout forced some news media to alternate outlets.

> By the way, I notice the jokes from a parking attendant and a border
> guard about a bomb and/or the WTC blast.  Please don't joke TO such
> people about such matters, because the remark can be taken seriously
> and you can get in trouble as a result.  There are signs in some
> airports warning of this near the checkpoints for their terminal
> concourses; and a few years back, a young man remarked (apparently a
> joke) on a plane about a bomb, and the result was that the plane made
> an unscheduled landing in Philadelphia and he was arrested.

Indeed, joking about guns, bombs, and such at airport security
checkpoints is illegal, even if you are joking to your friends and
family, and not to the security people.  They have a relatively small
sign on the baggage X-ray machine which informs people of this.  My
father, someone who tends to crack jokes a lot and not having seen or
read this sign when he was with me at the airport once, made a joking
comment to me after the metal detector alarm went off that it must be
his gun.  Of course, I knew it was a joke, but the policeman who
overheard him doesn't take jokes lightly there.  My father was almost
arrested and taken down to the station for questioning, but he was
able to convince the cop that he didn't know it was illegal to mention
guns, bombs, etc. in conversation at the airport and that he didn't
see the sign, so the cop just took down his ID information from the
driver's license and told him to not leave town real soon.  Isn't it
wonderful that our constitution guarantees us freedom of speech?

[e-mail] (Roy Smith) writes:

> I know the dangers of electric fields is an open question, but
> if I were a pregnant woman, I don't think I would want to be working
> around a live high-power TV transmitter!

Neither would I.  My brother, who is also an avid reader of this
digest, told me that at an AM radio station for which he used to be a
part time DJ, they could not use IBM PC's because the broadcast tower
interfered with the keyboard preventing it from working properly.  I
also recall a comment about feeling the hair on the back of one's neck
stick out from the electric field as one approached the tower.


    * * * * * * --> 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

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 07:28:26 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News


In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 156 [e-mail]
(scott.d.brenner) writes:

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

>> I usually watch the NBC affiliate in NYC, WNBC -- channel 4.  Although
>> I worked late last Friday, and didn't get home until about 9 PM
>> (listening to WCBS radio all the way!), channel 4 *was* on the air
>> when I got home.

>> A newspaper article I read earlier this week implied that the station
>> (and other local stations) was able to provide their signal to other
>> stations out in Long Island, who were then able to uplink the signal
>> to the satellite, from which the cable systems could pick up the
>> signal.

What happened on Long Island is that WNBC uplinked to a satellite and
the local PBS station, WLIW - Channel 21, picked up the signals and
retransmitted them over the air and the two cable companies
(Cablevision of Long Island and TCI) sent the signals to their
subscribers.  In this way, all TV viewers could receive the news "as
it happened."

In addition to the cable companies, the radio stations kept their
listeners very up to date, especially WALK - 97.5 FM.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Things Really Went BOOM! (and unrelated topics)
Date: Sun 7 Mar 1993 20:34 -0400


Why use a free 900 number instead of an 800 number?  The reason, I
presume, is that one class of 900 number supports locally provided
prerecorded message that reduce network congestion.  But this is
simply an artifact of the translation tables.  Once 800 numbers are
portable, why should one have to use a different "area" code to
specify a property?

The place where a number implies a property is still useful in PBX'es
to make blocking simple.  Of course, this isn't perfect as in using
"1" as a charge flag. But for 900/800 it should be mandated to work --
at least for the next five years till the network can provide property
information via a protocoled interchange.

Thus, in a case like the Chicago information, an 800 number with
locally provided messages would seem to be the right service.

As to "area" code, I guess that will stick with us just like "dialing" a
touch-tone [notTM] phone.

BTW, I was in a hotel last week which seemed to have smart 0-700
processing.  It would allow me to place a callee pays 700 number call
but not a caller pays. On the same trip I did find the redirectability
of the 700 number useful for avoiding a long and problematic credit
card string. 800 numbers can also be reprogrammable but the 700 number
process was much simpler and more flexible including an automatic
expiration feature so that I didn't have to worry about having given
out a proprietary number.

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

From: [e-mail] (BUCHANAN TIMOTHY E)
Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 00:41:06 GMT


While stationed in San Juan, PR, and working for the FAA, I was
writing simulator problems for radar controller students. It was
simple batch language, but my first attempt bombed. I was told to
start commands in certain columns because the computer simulated the
punch card reader it replaced! My question was whether the computer
also made a card flipping sound.

Speaking of backward compatiblity, I understand that Herman Hollerith
based the size of his card on the size of the dollar in the 1890's, in
order to use stock material. So the length of the line of the terminals
we type on is descended from the size of our money in the last century!


Timothy

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 11:04:24 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards
Organization: New York University, School of Medicine


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

> Ya know, you can still order the ANSI Standards documentation (which
> just went "FINAL" last year).  I've misplaced my copy so I can't give
> you the order number.  The title has the words Holerith Codes in it.

    OH MY GOD!  He's right.  It's still in the catalog!
Everything you ever wanted to know about punch cards can be found out
from:

    ANSI X3.11-1990 General Purpose Paper Cards for Information
Processing, $20.00

    ANSI X3.21-1967 Rectangular Holes in Twelve-Row Punched Cards,
$13.00

    ANSI X3.26-1980 (R1991) Hollerith Punched Card Code, $13.00.

    Actually, I suspect you can't learn *everything* you ever
wanted to know; ANSI standards tend to be pretty dry reading.
Probably nothing in there about the uses of chad as confetti for
ticker-tape parades (not that there's any more ticker tape left
anymore than there is punch chad).

    BTW, just in case anybody has delusions of ANSI being somebody
that sets computer standards, you should be aware that the 200+ page
1993 ANSI catalog has only a very small section of it devoted to
computer standards.  It's chock full of things having to do with
machine tools, concrete, aviation fuel, chemicals, textiles, saftey
devices, building codes, hydraulic fluid, you name it.  I noticed one
title in there that had to do with fabrics used in book binding.

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

From: [e-mail] (David A Fiske)
Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards
Organization: Portal Communications Company
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 00:46:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gordon Burditt) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: So you remember when programmers used to write
> their programs via punch cards. They'd then turn these cards in to the
> computer room, the cards would be run through the computer, and as you

And there was always that smell of freshly punched cards. Nothing else
ever seemed to have that same odor.


Dave Fiske          [e-mail]
Ballston Spa, NY    [e-mail]
                    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 20:52 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back


On Mar 4 at 16:40, apple!TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com!MPA15AB!RANDY
writes:

> Sorry.  PacBell CW does indeed work as expected.  It is PacBell 3W that
> works differently from GTE 3W.  I had gotten used to having both work
> the same in GTE land, and really liked being able to "transfer" a call
> from one phone to another by flashing for a 3W stutter dialtone, then
> hanging up.  My phone would ring, and the caller would hear ringback.

I have taken advantage of the Pac*Bell mode. The way to positively get
rid of a caller who refused to hang up (and release my called line)
was to flash, then hang up. When immediately lifting the receiver, I
got dial tone, but the caller got reorder. This was how it worked on
my 1ESS.


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 #157
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03071;
          8 Mar 93 2:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12344
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 8 Mar 1993 00:06:38 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12346
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 8 Mar 1993 00:06:04 -0600
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 00:06:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #158

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 8 Mar 93 00:06:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 158

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Paul Robinson)
    Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill ([e-mail])
    Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (John Higdon)
    Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Graham Toal)
    Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Tim Russell)
    Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Albert Crosby)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1993 14:46:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review


[e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (James
> Borynec; AGT Researcher) writes:

>> I just read a startling report: "The Geodesic Network II: 1993 Report
>> on Competition in the Telephone Industry" By P.W. Huber, M.K. Kellogg,
>> and J. Thorne.  The Geodisic Company, Washington D.C.

>> The central thesis of this (thick) report is that the economics of
>> fiber and the economics of radio make long distance a "natural"
>> monopoly and that local access is now "inherently competitive".

> Well here's an opposing viewpoint!  Personally I think Huber is way
> out in right field ...

> As any regular reader of the EFF newsgroup would know by now, a
>"natural monopoly" is a fairly clear concept which applies when the
> economy of scale never maxes out, so a small vendor can never be
> competitive with a big one.  Long distance, even per Huber's quote, is
> almost exactly the opposite, a competitive commodity.

> Local wireline is a natural monopoly because it would cost too
> much to string a second set of wires.

How about if I claim you are both incorrect.

Let me look at this a moment.  It's too expensive to run a second set
of wires in a city where people pay a monthly charge whether or not
they use them, but not too expensive for MCI and Sprint to run
thousands of miles of wire or fiber from city-to-city where the only
time people pay for them are when someone uses the lines?

Why wasn't it "too expensive" back in the days when there were two
companies competing for local phone service back in the early part of
this century, and often getting two phones (one each from two
different companies) was cheaper than the price for one phone from a
monopoly supplier of dial tone in other cities of comparable size?

The wire isn't that expensive; the equipment isn't that expensive,
otherwise companies wouldn't turn around and install a PBX on top of
buying phone service from the local company.  What is expensive are
recurring costs: maintenance, salaries, royalties and so on.

When you have to pay a monthly charge for every pole your wire sits
on, you start burying wire so you can stop paying rent to the electric
company.  When you have to pay taxes on every facility site, you
reduce the number of facilities used to the absolute minimum needed.

This is where GTE is having so much trouble: they are not making their
lines and equipment reliable so that they require less maintenance,
and thus reducing the amount of people needed to support it.  No,
apparently because the stuff is so bad, that making it correct would
be expensive, they started consolidating offices to decrease the
overhead.  This doesn't work when the problem isn't the amount of
overhead, it's the amount of maintenance needed.

This could be the reason why American Telephone companies had much
better service and equipment than foreign countries: These companies
had to pay dividends to stockholders; therefore they had to make
money.  You make money by getting more people to use the system.  You
allow maximum use of the system by making it as reliable as possible.

Since, in general the local telephone company owned everything
connected to the phone system and you paid a monthly fee for it, it
was to their advantage to keep that stuff in good working order and
because you don't know the conditions in customer premises, make it as
rugged as possible.

In countries where the telephone company was government owned, there's
no profit incentive to make stuff better, or to think up new ideas.
People will get their government paychecks whether the phone system
works or not, so why bother worrying about service, or why bother to
care.  Once they have to fight for business as the private companies,
then service improves.

I have a message to John Higdon: do you want to see an immediate
improvement in service: find the money to run a fictional ad in the
local paper indicating that a new company is looking for investors and
potential customers to compete with GTE in providing local service.
Come to think of it, you already have a PBX in your home, so ... :)

Fact of the matter is there is no such thing as a 'natural monopoly'
in telephone service.  There are always alternatives to service.
Radio spectrum can be used in new and different ways to increase
capacity; people can make different uses of the radio spectrum
involving things like lower-power and unused channel spectrum.  For
example, one TV channel has 6MHZ of space.  This is the equivalent of
perhaps 300 simultaneous 12KHZ voice channels with separations.  The
UHF television band in the U.S. has LOTS of empty space; and in areas
where it is not being used, it can be converted to other places.
Realize that the people developing equipment can always use different
systems; for example, you use a microwave tower to deliver signals
into each region of a six-block area.  In each area you have a
microwave receiver on top of a house, apartment or building, that
transmits calls for its local area on the radio into a very short,
three block range.  The only requirment you have to have is the number
of people in the local area that no more than 300 people want to
simultaneously use the system.  This idea is the same as cellular; you
can then make the cells smaller and reduce the power of the
transmitter.

Or another idea.  You use a microwave tower to send across blocks at a
time, where on the top of the tallest house or building in the area
who happens to be a subscriber, is a microwave unit that receives
signals from the next block, and passes distant signals on to the
distant site, local signals can be carried to a telephone wire on that
block.  Since you are only having to send a signal across a street or
a couple of blocks, you don't need a huge amount of power.  You're not
boosting the signal 20 miles.  (PS: Does anyone know how many
voice/data channels can fit on, say a two- or three-foot microwave
horn (both ways) and how much they cost?)

Or, if you can rent a channel space not used by a cable company, the
wiring is already there, you just use subscriber carrier and GSM
scrambling techniques to carry your signals back to the phone system
processor.  Some cable companies have extra channel space that because
of technical reasons they don't use; there is another idea.

The problem is not necessarily cost of installing wire: it's the cost
of overcoming inertia and figuring out how to market a new service.  I
speculated on this earlier as an example of what someone could do to
provide competitive dial tone in the Washington DC metro area.
Someone else gave a suggestion: provide larger long-distance calling
areas.  And one possibility is for a service number to be able to
reach anywhere in Maryland or Virginia for no more than a local call.
Call all the way from DC to the VA side of the State Line in North
Carolina and the cost is a local call.  For some people, this might be
considerably cheaper, even at twice or three-times the price of a
regular telephone line.  (AT&T's rate from DC to Richmond is only 3c
less than the rate from DC to Los Angeles.)

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

Date: Sun, 07 Mar 93 11:09:50 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review


Long-distance a natural monopoly and local access inherently
competitive?

I have not read the (thick) report but to call LD a natural monopoly
seems to me to be overstated, even if it is by Peter Huber.

I have made the point on the digest that the LD business seems like a
"natural oligopoly."  Market share concentration inthe industry has
fallen after the ATT divestiture but is now on the rise again.

My argument is simply that you need both business and residential
diversity to make it in the LD business. And you also need
geographical diversity.

To describe LD as natural monopoly, you would have to explain the rise
of regional LD companies.

As for the economics of radio, I wonder how well that will do with the
scare about ELF, EMF, etc. Would people want local access via some
death beam?

Put it this way: Ma'am, you have the choice of access via radio which
is cheaper but has sometimes been shown to be carcinogenic and
sometimes not. It is not conclusive, you understand. On the other
hand, for just 50% more, we can offer you the same quality of service
on fiber optic. It is 50% more you understand.

I expect the local phone companies to exploit whatever scare there is
already out there.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1993 18:51:03 GMT


Our Moderator notes, as a follow-on to James Borynec's article on the
Geodesic Report:

> [Moderator's Note: We have known for a while now that MCI and Sprint
> have been repeatedly trying to keep AT&T from lowering its prices.

> MCI and Sprint trying to keep the prices up. After all, their entire
> fortunes were built on their fraudulent advertising campaigns saying
> how they could save telephone users money on long distance calls, were
> they not?  You know how that goes ...  PAT]

So how are these fraudulent claims different from those made by Orange
Communications and one of its sales agents who frequents these parts?
Just kidding, Pat!


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


[Moderator's Note: In the early days of MCI, they were fond of showing
unsophisticated (telecom-wise) business executives how they could
'save money' by using MCI. And sure enough, a comparison of their long
distance rates ONLY versus AT&T showed the cost for the *long distance*
part of the call was less. But they conveniently neglected to mention
that AT&T's higher rates included (admittedly due to their connection
with the local telcos at that time) as well the local part of the
connection from the local CO to the long distance switch. So business
pplaces signed up with MCI and saw a decrease in the long distance
side of their bill but a substantial increase in their local message
unit charges. The 'savings' was a wash at best and in many cases, the
total monthly outlay for telecommunications (local bill from telco
plus long distance bill from MCI versus a single bill from telco which
included long distance charges from AT&T) was actually higher than it
had been before.  MCI conveniently failed to mention that if you
called via their switch somewhere and the distant end was busy or did
not answer on five attempts, you still wound up paying for five local
message units to the local telco, which in those days was understandably
not about to give a free ride to the long distance switch of AT&T's
competitor. After several complaints to the FCC and getting sued, MCI
finally began mentioning this 'slight additional expense' over and
above their published rates. As Charles Brown, former Chairman of AT&T
said at the time, " ... they have no investment in outside plant, they
have no local loops or switches, they only handle (this was in the
middle 1970's) the high traffic, very profitable east-coast corridor
stuff ... of course their prices will be cheaper. If I could get away
with the stuff they are allowed to pull off, my prices would still be
less than theirs ..."

Regards the Orange Card, I make no claims that it is anything other
than 25 cents per minute with no surcharge. I do not claim you will
spend less or more than before. It is strictly an applications thing:
you decide if weekday daytime hours calls using some other calling
card at a payphone or in a hotel room would cost more or less than my
offering.  More on the Orange Card in an issue of the Digest on Monday
with some comments sent to me recenty by readers.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 15:17:04 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> nicmad!madnix!zaphod%
[e-mail] (Ron Bean) writes:

> If your recording device sits between the demark and your inside
> wiring, can it listen for tones (or pulses) on *both* sides of the
> line and distinguish between calls dialed from inside your building
> and those dialed from some other point between you and the CO? If such
> a device does not exist, could one be built with available components
> possibly using a PeeCee)?

The only way I can see protecting your line from unwanted phone calls
is to set up a system between the main phone lines, and the building
phone lines that will require a access code to dial a number, or even
better, it will require a code on any call whose number is longer than
8 digits, and doesn't start with 1800.  Calling up the phone company
and turning off 1900 calls isn't that bad of a idea (I can't see a
business needing to use 1-900 number).

As for interception between the main phone lines, and the telco (such
as someone going in a sewer and tapping the lines, I can't see how you
can protect against that, unless you can get the telco to put a lock
on your line, which (I just thought of that) is a good idea, but I'm
not sure the telco offers such a security system, and even then, if
someone tapped the line, they can get the number.  You'd have to set
up a preety complex system to be 100% foolproof, which for most
applications is way too expensive.

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 13:24 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill
Organization: Green Hills and Cows


In article <[e-mail]> nicmad!madnix!zaphod%
[e-mail] (Ron Bean) writes:

> If you're being billed for calls that don't show up on your
> computerized record, could you take AT&T to small-claims court?  (Who
> has jurisdiction on an interstate call?)

I think it works the other way around. I can always refuse to pay
(which I did), but AT&T can if it so chooses take me to court to
enforce payment. We were a long way from that, I feel.

> If your recording device sits between the demark and your inside
> wiring, can it listen for tones (or pulses) on *both* sides of the
> line and distinguish between calls dialed from inside your building
> and those dialed from some other point between you and the CO?

My "recording device" is the SMDR output of the PBX. It does not
listen for tones on the line but rather records the calls placed
through it.  Since I have sixteen lines, the PBX is the only practical
method for logging the calls. For various reasons, my demark is
secure. If calls are made from my residence on any phone whatsoever,
the calls will appear on the SMDR record. Period.

> If such a device does not exist, could one be built with available
> components possibly using a PeeCee)?

That is fine for one line. But what if you have multiple lines billed
under the same account? My billing does not differentiate between the
lines, so all lines in the billing must be monitored for fraud usage.


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

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 16:39:23 GMT
From: Graham Toal <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week"


Brian Erwin <[e-mail]> wrote:

>     The interviews are mastered onto Digital Audio Tape.  A typical
> 30-minute program occupies 15 Mbytes of disk space.  UUNET
> Communications in Virginia serves as the initial spool area with
> several gigabytes.  From there, the data moves to the IIJ network in
> Japan and EUnet in Europe.  These three sites -- UUNET, EUnet, and IIJ
> -- serve as the primary distribution points for the world.  From
> there, regional and national networks move the data closer to the
> users.  Eventually, a network manager takes the files and broadcasts
> them on a local area network or stores them on a file server.

I hope none of the sites that store these 15Mb files have previously
chopped a.b.p.e feeds on the grounds of 'waste of resources'...

A Mb per minute is ridiculous for speech.  That should be brought down
a *lot*.  Still, even at the best rate possible - say some very
crackly zero crossing scheme, fitting the data into a 14.4K modem's
bandwidth - you're never going to be able to download speech by phone
at much better than real time.  Who's going to spend 30 minutes
downloading this over their SLIP line?  And without the compression,
15Mb just isn't worth the bother for anyone, who isn't already on a T1.


G

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Russell)
Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week"
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1993 20:08:40 GMT


[e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> Seems that distribution of audio over internet is going to
> take an awful lot of bandwidth and be real costly.  Is it worth it?  I

    Well, firstly, my understanding is that the only transmissions of
ITR allowed on the backbone itself will be to the regional networks.
Thus the total backbone bandwidth used per episode will be at most
(15M * (# of regional nets)), which is rather small compared to the
amount of traffic flowing on the backbone daily.  Further, these
transmissions can be scheduled to occur during the wee hours when a
lot of bandwidth goes wasted anyway.

    As for the transmissions being "real costly", I don't quite under-
stand.  Unless I'm very mistaken, the backbone is not paid for by the
byte, it is paid for by the phone line.  The only way I see this
costing anything at all is if it impacts the backbone so much that
additional lines need to be installed.  That won't happen with this
scheme.

    Personally, I think this sounds like a really nifty idea.  I just
hope that player software is available for as many machine types as
possible to facilitate a large listenership and make it all
worthwhile.  That includes PC's with sound cards as well.


 Tim Russell                 Omaha, NE              [e-mail]
     PGP public key available, finger [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 17:50:42 -0600
From: Albert Crosby <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week"


PAT:

When I first heard of Internet Talk Radio, my second thought
(seriously!) was, "I hope they make text transcripts available".  (My
first thought was that it was likely to be some special version of
Internet Relay Chat (IRC).) I personally don't have access to truly
capable sound hardware, and besides, I'd just as soon read it!

And as someone else pointed out, the idea of thousands of 'listeners'
ftp'ing 15+Mbytes of soundfiles regularly is going to add a lot of
network load.  Hopefully the implementors have arranged about 50 or
100 mirror sites around the globe ...

For myself, I'll continue to hear MY "Geek of the Week" right here,
you guessed it, in TELECOM Digest land.

(Or are you going to start offering an audio version too?)


Albert Crosby


[Moderator's Note: I *may* -- just may -- start a voice BBS one of
these days for telecommers ... with voicemail boxes for private mail
and some bulletin boards to post messages to the group. Depends on if
anyone is interested.  I'll decide before long.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #158
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01826;
          9 Mar 93 3:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20413
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 01:00:07 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31991
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 00:59:19 -0600
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 00:59:19 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #159

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 9 Mar 93 00:59:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 159

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer (Koos van den Hout)
    DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question (Ken Stone)
    Hacked Cellular Phones (RISKS via Ron Dippold)
    International Connectivity Data Available (Rick Broadhead)
    Information on "Direct-Link Sought (Daniel M. Greenberg)
    AT&T Easy Reach 700 Number Hints and Tips Wanted (Gregory Youngblood)
    Wristwatch Pagers (Chris Taylor)
    FCC Versus Bell Atlantic? (Yue-shun E. Ho)
    Southern Bell Acknowledges Modems (Jack Dominey)
    Telephone Express/Penny Express (Stephen Wolfson)
    Typical GTE (John Higdon)
    Gotta Love GTE -- One Better (Mike Newton)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 93 22:05:16 +0100
Subject: Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer


Friday (3-5) there was a short item on the news that the Dutch PTT
(the national telecommunications provider which has a monopoly at this
moment) is studying the possibility of charging for not-completed
calls that get a busy tone or don't get answered.

I was wondering, is this charging of not-completed calls done in any
other country in the world?

Technically there are very limited costs with not-completed calls.
Calls to numbers that are busy don't even occupy line capacity (the
exchange from which you'r calling asks the other exchange if the
number is available and if it's not the local exchange handles the
generation of the busy tone).

By the way, a representative of the Dutch consumer organisation
('Consumentenbond') said when interviewed 'I wonder if there is a wire
loose with them'. (This remark is also connected to the recent raise in
the local tariffs).


Grtx. KH     Koos van den Hout
Student Computer Science (AKA HIO)       BBS Koos z'n Doos ([phone])
Inter-: [e-mail]                 300..14400 MNP2-5,10,V42bis)
net   : [e-mail]    |  Use PGP for  |   Fido: Sysop @ 2:500/101.11012
Schurftnet : KILL !!!     | private mail! |       Give us a call !!

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

Subject: DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1993 18:02:50 -0800
From: Ken Stone <[e-mail]>


I appear to have dug into a rats nest on this one and I'm just not
sure why :-).  In trying to look at getting a T3 to an offsite
building a while back, we noticed that tariffs for buying at the
optical vs buying at the electrical interface were considerably
different.  Now I would expect some difference as you have to pay for
the shelf that does the conversion ... but this seemed like too much
of a difference for that.  As it was, we ended up going microwave for
delivery time reasons and the issue was never resolved.

Now I have another shot at it and I want to understand.  It is to my
advantage to buy at the optical interface on at least one end since
the existing DS3 mux equip is "microwave located" and not "demarc
located".  I'd also like the idea of the lower tariffs.  In what
little research I have done so far (talking to my DS3 mux vendor), the
only thing I have come up with is that it would appear that optical
DS3 is not necessarily optical DS3 ... in that it may be that PacBell
REQUIRES the optical/electrical interface be done with this nifty
super do-all $bucks$ mux gadget from NT which can do MUCH more than
just the E/O conversion.  That would explain the tariff difference.
The inability to use some of the simpler gear I have heard of, having
to deal with a rack full of PacBell gear onsite AT THE DEMARC, and
being length limited by DS3/coax from said PacBell rack really stinks!!

What I'm interested in is what's available as far as DS3 optical
termination equipment (the simpler the better) and what other's
experiences with buying DS3 point to point from the RBOC's are.

What I would like to see is something like:

PacBell DS3 fiber <DEMARC> house fiber -> E/O -> DL3000 -> data/voice

on each end of the link.


Ken

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)
Subject: Hacked Cellular Phones
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 21:49:23 GMT


 From comp.risks:

 Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 18:15:08 -0500
 From: John Stoffel <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Cellular Phreaks & Code Dudes

I picked up the premiere issue of a new magazine called "Wired" which
is trying to spread the word about the Digital Revolution.  And
editorial blurb from the inside page is repeated here:

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

WHY WIRED?

Because the Digital Revolution is whipping though our lives like a
Bengali typhoon -- while the mainstream media is still groping for the
snooze button.  And because the computer "press" is too busy churning
out the latest PCInfoComputingCorporateWorld iteration of its ad sales
formula cum parts catalog to discuss the meaning or context of SOCIAL
CHANGES SO PROFOUND their only parallel is probably the discovery of
fire.

There are a lot of magazines about technology.  "Wired" is not one of
them.  "Wired" is about the most powerful people on the planet today --
THE DIGITAL GENERATION.  These are the people who not only foresaw how
the merger of computers, telecommunications and the media is
transforming life at the cusp of the millennium, they are making it
happen.

OUR FIRST INSTRUCTION TO OUR WRITERS: AMAZE US.

Our second: We know a lot about digital technology, and we are bored
with it.  Tell us something we've never heard before, in a way we've
never seen before.  If it challenges our assumptions, so much the
better.

So why not now?  Why "Wired"?  Because in the age of information
overload, THE ULTIMATE LUXURY IS MEANING AND CONTEXT.

Or put another way, if you're looking for the soul of our new society
in wild metamorphosis, our advice is simple.  Get "Wired".

-LR [jfs: Louis Rossetto]

You can reach me at 415-904-0664 or [e-mail]

                         ================

Along with this they had an interesting article on "Cellular Phreaks
and Code Dudes" by John Markoff ([e-mail]), which discusses how
the latest rage of Silicon Valley hackers is cellular phones.  He
gives an example of how two phreaks hacked into an OKI 900 cellular
phone and some of the features they discovered:

  o how to use it as a cellular scanner.

  o the manufacturer's interface so you can attach the phone to a
    portable computer.

  o one of the phreaks wrote some software to track other portable
    phones as they move from cell to cell, this allows him to display the
    approximate locations of each phone since he knows the geographical
    locations of each cell.

  o having the phone watch a specific number, and when that number is
    used, pick up and by using a simple sound activated recorder, you've
    made an instant bugging device!  Maybe all the spies in Common Market
    who were worried about having point to point encryption on cellular
    phones didn't think of this trick?

I found this article to be worth the cost of the magazine, as it ties
in directly with RISKS readers here have been talking about.  Now if
it is this easy to hack this phone, how hard would it be to hack into
the general cellular phone service machines, those that handle the
passing of phones from cell to cell?

The down side was the really annoying format, which seems to be
"Techno-babble-obnoxious" with arbitrary changes in typeface,
orientation, etc as you flip through pages.  I felt that this
detracted from the overall look of the information they were trying to
present, making it harder to assimilate.  I'd be interested in talking
to anyone else who has read this magazine too.

John

              ------  end quote ------

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


Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 00:18:01 EST
Reply-To: Rick Broadhead <[e-mail]>
From: Rick Broadhead <[e-mail]>
Subject: International Connectivity Data Available


Larry Landweber of the Internet Society recently released Version 7 of
his ever-popular International Connectivity List.  For _every_ country
in the world, the document will tell you if the country has links to
any of the major computer networks.  The networks covered in the table
are Internet, Bitnet, UUCP, and Fidonet.

The list is authoritative -- all links are verified prior to inclusion
in the table.  It is the most definitive and comprehensive compilation
of its kind, and it is a must-have for anyone who wants to know what
countries are connected to each of the networks.  Over 50% of the
countries and dependencies listed in the table are now reachable by
e-mail through at least one of the international computer networks.

The International Connectivity List will be a useful reference for
anyone at York who has a need to correspond internationally, and who
uses e-mail in the course of his/her work.

If you would like a copy of this document, please send an e-mail
message to [e-mail].


Rick Broadhead    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Information on "Direct-Link sought
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 93 01:43:01 -0500
From: Daniel M. Greenberg <[e-mail]>


I recently discovered a brochure on-campus for Direct-Link 800 and
calling card service.  The brochure indicates that the program is
presented by On Campus Marketing Concepts in conjunction with
Direct-Link (Houston TX) yet the mailing address is in Cherry Hill,
NJ.  Suspiciously, there is no contact phone number and the address
is, of course, a P.O. Box.

Here are the two plans they offer:

1.  25 cents a minute calling card from anywhere to anywhere in the US.
    (It does not mention continental US restrictions, but I'm assuming
     that is merely an oversight).  The calling card has no service
     charges or minimum usage requirements.  As an option,  they offer
     a "customized" card design with school name and colors, etc. for
     $2.

2.  They offer personal 800 service at the following rates:  23.9 cents
    per minute (8am-8pm) and 19.9 cents per minute (8pm-8am).  There are
    no surcharges, no monthly charges, and no setup charges.  Further,
    they offer a "multi-link service" which (where available)
    allows one to add 5 other locations anywhere in the US which can
    "ring in with simple extensions added to your 800 number."

The application requests credit references and offers as a "bonus"
chances to receive specials, discounts, gifts, giveaways, contents,
and more if you choose direct credit card billing as opposed to direct
billing.

So ... my questions are: 1) Anyone know about these companies, and 2)
how do these deals stack up for someone looking for no volume
commitment or monthly fees.

Thanks in advance for your help.


Daniel M. Greenberg                      Syracuse University
[e-mail]   School of Management, MBA Program


[Moderator's Note: I am also going to be offering 1+ service and 800
service probably starting in the next few days. Watch for a message
here.   PAT]

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

Subject: AT&T Easy Reach 700 Number Hints and Tips Wanted
From: tcscs![e-mail] (Gregory Youngblood)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 93 22:28:15 CST
Organization: TCS Consulting Services


Please reply to me via e-mail, and I will summarize the response, if
there is interest in the summary.

I just ordered an AT&T Easy Reach 700 number today ... I should have
it in a week.  I went ahead and paid the 25 dollar fee and selected my
own 'personalized' number as well.

While I am waiting for the packet telling me how to use it and for it
to be activated, I was hoping I could find out some interesting tips,
tricks, or hints on how to get the most out of this number.

I'd be interested in hearing any experiences, limitations, joys or
annoyances, and especially if anyone has used the easy reach number in
an unusual way.

I know this sounds like an odd request, I am just curious as to how
others were using this service so that I can make sure to get the most
of it.

Thanks for your time and replies in advance.


Greg

TCS Consulting Services   P.O. Box 600008   St. Paul, MN  55106-0008
****** PLEASE REPLY VIA E-MAIL as my news feed is temporarily down ******
  [e-mail]        or       [e-mail]
  ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta                or           ..!guppy!tcscs!zeta

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

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 02:00:44 -0500 (EST)
From: Chris Taylor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wristwatch Pagers


Does anybody out there have tales to tell of the Motorola wrist pager?
I recall seeing some advertising for it, but haven't seen any for a
while.

Are any other manufacturers making wrist pagers?


Chris Taylor    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Yue-shun E. Ho)
Subject: FCC Versus Bell Atlantic?
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 9:45:36 PST


I read about Bell Atlantic filing a lawsuit against FCC for its ban on
telephone companies owning cable tv companies.  Could someone tell me
about the results, if any, please?  Southwestern Bell's recent
purchase of two cable tv companies seem suggest that the ban is no
longer in force, but I'd like to know a bit more.  Thanks much in
advance.


yue-shun e ho                   [phone] (home)  [phone] (work)
[e-mail]  or  [e-mail]  (personal)     [e-mail] (business)

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 8 Mar 93 16:06:28 GMT
Subject: Southern Bell Acknowledges Modems


This showed up on my Feb. bill from Southern Bell:

"To temporarily cancel Call Waiting before making a call, dial *70
[stuff deleted]. Customers with personal computers can use the service
to avoid transmission interruptions during dial-up calls. [more
deleted] (This service not available in all areas.)"

I find it noteworthy that this telco, at least, seems to believe a
significant number of residential customers are placing modem calls.


Jack Dominey    AT&T Network Planning, Atlanta GA
404-810-6936 AT&T Mail: !dominey or !nesca!jdominey

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

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 12:24:44 -0700
From: Stephen Wolfson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone Express/Penny Express


I've recently received an ad for Telephone Express' Penny Express
deal.

First ten minute phone call is a penny, and then if you use them every
tenth call is the same deal.  They don't want to be a 1+ carrier. They
give you some stickers with their 10xxx code (10465?) and you access
it only that way.  Any one know anything about them, who's lines do
they use?  They claim to be the offshoot of a business LD provider
that's older than MCI/Sprint.  Are their rates any good?

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

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 21:06 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Subject: Typical GTE
Organization: Green Hills and Cows


Browsing through the new San Jose/Santa Clara phone directory has
reminded me of a typical ploy of GTE: maximization of toll revenue.
The company sets up these little islands of toll to wring the last
dime out of customers.

While this is commonplace in southern California, we have a little
mini-version right here in the south Bay Area. The two communities
"served" by GTE are Los Gatos and Morgan Hill. Just south of San Jose
is a cluster of mountain communities: Felton, Boulder Creek, and Ben
Lomond. Los Gatos is adjacent to each of these communities, plus
Scotts Valley (in the Santa Cruz exchange). While Pac*Bell's policy is
to make any adjacent community or rate area a local call, GTE goes out
of its way to justify making a similar route a toll call. Hence, while
Pac*Bell's Saratoga exchange is local to all of those communities
mentioned (and is farther away), Los Gatos is toll.

The Morgan Hill situation is no better. Morgan Hill is a small farming
town which shares a border with San Jose to the south. Under the usual
Pac*Bell zoning methods, it would at least be a local call to San Jose
Three (the southern rate area). But GTE, in its toll maximizing
wisdom, keeps it a very expensive toll call. I could show you two
places, one in the Morgan Hill exchange and one in the San Jose South
exchange that are close enough to each other that you can see the
smile on a person's face standing at the other location as well as
hear him yell. Yet, due to GTE's pettiness, it is a twenty-five cent a
minute call.

There has got to be a vaccine for GTE.


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

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

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 22:36:59 -0800
From: Mike Newton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Gotta Love GTE -- One Better


GTE .. wait 'till you see Citibank Visa...

I started to write a check; wrote the 'numeric amount'; thought I made
an error; 'X'-ed out the check, wrote 'VOID' on it and wrote a new one
 ... and sent in both.

No payee, no signature, no written (longhand) amount, just the numbers
and a VERY large X.  Oh, and the word 'VOID'.

Citibank cashed it.  My bank paid it.  And paid the correct one too.
Then started bouncing my checks (an extra $1000 makes a big difference!)
 ... real embarassing.

Now, if you're evil minded you can think of amazing ways of getting
Citibank (or GTE, or ...) to commit fraud for you.  Eg: take a check
from someone, write in a number and 'VOID', send it in.  You haven't
signed it or ...

A little creativity and you can come up with more exotic schemes where
you're very unlikely to get caught.

It took weeks, three visits to the bank (which I rarely do), numerous
phone calls ... but the bank took back all the extra fees, etc.
Grrrrr ...


Mike

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #159
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02956;
          9 Mar 93 4:14 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04990
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 01:35:31 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30515
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 01:34:42 -0600
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 01:34:42 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #160

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 9 Mar 93 01:34:40 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 160

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (John Higdon)
    Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Marc T. Kaufman)
    Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Ron Dippold)
    Re: Future of North American Numbering Plan (Al Varney)
    Re: Toll Stations in California (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (John Higdon)
    Re: Moving a Phone Line Within Apartments (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: OSPS and ANI Failure (Tim Gorman)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager ([e-mail])
    Re: Costs to Telco: Leased vs Dial (Pat Turner)
    Re: A Little More TWX History (Dave Levenson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 11:35 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada
Organization: Green Hills and Cows


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

> Paper forwarded by to telecom by Sid Shniad, Burnaby BC
> <[e-mail]>:

> What are those effects?  Since the early 1980s, as deregulation
> tore apart the American phone system, the US experienced an
> unprecedented series of local price increases, cutbacks in service,
> and the loss of tens of thousands of jobs as competing telephone
> companies narrowed their focus to satisfy large corporate customers
> located in major urban centres.

The only thing true in the above paragraph is the "loss of ... jobs".
They were lost in the telcos as those companies were forced to become
more efficient. However, what was not mentioned was the creation of
MANY more jobs in the non-telco sector. Of the many tens of people
that I personally know in the telecommunications business, few are
working for a telco such as Pacific Bell. None of these jobs would
exist today without deregulation and divestiture.

[all the usual garbage about the evils of competition and deregulation,
deleted]

> These challenges to the actions of the government and the CRTC were
> part of the ongoing campaign to prevent the introduction of American-
> style telecommunications deregulation in Canada.  Given the
> degradation of service, the increase in the cost of service, and the
> massive loss of employment that has rocked the US phone industry over
> the past 10 years, Canadians have been anxious to avoid a repetition
> of that experience in this country.

More outright lies. It is amazing that such nonsense can be thrust at
the Canadian people with a straight face. Of course, the opposite is
true. Service has improved remarkably, it is cheaper, and there are
more jobs than ever before available in the telecommunications
industry. But naturally this self-serving union propaganda is
addressing the cushy, non-productive jobs that would be lost in Bell
Canada should that entity be forced to provide real marketplace
service.

[The usual moaning and groaning about the affront to nationalistic
concerns, deleted.]

> Which brings us to the subject of telecommunications.  Canada's
> telephone system and the services related to it are world class.

 From correspondence with Canadians, I have determined that the US has
benefitted greatly for deregulation and divestiture. While Canada
still has step equipment and multi-party lines in rural areas, that
equipment and facility arrangement has all but disappeared in this
country. Bell Canada has no technical superiority with regard to the
typical service provided in the US; and frequently the reverse is
actually the case.

I hope all who read this paper will realize that every single argument
contained therein was used at the time of the US divestiture. History
discredits it all. My only comment is that if Bell Canada has to start
making its own way in the marketplace, there should be better
provisions concerning COCOTs than here in the US.

Other than that, I would put the world-class US telephone system up
against any, including Canada.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman)
Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week"
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date:  8 Mar 93 16:09:28 GMT


Graham Toal <[e-mail]> writes:

> Brian Erwin <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> The interviews are mastered onto Digital Audio Tape.  A typical
>> 30-minute program occupies 15 Mbytes of disk space.

> A Mb per minute is ridiculous for speech.  That should be brought down
> a *lot*.  Still, even at the best rate possible - say some very
> crackly zero crossing scheme, fitting the data into a 14.4K modem's
> bandwidth - you're never going to be able to download speech by phone
> at much better than real time.

The rate is 0.5MB per minute, or 64KBPS, which is just straight audio.
I expect that it would be possible to easily get another factor of 2
by delta coding, 3-4 bit cvsd.  If you don't mind compute cycles, and
you are willing to restrict the information to speech (not music), a
Linear Predictive Coding system can further reduce the required bit
rate to about 2.4KBPS, which would bring a 30 minute interview down to
about 4 MB.

Thats only 4500 punched cards.


Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)
Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week"
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 21:04:03 GMT


Graham Toal <[e-mail]> writes:

> A Mb per minute is ridiculous for speech.  That should be brought down
> a *lot*.  Still, even at the best rate possible - say some very
> crackly zero crossing scheme, fitting the data into a 14.4K modem's
> bandwidth - you're never going to be able to download speech by phone
> at much better than real time.  Who's going to spend 30 minutes

It's not quite that bad ... our vocoder, using a variation of CELP
(QCELP), vocodes at 1000 bytes per second locked at full rate.  If
running at variable rate and assuming a standard voice activity factor
(one-sided) of about .6 for one side that's 600 bytes per second, or
one megabyte for the half hour.  (If you're really worried about space
and want to trade for voice quality you can lock out full rate voice
entirely and force it to go at half-rate and below only).  This system
was designed to sound good on a cellular system, and when there's no
data mangling in the transmission medium it _really_ sounds great.

You should be able to do two separate voice conversations over a
V.32bis modem using a CELP variation like this -- there should be
enough bandwith because of the variable rate, and if there's ever a
problem you can throttle back the vocoders to a random half frame now
and then.

Going back to the net, in the worst case you could "decompress" the
vocoded speech once you'd ftped it if your software wasn't fast enough
to do it in real time, then play back the decompressed version.

The only problem is that QCELP and variations are designed to handle
speech, so that any music will be mangled and you can't have a cool
theme song (maybe someone singing acapella?) unless you store that
separately.

I'm not suggesting using QCELP specifically, I'm just using it as an
example that it can be done -- I know there are plenty of CELP
variations out there, some of which are public domain.

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

Date: Mon,  8 Mar 93 10:59:43 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Future of North American Numbering Plan
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


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

> A couple of days ago, I asked:

>> Why can't you just add another digit to the phone number?

[And John Levine responded:]

> In case nobody else has pointed it out, North American switching
> systems have evolved a different switching protocol than is used
> elsewhere in the world.  The CCITT standard used everywhere else
> passes a digit at at time with per-digit handshakes.  The North
> American standard buffers up a full ten digit number and transmits it
> in a block.  (Before you ask, at the time this convention was invented
> in the early 1950s there were probably more dial phones in North
> America than in the entire rest of the world.)

   But this "buffering" isn't all that unusual once you get beyond a
SXS view of switching.  Almost all switches have to know when the
caller has completed dialing, and since billing is done at the local
end (except of SXS), all the digits have to be seen at the local end.
SS7 will support "en bloc" and "subsequent digits" forms of calling,
but a single "en bloc" IAM is much simpler and efficient.

> So making phone numbers longer than the current ten digits would
> require immense changes to every phone switch we've got.  Newer
> switches use SS7 which could probably be changed with a software
> upgrade, but there is still a lot of crossbar which would require
> soldering in hundreds of new relays.

(Ech, solder dripping into the markers!!  How about wire-wrap?  And
all that wiring would have to happen on one night!!)

   But the basic point to remember is that North America isn't running
out of numbers in the ten-digit spectrum.  We have plenty of numbers
available.  Unfortunately, the NPA middle-digit-is-0/1 rule meant we
were not using 75% of the spectrum.  Much easier to use up the
existing spectrum (which doesn't change anyone's existing number
either INSIDE the USA or in the rest of the world).  And much more
sensible, IMHO.

   So the impact (unlike adding a digit) is almost entirely on the
equipment vendors and owners of that equipment, not every person that
makes a call into North America.  (Not to mention that such a change
would be more complex because Canada and the 809 countries would
likely resist adding a digit to their numbers -- this would add
immense even more complexity to switches everywhere in the world.)

   If you think there is an uproar over the planned NPA change because
of it's impact on the somewhat tiny world of telecom, step back and
think about the impact of another digit on every business and
telephone user in the USA (and their world-wide callers).  Now there's
an UPROAR!


Al Varney - just my opinion, of course

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Toll Stations in California
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 17:28:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott
D Fybush) writes:

> The other toll station missing from the list is (or was) at the
> intersection of Nevada 266 and US 95, about 40 miles east of Deep
> Springs.  This was Lida Junction 3, a pay phone with no dial in the
> parking lot of the, er, "Cottontail Ranch," a whorehouse (yes, they're
> legal in rural Nevada!).  I think LJ 1 and 2 were inside, but I never
> went in to check.

According to the "Best Cathouses in Nevada" by J. R Schwartz (Copyright
1984, and there's a new book out by now, I'm sure) the Cottontail
Ranch is indeed served by Lida Junction #2.

This is not the only cathouse served by a toll station.  Janie's
Ranch, west of Montgomery Pass on US 6, just inside the California
Nevada Border is served by "Montgomery Pass #4" although they are also
served by direct dial out of 619-933, Benton, CA.

One more telecom anomoly in this book is listed under "Billie's Day
and Night."  Here the listing states "No Telephone."  The mind
boggles.  Where are their priorities?  What _could_ they be thinking? :-)

Now you have an excuse to check out these facilities.  After all, they
are telecom history in the making. :-)


Edward W. Greenberg  | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
1600 Stokes St. #24  | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95126  | Fax:  [phone] | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH)

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

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 11:09 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls
Organization: Green Hills and Cows


In article <[e-mail]> MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.
tredydev.unisys.com writes:

> I know this has been discussed before, and I thought it was a
> switch-settable option, but GTE only permits one call at a time to be
> in processes through a normal Call Forwarded ("Programmable Call
> Forwarding") line.  This is really annoying, as I intended for people
> to continue using my old (GTE) number, even though I am receiving
> calls at my new (PacBell) number.

I have often wondered why people forward the old number to the new
one.  My mechanic did this after he moved from his old location to a
new one just over the exchange boundary line. The only thing that I
could see that it bought him was the postponing of the inevitable day
of truth when people would finally HAVE to learn and dial the new
number.  Plus there was the side "benefit" of paying all those local
units for the forwarded calls.

So let me ask you: why don't you just have the old number referred to
the new one? Are you going to leave the old one forwarded forever? As
long as someone can reach you by dialing the old number, he is NEVER
going to learn the new one (or even care).


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Moving a Phone Line Within Apartments
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 22:50:35 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Hon Wah Chin)
writes:

> While moving from one unit in an apartment building to another, I
> wanted to have access to my phone line from both places.  I did this
> from the building's side of the demarc.  Now that I'm out of the old
> apartment I called PacBell to get the records changed to reflect the
> situation.

> After talking to the rep I get the feeling that they would have done
> the transfer at the CO and charged me $35.  It looks as though my
> attempt to do the switch "make before break" didn't work.

> It looks as though I will have to back out my wiring changes and ask
> for a regular transfer of service.  Any hints about how to minimize
> the no-service window?

Well, you do not indicate which state you are in.  The answer varies
from state to state.  Some states (including NY) define the point to
which they (as distinct from the landlord) provide service as the
network interface jack in your individual premises.  In those states,
they would take a _very_ dim view of your reconnections since there is
no "building's side of the demarc".

Other states (e.g. Illinois and California) define it as the
street-cable binding posts in the basement.  In such a state it is not
the telephone company's business what happens on the riser side of the
basement cross-connection.  It is the business of the landlord.  In
such a state I should think you could call them up and simply announce
you want your bill sent somewhere other than where it was being sent
before (e.g. the new apartment) if that is what you want.  Or, if you
don't mind the bill being addressed in an unchanged way (e.g. you are
having it sent to a PO Box) then no further action would be required
on your part.

Here in NY, a change of service location that happens to be within one
building has a smaller one-time charge than a change of location that
changes what building you are in.  The different pricing is, I assume,
a throwback to the days when all changes involved physical
manipulations of wires.  In those old days, a within-the-building move
required one technician act (in your basement) and a building-
to-building move required three technician acts (one in your basement
and one in the central office, as well as a technician act in the new
basement in most cases).

Of course, nowadays with dedicated pairs running from the central
office to each apartment in each building, the intra-building moves
are handled from the telco's point of view exactly like inter-building
moves, namely by keystrokes entered at a keyboard.  But in NY, at
least, the difference in one-time charges persists.

Here in NY, the tariffs let the customer have up to ten days, I think,
of overlap in service between the old and new locations, at no extra
cost.

Hope this helps.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza   New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

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

Date: 08 Mar 93 18:31:24 EST
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failure


[e-mail] (Al Varney) writes in TELECOM Digest V13 #154:

> Tim, I'd like more info on this SS7 "compatibility" issue.

In trying to be brief, I made a statement that was misleading. The
incompatibility is that SS7 trunk signaling on CAMA trunks between an
ANI office and its CAMA billing office is not provided for. This does
prevent the use of CLASS features on calls to and from these offices.
It does not prevent the completion of calls using ANI. It does not
prevent these calls from interworking with trunks and or call
processes using SS7 trunk signaling or data base queries (at least as
long as the switch vendor properly implements this <g>).

> But when you replaced the CDO in my home town, you forgot to
> activate the "four-digit local calling" feature on the new switch
> (grin).  And my dad's impression was that it was SWBT, not the PUC,
< that forced him to private line service from 8-party.  Of course,

Since there may be a good possibility of having to go to 10D local
dialing in the near feature, forgetting to activate 4D dialing may
turn out to be a blessing :->. Elimination of four-party and
eight-party was part of a five year telecommunications network upgrade
agreement SWBT in KS made with the PUC.  In turn for eliminating
multiparty service, going completely stored program control/equal
access, upgrading interoffice facilities, and freezing certain rates
including local flat rates the PUC moved away from rate-of-return
regulation to more of a price regulation format. This plan is to be
complete 12-94 and will be reviewed for renewal in late 1994.


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

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

Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 93 00:31:51 EST
Organization: The Waffle Whiffer, Atlanta, GA


[e-mail] (jack lowry) writes:

> The skypager had a few advantages over the local pagers I have had:

> 1. possibilty of retrieving missed pages. (upto 100 hours ago)
> 2. Blocking pages. (Don't bother me I'm...)
> 3. future pages. (page you at some time in the future)
> 4. The newer sky pagers can also tell you when you are out of range.

I had a SkyPager for a long time, and I was very unhappy with it.
They're up to 4x as expensive as a regular pager, and the local pagers
around here have all the features the SkyPager has but better local
coverage.  While the SkyPager may work in 100+ cities, the local
pagers we now use have well over THREE TIMES the coverage area.  In my
travels I've found that SkyPagers rarely work even to the edges of the
city, and huge sections of metro areas are without service from their
weak signals.  I've boiled my travels down to primarily Chicago and
Atlanta and I find it cheaper to just have local pagers in both cities
than a SkyPager that works marginally in either city.  If you travel
to more than three or four cities with regularity, then a SkyPager
will probably work for you.  I think that there are several other
companies offering nationwide service, and some local companies (like
PacTel Paging, I think) can offer service in more than one metro area
on the same pager.

>> Would cellular phones be better?

Personally, I would think that a cellular phone would be a necessity
nowadays as a supplement to a pager rather than a replacement for it.
The service (especially if you're roaming) was still _way_ too
expensive to be used as a paging service, but it's sure easier to
return a call via cellular than to trudge around in the rain looking
for a payphone, and fumbling for a calling card.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 12:14 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Costs to Telco: Leased vs Dial


Vance Shipley writes:

> Network simplification has to be important to the telco, their manpower
> costs are a high percentage of operating costs.  Also, as another poster
> pointed out automated loop testing, etc. are not possible (or more costly
> and difficult) on special service facilities.

Assuming you don't mean automatic (ie ALIT) when you say automated, I
will have to disagree.  Special Service circuits can be tested from
either the digital (ie DCS) or analog (ie SMAS) side.  I would assume
there are very few all analog SS circuits, unless both ends are served
by the same CO.  All transmission impairment measurements (SNR, noise,
attenuation distortion, envelope delay, IMD, jitter, etc) can be
preformed from the DACS as well as the SMAS.  The biggest reason to
use the SMAS is to allow centralized (ie SARTS) testing of cable pairs
for problems such as ground faults and side crosses.

A SMAS, or similar metailic facility access, also allows tones to be
sent to both pairs of a four wire circuit.  This is useful for
locating bad cable pairs, or IDing pairs in critical situations. I
have been told that the SMAS capability comes built in to most of the
CO equipiment used for SS circuits.  Every SS circuit I have been
involved in troubleshooting was accessable by the SMAS if the office
was so equipied (and not served with DLC.)

I would imagine the problem with maintaing SS circuits would be being
able to access the circuit for testing.  With the nailed up
connections, you don't know when, if ever, you can access the circuit
for routine or automatic testing.  This problem is made worse because
of the critical nature of some SS circuits.  Holston Mt, TN is a good
example.  Along about two miles of mountain top sit a NWS radar, a FAA
VORTAC, three TV stations, four radio stations, several microwave
repeaters and DIPs, two airphone transmitter sites, and a whole bunch
of two way sites.  The local United cable man will not touch a pair
unless he is at either end or has a tone on the pair.


Patton Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: A Little More TWX History
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 18:33:34 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

[as part of a truly interesting article on some hobby uses of old
teletypewriter equipment]

> ...  We now don't even plot our boards.  We just take a disk with
> the Gerber photoplot file and drill file across town to the PC house.
> We give them a disk and back come PC boards.  Pretty neat!

> It's amazing to see the changes I've seen in the electronics
> industry ... but then, I'm getting older ...

Harold: It is, indeed, amazing.  There even are places where we no
longer have to take the disk across town ... our phototypesetter
accepts Postscript files from us by modem.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #160
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04844;
          9 Mar 93 5:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21581
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 02:38:53 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26937
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 02:38:11 -0600
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 02:38:11 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #161

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 9 Mar 93 02:38:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 161

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (John Higdon)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Andrew Funk)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (John Boteler)
    Re: Things Really Went BOOM! (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Things Really Went BOOM! (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Blocking of Phone Numbers With Caller ID (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Kevin Paul Herbert)
    Re: Explain This Phenomena (Mickey Ferguson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 16:31 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Organization: Green Hills and Cows


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brent
Whitlock) writes:

> Neither would I.  My brother, who is also an avid reader of this
> digest, told me that at an AM radio station for which he used to be a
> part time DJ, they could not use IBM PC's because the broadcast tower
> interfered with the keyboard preventing it from working properly.

Rather than indicate any mysterious forces at work, the fact that the
PC did not work properly simply indicates a lack of knowledge on
someone's part concerning proper grounding and shielding. I know of a
number of 50KW AM stations that have studios and transmitters
co-located. They also have PCs that work just fine.

> I also recall a comment about feeling the hair on the back of one's
> neck stick out from the electric field as one approached the tower.

Someone was pulling your leg. For the hair on your neck to be
noticably affected would require an electrostatic field in the
one-million volt department to occur at any distance at all from the
source. RF voltages (even at the voltage-peak point on the tower)
never even remotely approach this, even on a 50KW tower. I have worked
around dozens of 50KW stations over the past twenty-five years or so
and have NEVER observed my hair standing on end. What nonsense!

Once again, let us nip the folklore in the bud. There is absolutely NO
EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that RF energy at AM wavelengths causes ANY
physiological affects. It is common practice for tower workers to
climb energized AM towers (you cannot get much closer than that) and
no one has come up with a single case of anything that can be
attributed to such exposure. Yes, you can get an RF burn off the tower
if you brush your hand past it, but that is due to the arc that is
drawn, not some mysterious, unseen force.

FYI, I have known a number of pregnant women who have worked around AM
transmitters and have all given birth to very healthy babies.


>  * * * * * * --> 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

Amazing! Do you ever work in the lab?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Funk)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 03:43:35 GMT


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

> In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 156 [e-mail]
> (scott.d.brenner) writes:

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

>>> A newspaper article I read earlier this week implied that the station
>>> (and other local stations) was able to provide their signal to other
>>> stations out in Long Island, who were then able to uplink the signal
>>> to the satellite, from which the cable systems could pick up the
>>> signal.

> What happened on Long Island is that WNBC uplinked to a satellite and
> the local PBS station, WLIW - Channel 21, picked up the signals and
> retransmitted them over the air and the two cable companies
> (Cablevision of Long Island and TCI) sent the signals to their
> subscribers.  In this way, all TV viewers could receive the news "as
> it happened."

Uh, not quite ...

WNBC-TV has a 2 GHz Electronic News Gathering (ENG) receiver on the
WLIW tower in Plainview.  their equipment is in a rack inside WLIW's
building.  WNBC-TV put a portable ENG transmitter on 30 Rock and
pointed it to Plainview, WLIW patched into the WNBC ENG rack and got
the video and audio.

WCBS-TV has primary and main back-up transmiters on WTC.  We're the
only VHF to maintain back-up transmitters on the Empire State
Building.  So, when WTC wend dark we "lit-up" Empire and stayed
on-the-air.

Many of the cable systems receive direct studio feeds via microwave or
cable (copper or fiber) rather than getting the local stations
off-air.  So the other stations kept their news going, but only those
few viewers watching on cable systems getting these feeds could see
them.

I had a bit of a busy week!  We were on-air from 12:40 PM to 7 PM, and
then 7:30 to 8 PM, with only the half-hour break for the CBS Evening
News.  Except for a single five minute break I was in Microwave
Control handling all the ENG feeds and live remotes.  They had me in
before 6 AM and until midnight for quite a few days of the following
week.

(Can you say overtime?  It feels weird to profit from a terrorist act.
Yes, I've sent major contributions to my favorite charities in memory
of the victims and with some of the overtime money!)

Debbie Matut, the WCBS-TV transmitter technician in question,
apparently decided to stay at the transmitter during her pregnancy
rather than accept a new position in video maintenance at the
broadcast center because the transmitter is an almost stress-free
place to work ... she is definitely reconsidering!  (And I spent about
1/2 hour talking to her and her husband, suggesting that a high RF
area is *not* a good place to be during pregnancy!)

We'll see what she does ...


Andrew Funk, KB7UV
Chair, Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society (RATS)
ENG Editor/Microwave Control, WCBS-TV Channel 2 News, New York
Internet: [e-mail]      Packet: kb7uv@kb7uv.#nli.ny.usa


[Moderator's Note: Look at all the overtime the New York Police
Department is paying, and the overtime the FBI guys are getting. In
that Texas confrontation with Jesus Christ (at least that's who he
says he is) the FBI says they believe JC has enough food, ammo and
other supplies to stall them for another *year*. They say they'll
be waiting for him. The television news tonight showed the FBI guys at
their shift-change. One crew leaving, another crew arriving to sit it
out until JC decides to surrender or have a mass-suicide like the
former San Fransico Commissioner of Housing, Rev. Jim Jones. I guess
they figured after he preached the sermon over the radio he would go
with them quietly.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Boteler)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Date: 8 Mar 199    &PC}\23 04:51:37 -0500
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA


[e-mail] (scott.d.brenner) writes:

> [e-mail] (Aninda Dasgupta) writes:

>> said that all the other TV stations had their transmitters on top of
>> the WTC.

> I don't care how they did it, but I was really pleased that they were
> able to continue broadcasting.  It's amazing that they were able to
> get it all set up so quickly.  I know it's not *really* related to
> telecom, but if anyone can give a more detailed (but understandable)

Au contraire, it does have a telecom twist, and that ain't a pair.

All the networks have fiber links from NYC to Washington DC bureaus.
Apparently those other stations you mentioned on Long Island are also
connected this way. I assume that these were on hot standby and
provided a quick path for the programming to get out.

I also found out that IDB's (you remember them) NY Teleport sits on
top of one of the WTC towers, and it was knocked off too. They nabbed
one or two of their transportable sat. trucks and possibly a flyaway
dish to keep critical (big $$$) customers on the birds and in touch,
much like they would a sporting event such as the World Series.

Although this had a major impact, for broadcasters at least it was not
the kind of doomsday that might have been had these two modern
technological gems been unavailable.


[e-mail] (John Boteler)

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Things Really Went BOOM!
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1993 21:50:23 GMT


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> [Moderator's Note: They realized people with 900 blocks on their phone
> would not be able to use it, but the idea was to be able to service a
> huge volume of callers at the same time with emergency reports. Many
> 900 services are set up to take thousands of calls at the same time. I
> think they want to be able to send a message to television and radio
> stations saying (something like) "there is a serious emergency affecting
> residents of Chicago. Please dial 900-xxx-xxxx at no charge to hear an
> emergency announcement by the mayor".  Of course, someone suggested
> why not just make the announcement on the radio/television in that
> case ...  it was an idea they've tossed around while building our new,
> very modern, very high tech police communications center.  PAT]

    The FCC is looking into updating the broadcast Emergency
Broadcast System allowing for automatic program interruption by
emergency operations centers.  They are looking at replacing the
existing 853 & 960 Hz tone signalling with some other method that
would include an end of message signal to return programming to
normal.  I wrote an article in the January issue of {Radio World} on
this.  In addition, we have proposed such a system for use in San Luis
Obispo County.  It does seem that broadcast stations would be a more
effective way of reaching the population than asking everyone to dial
a 900 number.  I'm sure the telco would run out of dial tone.  Also, I
seem to recall a previous discussion here about having a capability
thru the central office of ringing every telephone in an area and
dropping it into an emergency message recording on answer.  It seems
like this could be quite effective for localized emergencies such as
chemical spills, etc.


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Things Really Went BOOM!
Date: 8 Mar 1993 20:42:19 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


> [Moderator's Note: They realized people with 900 blocks on their phone
> would not be able to use it, but the idea was to be able to service a
> huge volume of callers at the same time with emergency reports. Many
> 900 services are set up to take thousands of calls at the same time.

Most of the 900 service bureaus can set up such a system just as
easily on an 800 number.  They have a bunch of dedicated T spans to
the IXC, coupled with their conferencing equipment.  There's no reason
why they can't implement the large "broadcast" conference using an 800
number instead of a 900 number.  It's just that there's not much
demand for such a service, so you don't see it that often.  After all,
how many people have the need to broadcast to a large number of
people, and allow anyone to call into the conference on their dime?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Blocking of Phone Numbers With Caller ID
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 19:00:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Bob Baxter <p00284@psilink.
com> writes:

> Anyhow, I seem to remember reading someplace, whether it was a New
> York Telephone pamphlet, or perhaps an old Digest, that if you had
> Caller ID, you could block out either:

> a) A selected phone number(s);
> b) A number that is marked private would not even let my phone ring.

Call-screening is available from many telephone companies, and allows
you to block calls from a customer-administered list of (usually) up
to eight numbers.  This is available independently of Caller*ID.

At least one state (Virginia) also offers a service called Anonymous
Call Rejection.  This service allows you to prevent incoming calls on
which the caller's number is marked PRIVATE.  This service is
performed for you by the telephone company.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1993 21:19:58 GMT


    The monthly rates on pagers are sure a lot better than the
airtime use on cellular phones.  To discourage use of pagers in drug
sales, our paging supplier limits free paging to 300 per month, which
is certainly adequate for my use.  I think doctors and others who can
demonstrate a need for a higher limit can get it at no charge.  Our
tone only paging, which is simulcast all over California and parts of
Nevada costs $10 per month.  The pager operates at about 931 MHz.

    Now and then I have to travel outside the coverage are of the
system.  It would sure be great if the various pager companies would
set up a co-op where I could tell my pager company I'm going to be
somewhere for a couple weeks and they'd give me a telephone access
number for that area.  If the local paging companies were to do this,
they could hold off some of the competition from nationwide paging
companies (Skypage, etc.).  I've suggested this in a letter to the
editor of Mobile Radio Technology magazine, but no one (that I know
of) has done it yet.

    To help those of us that occasionally travel, it'd be great to
have "communications stores" in airports.  They'd offer pagers and
cellular phones for rent while you're in that city.  I've seen (as I
recall) car rental companies that are renting cellular phones, but
have generally not seen pager rental.

    Somewhat related, at the National Association of Broadcasters
convention (in Las Vegas), exhibitors can rent a single dial up line
for about a week for $191.65 (no instrument).  Portable cellular
phones are available for $3.00 per day and $1.45 per minute air time.
Pagers are available for $25.50 each (again, for about a one week
period).

    We intend to utilize the paging network in one of our
broadcast transmitter control systems.  On an alarm, the system would
dump transmitter parameters to the on call tech's pager
(alphanumeric).

    Finally, I read a lot about data broadcasting (using FM
subcarrier, TV aural subcarrier, TV vertical blanking interval, etc.).
It seems that the paging companies are in an ideal position to serve
the data broadcasting market.  They could stuff data between pages.
Since paging traffic definitely varies with time of day, there could
be variable rates depending on system loading.  It'd be a way to sell
some of their excess capacity without having to expand the system over
what is currently needed to meet their existing peak demand.

    Finally finally, I find UPS's use of the cellular telephone
network to track package deliveries pretty interesting.  Someone want
to write about that?


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 13:43:04 -0800
From: Kevin Paul Herbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> Curiously, on a couple of exchanges here, if A forwards to B and B
> forwards to C then a call directly dialed to B goes on to C while a
> call reaching B via A stops at B and rings through right there
> regardless of what B wants done with *his* calls.

This is the behavior of #1 ESS switches. This was fixed in 1A. This
happens if you set up call forwarding to a number on the same switch.

> In other words, you cannot go A > B > C > D > A > B > C > D just to
> have the equipment running around in circles.

I'm pretty sure that this is the basic reason that multiple forwarded
calls off the switch are not allowed.

Without SS7, the forwarding switches have no alternative for
forwarding a call than to just grab a trunk and place the call. The
switch can't route to the eventual end destination and do loop
detection, so in order to prevent loops, it must just allow one
forwarded call.

As far as I know, if the destination of a forwarded call is on the
same switch, there is no limit to the number of allowable concurrent
forwarded calls.


Kevin

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

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 14:04:23 PST
From: [e-mail] (Mickey Ferguson)
Subject: Re: Explain This Phenomena


> My kitchen phone's DTMF keypad is intermittently on the blink.  One
> morning I decided to see if I could dial a number by flashing the
> switch-hook (trying to emulate rotary dialing).  [stuff deleted]

> [Moderator's Note: What happened was your 'pressing the hook eight
> times' was not properly synchronized, and the eight probably got taken
> as four 2s, or two 3s and a 2, or maybe a 3 and two 2s and a 1, or
> similar. You could have wound up calling 332-1133 or any number where
> a total of 16 pulses would be used. Pressing the hook rapidly is not a
> very reliable way to dial unless you are really coordinated and good
> at it. The taps of your finger were probably not precise.   PAT]

That reminds me of the good old days ;-) back in college when our
pathetic telephone system only allowed us rotary phones.  My roommate
used MCI for his long distance, and the only way he could use it was
to dial the 800 number, then tone dial the access code and phone
number.  Since he only had a phone and not a tone sender, what he
would do was to disconnect our rotary phone, plug in his tone phone
(which didn't have a switch for pulse), and then tap out the entire
9-800-xxx-xxxx number for MCI.  (That's a *lot* of taps!)  We both got
so good at tapping out phone numbers that sometimes we'd just keep the
tone phone connected, and then "tap" someone (no, it isn't the same as
reaching out and touching someone!  ;-) instead of dialing them.  We
made very few mistakes, and those where we did usually resulted in
some fun!  ;-) It also prevented others from coming in the room when
we were out for a minute and stealing long distance use or message
units.


Mickey Ferguson -- Rolm, A Siemens Company -- PhoneMail Development

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #161
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05650;
          9 Mar 93 5:37 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20461
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 03:11:45 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31636
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 03:11:07 -0600
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 03:11:07 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #162

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 9 Mar 93 03:11:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 162

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy (Steve Forrette)
    Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Don Hackler)
    Re: CLASS Question (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls ([e-mail])
    Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever (Dan J. Declerck)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy
Date: 8 Mar 1993 10:36:21 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard
Paiement) writes:

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

>> I have a business associate in Canada who tells me that businesses in
>> Quebec (or some part thereof) are forbidden to answer the phone in
>> English.  Reportedly, even a mixed French/English greeting is not
>> allowed -- the person answering can't use English until the caller
>> indicates that they want to speak English.  And, (perhaps in the
>> "Office de la Langue Francaise) there are Phone Police (tm) that call
>> businesses at random in order to ensure compliance with these
>> regulations.

> First off, Steve, I'll excuse you for believing such crap since you
> don't live in Canada.

> That anobody could believe such a rumour is hysterically funny. Quebec
> has never been and will never be an Orwellian society. One can walk in
> any city or town in the province of Quebec and will see many bilingual
> as well as English-only signs defying the language law, and nobody has
> been killed yet.

Since I didn't want to be guilty of spreading any false facts here in
the TELECOM Digest, I just double-checked them by calling my Canadian
friend and discussing this issue with him at length.  For reference,
he is a Canadian citizen who lives in Canada full-time, and has owned
and operated a business there for many years.  He has corporate
customers from all over Canada, many of them in Quebec, and has had
many opportunities to personally deal with and observe these language
regulations in action.  Here are several issues that he cited:

1.  The French language regulations on the answering of telephones has
caused several major companies to leave Quebec.  A specific example
cited was Sun Life, which catered to a predominantely English-speaking
clientele.  The French language regulations would have required them
to put all of their English-speaking clerks who answered the phone
through classes in order to teach them to speak French, even though
the only people who they talked to were English-speaking.  Instead of
paying for this waste, they moved to another province.  Another
example is Cominsco.

2.  All business signs must be predominantly French.  Having French
everywhere English is used on a sign is not enough -- it must be
predominantly French.  This may be accomplished by having the French
part in a slightly larger font.  There was a case where a business
owner had restroom signs that used just the silhouette pictures to
denote the men's and women's restrooms, and was fined by the Language
Police because the signs were not predominantly French.

3.  By default, all public school instruction is primarily in French,
with English being taught as a second language.  In order for a child
to attend a public school with most instruction in English, one of the
parents must have graduated from a primarily-English high school in
Quebec.  This was implemented to ensure that immigrant families who
came to Canada and spoke neither French nor English would send their
children to French schools.  Before, when they were given a choice of
French or English, most chose English, because that's the language
they wanted their children to learn.  But, this law also affects
Canadians moving from other provinces, or Americans who live for a few
years in Canada.  If I, as an American, were to come to Quebec for a
few years, why should my children have to go to French schools just
because me or my wife didn't graduate from an English high school in
Quebec?  Businesses can apply for an exemption for specific employees.
This was passed because American executives from companies that
operated Canadian branches (such as General Motors) started refusing
to come to Canada.

4.  Quebec tried to change their air traffic control system so that
all dispatching was done in French.  English is the international
language of air traffic control, and in fact they even land the planes
in Paris, France by speaking English, but Quebec wanted to use French
instead.  Reportedly this never got implemented, though.

I don't know about you, Richard, but a lot of this sounds quite
Orwellian to me.

And yes, Pat, there is a further telecom relevance to this post.  My
friend has a single 800 number that can be called from either Canada
or the United States.  It was issued sometime before divestiture.
When he applied for it, they would not give him any number he wanted,
but said that they were issuing numbers on a certain prefix, and he
could have any available number on that one prefix.  So, he sat down
with pencil and paper, and figured out what interesting words could be
spelled with the given prefix.  He found a great phrase, which works
really well for his business, and requested that particular number.
He didn't dare tell Bell Canada what it spelled, as it surely would be
given to a bigger, "more important" customer.  So, he just said that
he wanted this certain number.  The assignment was approved by both
AT&T and Bell Canada, and in fact he received a written confirmation
from Bell Canada.

A couple of weeks later, he got a call from a Bell Canada exec telling
him that they had made a mistake, and the number wasn't available
after all.  Of course, what had really happened is that someone
realized what the number spelled, and wanted to give it to someone
else.  But, he had in hand a written confirmation of the number, and
AT&T was going to honor their commitment regarding the number
assignment.  He was able to convice them that it would be silly for
Bell Canada not to give the number to his Canadian company that AT&T
was willing to give, and that they should have thought about all of
this before mailing a written confirmation.  So, he got his desired
assignment in both the United States and Canada.  And no, it is not
answered in French, as he's located in another province.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review
From: [e-mail] (Don Hackler)
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 93 01:39:08 PST
Organization: Shakala BBS (ClanZen Radio Network) Sunnyvale, CA [phone]


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: In the early days of MCI, they were fond of showing
> unsophisticated (telecom-wise) business executives how they could
> 'save money' by using MCI. And sure enough, a comparison of their long
> distance rates ONLY versus AT&T showed the cost for the *long distance*
> part of the call was less. But they conveniently neglected to mention
> that AT&T's higher rates included (admittedly due to their connection
> with the local telcos at that time) as well the local part of the
> connection from the local CO to the long distance switch. So business
> pplaces signed up with MCI and saw a decrease in the long distance
> side of their bill but a substantial increase in their local message
> unit charges. The 'savings' was a wash at best and in many cases, the
> total monthly outlay for telecommunications (local bill from telco
> plus long distance bill from MCI versus a single bill from telco which
> included long distance charges from AT&T) was actually higher than it
> had been before.

>  MCI conveniently failed to mention that if you
> called via their switch somewhere and the distant end was busy or did
> not answer on five attempts, you still wound up paying for five local
> message units to the local telco, which in those days was understandably
> not about to give a free ride to the long distance switch of AT&T's
> competitor. After several complaints to the FCC and getting sued, MCI
> finally began mentioning this 'slight additional expense' over and
> above their published rates. As Charles Brown, former Chairman of AT&T
> said at the time, " ... they have no investment in outside plant, they
> have no local loops or switches, they only handle (this was in the
> middle 1970's) the high traffic, very profitable east-coast corridor
> stuff ... of course their prices will be cheaper. If I could get away
> with the stuff they are allowed to pull off, my prices would still be
> less than theirs ..."

I grew up in Southwestern Bell territory, where business lines were
flat rate by default, and measured service was a lower priced option
for low usage business phones and the measured charge was flat rate
per call, any duration.

In that situation, you were really directly comparing actual long
distance charges, and the competition was pretty stiff among not only
the MCI/USTEL/SPRINT guys, but also WATS line resellers.  We were
surprised when we found people that actually used AT&T!


Don Hackler  - [e-mail]
Shakala BBS (ClanZen Radio Network) Sunnyvale, CA [phone]


[Moderator's Note: You said the secret phrase: flat rate business
service.  Even years ago when Chicago had flat rate residence service
it was not available to businesses. Everytime they made a call it was
a five cent charge.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: CLASS Question
Date: 8 Mar 1993 18:32:26 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> silver![e-mail]
(Mark Rudholm) writes:

> My next problem is with Call Return (*69).  It seems to work (well, if
> you ignore the fact that half of greater L.A. is GTE who hasn't
> apparently heard of SS7 yet) O.K.  I have a line at my parent's home
> that I use as an RCF, it isn't a REAL Pacific Bell RCF but just a line
> with Call Forwarding on it and no sets connected to it.

> [Moderator's Note: I think the problem with call return on the 261
> line is the switch is trying to place an outgoing call on a line not
> equipped for outgoing calls. The 261 line is only set up for incoming
> calls. It thinks 'here is 261-xxxx placing a call to <last number>
> ...' and realizes that is impossible since 261 is for incoming calls
> only.  An interesting bug, to be sure.  PAT]

Pat, from where do you infer that the 261 number is set up only for
incoming calls?  The way I read it, it is just a regular POTS line with
Call Forwarding, which Mark has set once to forward to his home number, and
just leaves it that way all of the time.  I'm sure that it can place outgoing
calls just fine, as Pacific Bell offers no such thing as an "incoming only"
line, unless it is part of a Centrex group.  Besides, when using Call Return,
the call from his home number should go directly to the originating number
of the original call, and not through the 261 switch.  When forwarded calls
arrive at his home through the 261 switch, the terminating switch knows
both the original calling number, and the (last) forwarding number.  If the
caller decides to invoke Return Call, it has no need to deal with teh 261
switch at all.

This reminds me of something I've been meaning to ask.  It was
reported here that Pacific Bell will x out the last four digits of any
toll call that is placed as a result of using Call Return on a call
that came in marked PRIVATE.  Of course, this only applies to
intra-LATA calls, right?  Inter-LATA calls, even those that are
intra-state, will still have the full number displayed.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You are correct that inference by myself should not
have been made. But I still think the problem stems from the equipment
trying to place a call that it thinks on the one hand 261 is originating
only to discover an instant later that 261 is not in that switch. I am
going to try this with my line and see what results I get.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 13:25:31 CST


> [Moderator's Note: Again, are we talking about the number of calls
> which can be forwarded at one time from A > B or are we talking about
> the extent to which A can be chained linked to B then to C and D, etc?
> If the former, there is no problem with the number of circuits which
> are available. As soon as the place to which calls are being forwarded
> runs out of places to put them (i.e. two, three or how many lines in
> the hunt group) then subsequent callers to the first number will get a
> busy signal.  If we are talking about chains that run forever, then
> the important thing is to stop the process when a previously visited
> number is found again in the chain. If this were not the case, then
> any call forwarding could be a potential problem because what would
> happen if A forwarded calls to himself, ie *72 <number I am calling
> from>?  Would an incoming call hit the CO and run in circles forever?
> No -- we know it sees a place where it has already been (original pass
> through A) and gives up, returning busy to the caller.  PAT]

This brings up an interesting question.  What would happen if such a
loop were set up.  For example, suppose phone A forward to phone B,
which forwards to phone C, which forwards back to phone A.  Assume no
number of calls that can be forwarded at one time limits are in place.
(i.e. assume that if X just forwards to Y, that there is no limit of
how many calls can be forwarded, except that once Y runs out of trunks
in the hunt group callers will get a busy signal).

There are several cases, then:

1) A, B, and C are in the same switch.  The switch would then probably
detect the loop and return a busy signal or stop forwarding and ring
one of the phones.

2) A, B, and C are in the same city, but off different switches (that
are SS7 connected).  Would the loop be detected?  Does SS7 signalling
tell the switch the entire path the call has taken? (i.e. when the
switch for C got around to returning the call to A, would it know that
the call has already passed through A?  The CNID field would be of no
use since that would have the number of whoever started the loop by
dialing A (say, D, for example), and the ANI field would be of no use,
since that could contain B.  So, are there additional fields that
would tell the switch that the call had passed through A?)

3) A, B, and C are in, say, Texas, California, and New Uork, off
switches that have no SS7 connection to the IXC (if we are using
sprint or MCI, that would be no problem, and even AT&T has lots of
places without SS7 connections to the LEC).  It would seem that the
OLY information the IXC would then get would be ANI, which would be of
no use in detecting that there is a loop.

Do the IXC switches count calls in real time, and notice that there is
a very large number of calls being made from A to B, for example, and
then block A from calling B.

Note that A having lots of calls to B is a normal occurance.  Say a
large company in LA has 100 lines, and several people are calling this
companys office, which has the number B (assuming that don't have
DID).  Then the IXC woudl think A was making lots of calls to B (since
all the lines from A's office would have the same billing number,
which is what ANI sends).

It would seem, that in the abcense of SS7 connections reporting the
entire forward path of a call, there would be NO WAY to detect such a
loop positively.  (i.e. do we have a loop here? or is A just a big
company that has lots of people simultaneously dialing B for some
reason?); and that to prevent this, the telco would have to use some
method of detecting activity that appears to be a loop, and stopping
it.

I am not trying to be naive here ... I am assuming that I am not the
first person to think of this, and that the telcos have a way of
preventing this from occurring.  I guess my real question is how do
they detect this?  By counting calls and noticing that there is a
large number of attempts from the same number to the same number is
rapid succession?  Do all local telcos limit the number of
simultaneous forwards at once?  (Although it would seem dangerous for
an IXC to bet the stability of its network on every local telco
remembering to set that parameter).  BTW, note that this loop would be
free to the people involved, since there would never be supervision
from the call being finally answered.


Brett    ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Others have commented that because of the problem
you describe, forwarding done out of the CO is limited to one call.
But this does not seem right to me; I am certain a few years ago when
we were partially ESS here and partially X-Bar that I tried forwarding
my ESS line to the office where the X-Bar was and succeeded in getting
more than one call forwarded. I could be mistaken; can't remember.
You'd think even if they did not have a complete 'aduit trail' to use
in detecting loops, they could at least compare one call coming
through to another and see that the origins were different.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan J. Declerck)
Subject: Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 14:53:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Terence Cross) writes:

> Daniel E. Ganek <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
>> (Terence Cross) writes:

>>> Ericsson has been awarded a contract worth over USD 150 million for a
>>> large expansion of the mobile telephone network in the Guangdong
>>> province, China.

>> Can a US cellular phone be used in China? If so, how difficult is it
>> to setup an account or set-up some sort of roaming aggreement?

> I don't think US phones will work.  I think there are two issues here:
> there must be a billing arrangement with the foreign roamer (e.g.  an
> on-line transaction system (VLR) between Chinese PTT and US mobile
> carrier or perhaps the visitor could become a Chinese PTT subscriber)
> and the foreign roamers phone must be compatible with the system in
> use.

> The system in Guangdong will be the sophisticated digital GSM (Global
> System forMobile communication).  If the foreign man has a GSM phone
> then he is half way there.  I don't think GSM is used in the US, yet.

The FCC has no intention of using GSM in the States. The US presently
has AMPS (most popular) NAMPS, AMPS-DC, and eventually DS-CDMA.  The
Frequencies used in GSM are being used by cordless, and trunked radio.
Also, the cost factor of GSM is still pretty high, while spectral
efficiency is only about 50% better than AMPS.


Dan DeClerck           EMAIL: [e-mail]
Motorola Cellular APD  Phone: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #162
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17421;
          10 Mar 93 12:25 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31262
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 09:27:34 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06689
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 09:27:02 -0600
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 09:27:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #163

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 10 Mar 93 09:27:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 163

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Al Varney)
    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Kevin Paul Herbert)
    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Steve Forrette)
    Re: DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question (Dave Gellerman)
    Re: DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question (David G. Lewis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue,  9 Mar 93 15:21:19 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


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

> This brings up an interesting question.  What would happen if such a
> loop were set up.  For example, suppose phone A forward to phone B,
> which forwards to phone C, which forwards back to phone A.  Assume no
> number of calls that can be forwarded at one time limits are in place.
> (i.e. assume that if X just forwards to Y, that there is no limit of
> how many calls can be forwarded, except that once Y runs out of trunks
> in the hunt group callers will get a busy signal).

   Brett, I hope you realize you are not the first person to think of
this question.  Every ESS(tm) switch in a college town probably had
this tried at least once before 1970.

> There are several cases, then:

> 1) A, B, and C are in the same switch.  The switch would then probably
> detect the loop and return a busy signal or stop forwarding and ring
> one of the phones.

   Bellcore suggests switches should detect the loop and block after
some number of forwardings, say five times.  The same DN should not
appear in two legs of the forwarding.  (This is for CFV --
customer-changeable call forwarding).  For RCF -- Remote Call
Forwarding -- they suggest a customer-specified number of simultaneous
forwardings be permitted.  They also hint that the default should be
one, except for cases where the customer has a multi-line hunt group
at the forwarded-to DN.  CF loop detection doesn't result in ringing
any telephone.

> 2) A, B, and C are in the same city, but off different switches (that
> are SS7 connected).  Would the loop be detected?  Does SS7 signalling
> tell the switch the entire path the call has taken? (i.e. when the
> switch for C got around to returning the call to A, would it know that
> the call has already passed through A?  The CNID field would be of no
> use since that would have the number of whoever started the loop by
> dialing A (say, D, for example), and the ANI field would be of no use,
> since that could contain B.  So, are there additional fields that
> would tell the switch that the call had passed through A?)

   Per Bellcore, ANI isn't passed in SS7 unless the call is
inter-LATA.  As you suggest, it's not useful in detecting the loop
anyway.  However, Bellcore's TR-972 (and ANSI T1) discusses the
parameters in SS7 that are created/modified by forwarding.  Of note:

  a) the Calling Party Number (CPN, your CNID) parameter is not changed
    when forwarding occurs in the switch,

  b) the Called Party Number (CDPN) parameter is changed to the forward-
    to number,

  c) if not present, parameters Redirection Information and Redirecting
    Number are added to the call; RI indicates how many forwardings have
    occurred so far and why this one occurred, RN contains the old CDPN,

  d) if those parameters were already present, the forwarding count in
    RI is incremented by the number of forwardings that occured in this
    switch, the RN updated with the last number that forwarded within
    the switch, and the RI gets the reason for the last forwarding.
    If not present, a parameter called Original Called Number (OCN) is
    added and receives the previous value of RN.  If already present,
    OCN is not modified.

   At any time, if the number of forwardings indicated by the total of
intra-switch and RI-indicated forwarding exceeds that allowed for the
DN currently forwarding (or a switch default, usually 10), the call is
routed to some tone.

   All of this not only helps the looping-forwarding problem, but also
permits Voice Mail and Answering Service systems to receive the first
and/or last forwarding number, thus identifying the "mailbox", even if
the client is located in another switch.  It also allows the systems
to know "why" the forwarding occurred, so "her line is busy" vs.
"no-one is answering" information can be given to the caller.

> 3) A, B, and C are in, say, Texas, California, and New Uork, off
> switches that have no SS7 connection to the IXC (if we are using
> Sprint or MCI, that would be no problem, and even AT&T has lots of
> places without SS7 connections to the LEC).  It would seem that the
> OLY information the IXC would then get would be ANI, which would be of
> no use in detecting that there is a loop.

> Do the IXC switches count calls in real time, and notice that there is
> a very large number of calls being made from A to B, for example, and
> then block A from calling B.

   I don't speak for any IXC (despite the Organization name), so I can't
comment on what they might do.

> It would seem, that in the abcense of SS7 connections reporting the
> entire forward path of a call, there would be NO WAY to detect such a
> loop positively.

   As I've indicated, one doesn't need the path -- just a count.

> I am not trying to be naive here ... I am assuming that I am not the
> first person to think of this, and that the telcos have a way of
> preventing this from occurring.  I guess my real question is how do
> they detect this?  By counting calls ...

   TELCos do not have cycles to burn in this manner.

> ...  Do all local telcos limit the number of
> simultaneous forwards at once?  (Although it would seem dangerous for
> an IXC to bet the stability of its network on every local telco
> remembering to set that parameter).  BTW, note that this loop would be
> free to the people involved, since there would never be supervision
> from the call being finally answered.

   The last statement is a clue.  The default (no parameters to forget
to set) in many switches is to allow only one forwarding from a given
number, UNTIL THE CALL IS ANSWERED.  This is why such things as call-
forwarding for un-answered calls (to Voice Mail, etc.) doesn't
absolutely guarantee that every call will be forwarded.  If a
forwarding occurs, say because of call-forward-busy-line while another
call is ringing, but the Voice Mail system hasn't answered when the
first call attempts to forward, the call will not complete.  If the
switch supports assignment of other than '1' for simultaneous
unanswered forwarded calls from a given DN, then the probability of
such happening can be reduced.  Such a tariff, if offered, is usually
more costly because of the added switch resources needed.

   Remote Call Forwarding is sometimes offered with a limit > one even
in switches that can't support CFV/CFDA/CFBL for more than one
unanswered call.


Al Varney - just my opinion, of course

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

Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 14:03:40 -0800
From: Kevin Paul Herbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> But this does not seem right to me; I am certain a few years ago when
> we were partially ESS here and partially X-Bar that I tried forwarding
> my ESS line to the office where the X-Bar was and succeeded in getting
> more than one call forwarded. I could be mistaken; can't remember.

Perhaps you were calling your ESS line from another line on the same
switch.

There is no forwarding limit in this case, just like if the terminating
number is on the same switch.


Kevin


[Moderator's Note: Yes, as a matter of fact, I was. Thanks for
pointing this out. I had forgotten this experience until this thread
of discussion reminded me.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls
Date: 9 Mar 1993 22:21:20 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> [Moderator's Note: Others have commented that because of the problem
> you describe, forwarding done out of the CO is limited to one call.
> But this does not seem right to me; I am certain a few years ago when
> we were partially ESS here and partially X-Bar that I tried forwarding
> my ESS line to the office where the X-Bar was and succeeded in getting
> more than one call forwarded. I could be mistaken; can't remember.
> You'd think even if they did not have a complete 'aduit trail' to use
> in detecting loops, they could at least compare one call coming
> through to another and see that the origins were different.  PAT]

This 'one call' limit is not always the case.  It is set by the telco,
and can have different values for each class of service, even in the
same switch.  I had to deal with this not four months ago with US West.
I had a number that was going to be used for an advertising campaign,
and was going to be forwarded to an answering service's DID number
(they don't allow the DID to be published directly, so that they can
reuse the number right away if the customer cancels the answering
service's service).  At first, I was going to set up a Remote Call
Forwarding number.  The cost was $18 per month plus message units.
But, it allows only one simultaneous call.  You can buy extra
simultaneous capacity for an additional $18 per month each.  I asked
about regular call forwarding on a POTS line.  They had to put me on
hold, and check what the value was for my specific switch, which is a
5ESS.  I was told that standard call fowarding allows up to 20
simultaneous calls, if it is a business line.  So, I ordered up a
business line in my apartment, with call forwarding.  This costs about
$36 per month for unmeasured service, which is a much better deal.
And it cost US West a lot more to provision, since they had to send
someout out to install it.

As far as how they can allow a relatively large amount of simultaneous
forwarded calls without creating the possibility of a forwarding loop
eating up a large amount of trunks, here one way it could be done:
limit the number of unsupervised forwarded calls.  So, in my example
above, with me being allowed 20 simulaneous forwarded calls, once my
switch got one call, and forwarded it on to the next destination, it
could return "busy" to additional calls until the first call
supervised.  Then, it could allow the next call through.  This would
prevent looping, but still allow 20 simultaneous calls.  In order to
reduce the chances of callers getting a false busy, they could put a
slightly larger limit on the unsupervised calls; say, 20 calls
maximum, but only five at a time in the unsupervised state.  This way,
a looped setup would only consume five loops of trunks before the
caller hit a busy.  And, the chances of more than five legitimate
callers calling at the same time is not too much to worry about, I
don't think.  Of course, both of these numbers would ideally be
individually configurable, based on the expected traffic patterns for
each number.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I have a voicemail number available to me which can
be given out direct as the need arises, to use for promotions, etc. On
it I have noticed any number of calls can hit it at one time. Of
course, that is a little different: the voicemail system has a large
number of DID trunks. When anyone calls, the voicemail system looks at
the DID number and decides what to do with the call.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Gellerman)
Subject: Re: DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question
Date: 9 Mar 1993 16:47:20 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


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

> I appear to have dug into a rats nest on this one and I'm just not
> sure why :-).

It is my understanding that the ONLY way to get DS3 is either via
digital microwave or fiber, as there really isn't a standard way of
moving DS3 long distances on copper.  If this is true, then for a
landline distribution there will always be a fiber interface.

I'm also not aware of a standard way of representing a DS3 signal
optically.  This is in fact why SONET is getting so much attention --
prior to it, virtually all fiber system used a proprietary (at least
vendor specific) representation of the DS3 signal.

I think this means you need the $bucks$ unit to convert (that is
demultiplex) the DS3 from the fiber.


David R. Gellerman            [phone]
Hekimian Laboratories, Inc.   [e-mail]
15200 Omega Drive       Rockville MD 20850 USA

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 14:31:37 GMT


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

> In trying to look at getting a T3 to an offsite building a while
> back, we noticed that tariffs for buying at the optical vs buying at
> the electrical interface were considerably different ... It is to my
> advantage to buy at the optical interface on at least one end since
> the existing DS3 mux equip is "microwave located" and not "demarc
> located".  I'd also like the idea of the lower tariffs.  In what
> little research I have done so far (talking to my DS3 mux vendor), the
> only thing I have come up with is that it would appear that optical
> DS3 is not necessarily optical DS3 ... in that it may be that PacBell
> REQUIRES the optical/electrical interface be done with this nifty
> super do-all $bucks$ mux gadget from NT which can do MUCH more than
> just the E/O conversion.  That would explain the tariff difference.

Typically, when telcos offer an optical interface for high capacity
private line service (DS3 or higher), what they're offering is an
optical demark between their E/O equipment and your E/O equipment, NOT
an optical pipe through the network.  This is why they specify the
equipment you need -- it has to be compatible with the equipment
sitting in their CO.  (Note that I'm talking about before SONET phase
2, at which time equipment from multiple vendors conforming to the
SONET specifications will be able to interconnect optically.  At least
theoretically.)

The motivation behind this is that telcos see themselves in the
business of selling telecommunications services, not fiber-optic
plant.  If you're selling a DS3 service, you have to be able to
manipulate, or at the very least monitor, the signal to provide fault
detection and isolation, performance monitoring, and so on.  This
requires a telco fiber optic terminal somewhere in the circuit.

Additionally, if the telco provides an end-to-end fiber pipe (referred
to as "dark fiber"), they have no knowledge of what you're putting on
it.  You could ostensibly be purchasing it for a DS3, and instead hang
an OC-48 FOT on each end, getting 48 times the capacity you've paid
the telco for.  Telcos, needless to say, don't like this.

> The inability to use some of the simpler gear I have heard of, having
> to deal with a rack full of PacBell gear onsite AT THE DEMARC, and
> being length limited by DS3/coax from said PacBell rack really stinks!!

Actually, I'm surprised that the length limitation is really a
problem, unless by "microwave located" you mean up a tower or
something.  I recall from my days at Teleport that the only buildings
in which we had any kind of a length issue with DS3 risers were the
World Trade Center and the Empire State Building.  Anywhere else, the
distance was well within the typical DS3 buildout.

If there is a length limitation, it can be ameliorated by the use of a
DS3 repeater somewhere between the PacBell demark and your mux;
they're made by the usual crossconnect/repeater type vendors (ADC,
Telect, I'm sure we (AT&T) make one, but I don't know if it's widely
offered).

Alternately, you find a company willing to provide you dark fiber.

Alternately, you find a company willing to locate equipment in closer
proximity to your mux.

> What I'm interested in is what's available as far as DS3 optical
> termination equipment (the simpler the better) and what other's
> experiences with buying DS3 point to point from the RBOC's are.

AT&T's DDM-1000 can provide a 90 Mb/s optical signal which is composed
of two DS3s (DDM = Dual DS3 Multiplexer); the electrical signal can be
either DS3 inputs or low speed inputs (DS1, DS1C, DS2) which the DDM
muxes up to DS3.

Telco Systems offers a system (the name of which escapes me - the
FOX-3, perhaps?) which is a pure O/E DS3 - electrical DS3 in one side,
optical DS3 out the other side.  They also offer a system called the
828A which takes low speed inputs, muxes them up to DS3, and converts
to optical.

(Note that this information is at least a year and a half old; I
haven't worked with transmission equipment in that long.)

Disclaimer: I don't know any of this from working at AT&T, so they
can't complain.


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #163
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20476;
          10 Mar 93 13:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30275
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 10:46:58 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19962
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 10:46:31 -0600
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 10:46:31 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #164

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 10 Mar 93 10:46:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 164

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    More Musings About UK "Phoneyday" (Richard Cox)
    How do I Order a Leased Voice-Grade Line? (Lars Poulsen)
    Summary: Mini-PBX in ISA PC (Simon Townsend)
    30-Channel PCM (Kees Hol)
    The New Phone Books Are Here! (John Higdon)
    TeleAdapt Surveying Hotel Comms (Jon Knight)
    Telecom Donation Wanted (John Pettitt)
    Caller ID Available in 405 Area Code May 3 (Stan Hall)
    To Tap or Not to Tap ([e-mail])
    Information Needed on ATM's (Clayton E. Kuetemeyer)
    Looking For Used Dialogic Boards (John V. Jaskolski)
    Device Wanted to Prevent Line "Bleed" Between Multiple Lines? (M. Rosen)
    US Post Office Not Caught Up With Common Technology? (Michael Rosen)
    How to Measure BER of V.29 9.6k/s? (Ching-Chang Liao)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 22:25 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: More Musings About UK "Phoneyday"
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Bob Goudreau) asks:

>> There would be no problem with collisions with STD codes 0801 through
>> 0809 (if any of them are even in use today), because they will change to
>> 01801 ... 01809 as part of the Phoneday cutover.

>> Any comments from the UK readership?

Certainly.  If the change was made as you suggest there would be
problems.

Firstly you cannot reuse the old codes for about two years after the
changeover: there would be too many misdials.

Secondly, not all codes are having a "1" inserted anyway. That's one
of the reasons why we refer to the change as "PhoneYday", not
"Phoneday".  And one of the codes in the 080X range (0802 -- used for
GSM Cellular), will not be one of those getting changed on Phoneyday.

The UK does have 0500 for Mercury toll free calls (though this is
definitely non-preferred as it does not conform to international
recommendations -- and in any event does not support the concept of 800
number portability.

Ultimately I expect 0800 will be changed to seven digit numbers just
like the good ol' USA.  One thing we are going to have to handle is
the demand for a common European toll-free numbering space.  Present
idealists would put this on 00-800 (using International Country Code
800) but I guess too many payphones and business switchboards would
block 00 calls anyway.

(00 is what most of the world, apart from World Zone 1, will use as
their international access code after 1995)

I'd prefer to put the toll free numbers on 1-800, just like Ireland
and one other country whose name for the moment escapes me ...


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]     Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: How do I Order a Leased Voice-Grade Line?
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 05:01:26 GMT


I have been asked to provide ordering specifications for a third party
to lease a full-time voice grade circuit here in GTE-CA territory.
The line is to be used to connect two V.32bis modems about six miles
apart (served out of different central offices). The modems are
designed for operation on the public switched telephone network (i.e.
they expect a two-wire circuit with battery, dial tone and ring signal
present).

The application seems straightforward to me, but I have encountered an
amazing difficulty in getting appropriate information for this
request.

(1) The ordinary customer service representatives do not seem to know
    much about modems or leased lines.

(2) In general, there is suspicion when I ask about what is available,
    particularly when I explain that "It is not for my own use, but for
    somene from a different company". ("Then THEY should call
    themselves." "But they asked ME to find out for them.")

(3) The customer service reps refer me to the data services people,
    who basically want to sell me either a four-wire circuit (3002 type)
    or 56 kbps DDS service. If the two points were in the same CO, I
    would be inclined to ask for a 3002 with metallic continuity and
    install a ringdown box, but I'm afraid to do that between two CO's.

It seems to me that this is similar to an off-premise extension for a
PBX; is that what I should order? If I get a two-wire "private
circuit" will it have battery, dial tone and ring?

Telecom readers, please help me. I will collect information and send a
summary back to PAT for publication.


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]

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

Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 10:39:50 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Simon Townsend)
Subject: Summary: Mini-PBX in ISA PC


Not too many replies, but they may be useful. I enclose them all:

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

 From: bears![e-mail]

I'm not sure where to get them, but AT&T makes a voice power card,
that has Unix driver suport.  It can handle four phone lines.

                - Ralph

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

  From [e-mail]

Check out Dialogic Corp, Parsippany, NJ.  They offer ISA-buss
compatible boards providing trunk interfaces, station interfaces, DTMF
receivers, voice recording and playback, and a matrix switch for
interconnecting the whole lot.  They also terminate T-1 links, DID
trunks, and provide a multi-line fax board.  No, you won't quite build
a PBX in a single slot, but with a few of their modules, you could
build a very sophisticated PBX with automated attendant, voice mail,
and as many other features as you card to write code for.

You may contact me for additional info; Westmark is a Dialogic
value-added-reseller.

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

 From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>

There is a product called PCBX that does this, although they may not
have a published API.  It is made by a company in Orange County, CA,
also called PCBX.  I thin they may be in Tustin, but I don't have the
specific reference in front of me.

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

Thats all folks!

If there's interest, I'll post how I get on with the project later in
the year.


Simon, [e-mail]

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

Date: 10 Mar 1993 08:56:29 +0000 (GMT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 30-Channel PCM
Organization: PTT Research, The Netherlands


The European 30-channel PCM has signalling information in the 16th
slot. What kind of information is in this slot? Does it tell which
slots are empty (i.e. no call)?

If you can help, please e-mail me.


Kees Hol   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 03:51 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: The New Phone Books Are Here!


The new Pacific Bell telephone directories for San Jose/Santa Clara
have two interesting format variations in the White Pages. The first
splits the directory into two approximately equal-size sections:
Business Listings and Residence Listings. If you are looking up a
business, you search the first section. If you are looking up an
individual, you check out the second section. This has already caused
me a minor inconvenience in that someone whom I was looking up had
business service. I have a hard time seeing the advantages to the
separation of "business" and "residence" listings in the white pages
(unless it is for telemarketers).

The second change is the way residence listings are presented. Instead
of the traditional approach, each surname is listed with the customers
of that name in the column underneath, but indented.  Something like
this:

HIGDON
  Fred.......
  George A.......
  John......

etc.

It actually makes the directory easier to read, particularly if you
are looking up someone with a common last name. The most common name
in the San Jose directory is Nguyen, which goes on for four five-column
pages (Smith is less than two).


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


[Moderator's Note: We've had the 'surname once, first name indented'
style in many of our suburban directories for a few years now, along
with the businesses listed separately. Listing the businesses in a
separate section is a clever way for telco to force people who operate
businesses from home on residential lines to obtain business listings
 -- and as a result, a business phone. In a consolidated list, someone
trying to find 'John Higdon and Associates' would not find it but they
would find John Higdon and assume it to be one and the same, which of
course is what you want, i.e. you have residence service and get to
conduct business on that line. But under the new system, if I am
looking for a BUSINESS in San Jose called 'John Higdon and Assoc-
iates' I will find nothing. It does not occur to me to check in the
residence listings, because after all, I am trying to reach a
business, or at least that's what I was told you were running. :) This
is a very clever ploy by telco and a perfectly legal, perfectly
logical way of organizing their directory ... but it has resulted in
many a small time, one person operating-from-home business man being
forced to pay for business service ('but why would you want to be
listed in the business section, sir? are you running a business? well
in that case you need a business phone line ...')   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Knight)
Subject: TeleAdapt Surveying Hotel Comms
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jon Knight)
Organization: Dept of Comp. Studies, Loughborough University of Tech., UK.
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 10:12:31 GMT


I just spotted an article on page 4 of the UK edition of {PC Week}
magazine that reports that an international data connectivity firm
called TeleAdapt is launching a survey of hotel chains worldwide in
order to assess the standard of communication facilities they make
available.  TeleAdapt apparently are suppliers of phone adaptors which
allow you to use your modem on foreign phone sockets.  The eventual
outcome of the survey will be a free guide issued to TeleAdapt's
customers which details what facilities hotels provide on a
city-by-city basis.  According to the article the guide will include:

"[...] details of freephone access to alternative carriers, second
lines, direct inward to dialing to the room, surcharges, and crucially
the particular telephone/plug connection type."

TeleAdapt are also seeking information from hotel users.  Anyone with
information to contribute can ring 081 429 0479 (that's a UK number so
remember to prepend +44 and drop the leading 0 if ringing from
abroad).  They're mainly looking for information on the main European
and American business cities, but welcome any experiences with hotel
comms anywhere.

The article also mentions that the US hotel chains are the most
``modem-aware'' and that the Germans are the worst.  The Marriott and
Sheraton chains have corporate strategies which encourage the
provision of good comms for modem users in their hotels.

Note that I have no connection with {PC Week} (other than as a reader)
or TeleAdapt.  I just thought that as hotel comms was a pretty
frequent item in c.d.t that you might find this interesting.


Jon Knight, Research Student in High Performance Networking and Distributed
Systems in the Department of _Computer_Studies_ at Loughborough University.

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

From: John Pettitt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecom Donation Wanted
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 22:58:54 PST


Las Madres is a network of neighborhood playgroups for mothers and
their children.  It is a not for profit organization covering the
greater San Jose area.

My wife is a board member and I have been asked to help update their
telephone information line.  This line takes calls from mothers and
provides information on which playgroup to contact based on age of
child (by year of birth) and area.  Currently this is done with an
answering machine with a ten minute message.  This is proving
unsatifactory due to the unreliable nature of the machine and the
difficulty in sitting through ten minutes of phone numbers.

I would like to get them on an automated system -- this is where you
can help.  If you have spare capacity on a system (needs one DID
number and a two level tree with about 30 messages) or you can donate
an old 286 PC with or without a voice card that I can program then I
would like to hear from you.

This is a tax deductable donation.

I am also looking at getting them an 800 number to hide the underlying telephone
number.  The best quote I have had so far is from MCI ($20/month, .19 day
 .14 eve and .11 cent min nights and weekends, California only).  If
you know of a better solution to hide the POTS number please let me
know.  N.B. 700 numbers are out because they are deemed too complicated.


Thanks in advance.

John Pettitt

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

Subject: Caller ID Available in 405 Area Code May 3
From: [e-mail] (Stan Hall)
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 93 16:35:43 CST
Organization: The Eternal Apprentice BBS, Norman, OK


In my latest SWB bill there was a notice saying that they plan on
offering Caller ID in most of the 405 calling areas beginning May 3.
It seems that they will be offering per call blocking at no charge.

The local SWB rep told me they were offering Caller ID units made by
Sidco (or something close to that).  Is anyone familiar with units
made by this company?

Anyone have any suggestions for cheap Caller ID units (no frills)?  I
also remember someone mentioning a unit that hooks up to the serial
port of a computer in the (under $50 range).


[e-mail] (Stan Hall)
The Eternal Apprentice BBS, Norman, OK -- [phone]

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

Subject: To Tap or Not to Tap
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 93 21:06:29 PST
From: [e-mail]


This month's issue (March 1993) of {Communications of the ACM} has a
pretty extensive set of articles talking about the issues posed by the
recent FBI proposal to make it easier for them to wiretap new forms of
communications.

 From the editorial pointers...

With advances in telephone technology rendering traditional
wiretapping procedures obsolete, the Justice Department has recently
proposed legislation that would assure law enforcement agencies
receive the technical assistance they need -- from U.S. phone
companies.

In "To Tap or Not to Tap," Dorthy Denning and a select group of
commentators debate the issues posed by this digital telephony
legislation.  Denning presents the case for the government and the
necessity of updating existing wiretapping laws to reflect new
technology.  She points out that there is no evidence the FBI ever
abused this law in the past, and explains industry's role in the
process.  Her report is followed by a series of commentaries from
noted representatives of industry, law, and government who argue
issues of privacy, competitiveness and potential pitfalls and
concerns.

I thought the best parts were a discussion of what this might mean for
encryption software.

Check it out.  This promises to be a debate that will make Caller ID
look like a cake walk.


Cheers,

Malcolm

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

From: Clayton E. Kuetemeyer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Needed on ATM's
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 12:45:32 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois


I am doing research on automated teller machines, and looking for
current information on products or effects on customer service.
Specifically, news about imaging systems, debit and credit card uses,
networking capabilities with systems such as Cirrus and Plus, and the
like would be useful.  Any information would be greatly appreciated.

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

From: [e-mail] (John V. Jaskolski)
Subject: Looking for used Dialogic boards
Date: 10 Mar 93 11:34:10 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Boston University Dept. of Cognitive and Neural Systems


I am looking for CHEAP USED (old) Dialogic boards.  Specifically, I am
interested in Dialogic's D121 Voice Boards (12-line voice processing
board) older versions are fine; Dialogic's LSI120 Loop Start Interface
(used to interface D121's with analog installations).  At least two of
each.  Also of interest is the MSI baseboard and any other used
boards.  Anyone who has any of these USED and wants to get rid of them
(or if you know of anyone who might have them) please let me know.

I might be able to use D41's and other boards as well.


Thank you very much,

John V. Jaskolski

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Device Wanted to Prevent Line "Bleed" Between Multiple Lines?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 06:01:01 GMT


We have two phone lines in our house.  When two people are on either
line both can hear the other person on the other line.  It is not loud
enough for either called party to hear but loud enough for either
person on this end to hear.  It seems to fade from low to high
occassionally.  I wonder if this might also affect my modem
connections.

Is there anything available to attach to the phone line somewhere to
prevent such line bleed?


Thanks,

Michael Rosen    Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University
[e-mail]   [e-mail] or @lambada.oit.unc.edu

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 06:03:36 GMT


With all the high tech scanning and sorting machinery the Post Office
utilizies, this surprises me:

I called the Maryland zip code information line and told the person on
the other end that I had five addresses I wished to find the ZIP+4
for.  I asked if it would be easier for him if I faxed the list to him
and called him back later.  I was told, with a chuckle, that they
don't have a fax machine.  You would think maybe the US Post Office
would have something as simple and common as a fax machine ...


Michael Rosen    Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University
[e-mail]  [e-mail] or @lambada.oit.unc.edu

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

From: Ching-Chang Liao <[e-mail]>
Subject: How to Measure BER of V.29 9.6k/s?
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 3:12:01 CST


I am a student who is working on CCITT V.29 9.6k/s modem. I know how
to generate V.29 9.6k/s voiceband data by computer program, but I am
lack of the knowledge to calculate the BER of V.29 9.6k/s. If you know
where I can find the materials of demodulating V.29 9.6k/s voiceband
data or the equations to calculate the BER of V.29 9.6k/s, please
notify me by mailing e-mail to my e-mail address listed below.  My
project is to find a way to improve the CCITT 32k/s ADPCM performance
on 9.6k/s voiceband data. Therefore, I have to know how to calculate
BER and the demodulation method of V.29 modem. Your replay will be
appreciated.


NAME: CHING-CHANG LIAO    E-MAIL: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #164
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21674;
          10 Mar 93 14:25 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24887
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 11:20:22 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26018
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 11:19:36 -0600
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 11:19:36 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #165

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 10 Mar 93 11:19:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 165

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy (Stewart Clamen)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Will Martin)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (David Lesher)
    Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (Justin Leavens)
    Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (Gordon Burditt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Stewart Clamen)
Subject: Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 18:15:36 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard
> Paiement) writes:

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

>> I have a business associate in Canada who tells me that businesses in
>> Quebec (or some part thereof) are forbidden to answer the phone in
>> English.  Reportedly, even a mixed French/English greeting is not
>> allowed -- the person answering can't use English until the caller
>> indicates that they want to speak English.  And, (perhaps in the
>> "Office de la Langue Francaise) there are Phone Police (tm) that call
>> businesses at random in order to ensure compliance with these
>> regulations.

> First off, Steve, I'll excuse you for believing such crap since you
> don't live in Canada.

> That anobody could believe such a rumour is hysterically funny. Quebec
> has never been and will never be an Orwellian society. One can walk in
> any city or town in the province of Quebec and will see many bilingual
> as well as English-only signs defying the language law, and nobody has
> been killed yet.

Since I didn't want to be guilty of spreading any false facts here in
the TELECOM Digest, I just double-checked them by calling my Canadian
friend and discussing this issue with him at length.  For reference,
he is a Canadian citizen who lives in Canada full-time, and has owned
and operated a business there for many years.  He has corporate
customers from all over Canada, many of them in Quebec, and has had
many opportunities to personally deal with and observe these language
regulations in action.  Here are several issues that he cited:

Although the discussion of Quebec language politics is inappropriate
on this forum, I feel the need to correct the inaccuracies in Mr.
Forrette's post.  I am an Anglophone (ie. English speaking) Quebecer
currently studying in the US.

1.  The French language regulations on the answering of telephones has
caused several major companies to leave Quebec.  A specific example
cited was Sun Life, which catered to a predominantely English-speaking
clientele.  The French language regulations would have required them
to put all of their English-speaking clerks who answered the phone
through classes in order to teach them to speak French, even though
the only people who they talked to were English-speaking.  Instead of
paying for this waste, they moved to another province.  Another
example is Cominsco.

(If the telephone people only spoke English, is it any wonder that
their customers were only English-speaking?)

The move of the Sun Life Head Office from Montreal to Toronto might
very well have been due to the newly installed regulations requiring
the use of French in the workplace.  However, it was only the Head
Office (and its staff) that was moved.  The customer service clerks
remained in the downtown Montreal skyscraper that bears its name.  I
have never heard anything related to telephony that caused this move.

2.  All business signs must be predominantly French.  Having French
everywhere English is used on a sign is not enough -- it must be
predominantly French.  This may be accomplished by having the French
part in a slightly larger font.  There was a case where a business
owner had restroom signs that used just the silhouette pictures to
denote the men's and women's restrooms, and was fined by the Language
Police because the signs were not predominantly French.

Actually, all outdoor commercial signage must be in FRENCH ONLY.
Indoor signs are subject to the "predominantly French" regulations you
describe above (although the restroom pictogram story makes no sense).
This rule has been in force for the past four years, and constitutional
requirements stipulate that it must be reaffirmed or rescinded this year.

3.  By default, all public school instruction is primarily in French,
with English being taught as a second language.  In order for a child
to attend a public school with most instruction in English, one of the
parents must have graduated from a primarily-English high school in
Quebec.  This was implemented to ensure that immigrant families who
came to Canada and spoke neither French nor English would send their
children to French schools.  Before, when they were given a choice of
French or English, most chose English, because that's the language
they wanted their children to learn.  But, this law also affects
Canadians moving from other provinces, or Americans who live for a few
years in Canada.  If I, as an American, were to come to Quebec for a
few years, why should my children have to go to French schools just
because me or my wife didn't graduate from an English high school in
Quebec?  Businesses can apply for an exemption for specific employees.
This was passed because American executives from companies that
operated Canadian branches (such as General Motors) started refusing
to come to Canada.

Actually, anyone who has had their (or some of their children's)
primary education IN CANADA (and landed in Canada prior to mid-1977)
can send their kids to English public schools in Quebec.  Anglophones
immigrants from other countries would not be allowed to send their
kids to Quebec English public schools.  (There are a number of English
private schools to choose from, of course.)  People temporarily
residing in Quebec (eg.  corporate transfers) can send their kids to
English public schools for up to three years, I believe.

4.  Quebec tried to change their air traffic control system so that
all dispatching was done in French.  English is the international
language of air traffic control, and in fact they even land the planes
in Paris, France by speaking English, but Quebec wanted to use French
instead.  Reportedly this never got implemented, though.

I believe they did do it.  The Quebec air traffic controllers and the
French speaking pilots wanted to be able to communicate in French, and
I believe they have been granted that right.  What makes it all the
more ironic is that the International Civil Air Organization is
headquartered in Montreal.

> I don't know about you, Richard, but a lot of this sounds quite
> Orwellian to me.

Orwellian? perhaps.  Quebecois? absolutely.


Stewart M. Clamen        Internet:    [e-mail]
School of Computer Science    UUCP:          uunet!"[e-mail]"
Carnegie Mellon University    Phone:          [phone]
5000 Forbes Avenue        Fax:         [phone]
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3891, USA

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

Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 8:28:59 CST
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News


Just to provide some info which I hadn't seen on the usual media
coverage: The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation science program,
"Quirks & Quarks", which I heard on Radio Canada International
shortwave on Sunday, 7 March, carried a long interview with a person
[whose name I forget, sorry] described as a building-demolition expert
and international-terrorism consultant about the WTC bombing.

Two very interesting aspects:

This person had given an interview back in 1985, which had been
published in a magazine article that year, in which he had been asked
to state from a structural (as opposed to strategic or tactical)
viewpoint what targets would be the most likely for a terrorist group
to attack. His first choice was the Statue of Liberty, because of all
the symbolic aspects and the way it epitomizes the American image. The
second choice was the World Trade Center complex. I guess the
terrorists must have read the article ...

The other fact, and one that I find rather surprising, was that he
stated that the bomb did so much damage that, if either the exact same
bomb had been detonated at a slightly different location, or if the
bomb at its actual location had been made with slightly more effective
explosive, the effect could well have actually brought down one of the
WTC towers. We're used to thinking that modern steel-frame buildings
can be damaged (and probably made unusable) but not that they can be
so easily caused to actually fall down. The way he described it, the
margins of safety are adequate, given the building's structural
integrity, to handle the usual loads -- the contents of the bulding,
including the movement of people, the elevators moving up and down,
wind loads from the outside, etc. But once that structural integrity
is breached sufficiently, the building will begin to tilt, and that
takes it out of the design envelope, and no more than a few degrees of
tilt is enough to overcome all the structural safeguards, and the
building will then basically disintegrate, falling right down due to
gravity.

Stuff I've previously read about building demolition has stressed the
small amount of explosives that are actually used by professionals;
the placement of those and the choice of the exact correct explosive,
with the right brisance, to sever the structural supports in a
controlled pattern, is what makes those spectacular pictures we've all
seen of buildings basically collapsing in on themselves with a
relatively small and unspectacular explosion-effect seen at the
beginning. All that is needed is to take out the right legs, and let
gravity do the work.

In the WTC case, it seems that either the bombers were not intending
to do this, or were not skilled enough to do it, or there was some
error or mishap. There have repeatedly been comments about the
possibility of the explosion being detonated at an unintended time,
perhaps by the van hitting a speedbump or the like -- one can
certainly speculate about the timing of the blast, since it seemed to
occur at a rather odd moment during lunchtime, not when the building
was as full as possible, nor when it was as empty as possible at
night. Also, some of the early reports emphasized the blast location
in relation to an area used by the Secret Service for VIP vehicles --
perhaps the actual intent was to trigger the explosion at some future
time when some important personage would have been in the area? That
is, of course, guesswork. In any case, though, it may be said that we
were lucky -- things could easily have been much worse.


Regards, Will

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1993 19:29:43 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Higdon) writes:

> Once again, let us nip the folklore in the bud. There is absolutely NO
> EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that RF energy at AM wavelengths causes ANY
> physiological affects. It is common practice for tower workers to
> climb energized AM towers (you cannot get much closer than that) and
> no one has come up with a single case of anything that can be
> attributed to such exposure. Yes, you can get an RF burn off the tower
> if you brush your hand past it, but that is due to the arc that is
> drawn, not some mysterious, unseen force.

    There is a lot of research going on in the RF exposure area.
For AM stations, the latest I've seen is a report from Richard Tell
Associates prepared for the FCC in October 1991.  Based on the current
ANSI guidelines, one should not climb a hot AM tower due to the
radiated field.  Richard Tell went back to the Specific Absorbtion
Rate basis for the ANSI field limits and calculated what currents
would be permitted thru the wrists of a tower climber and still stay
below the SAR (using I squared R calculations for the wrists).  Based
on these calculations and wrist current measurements while climbing
various towers, the report establishes suggested power limits for
climbing hot towers based on frequency.  In general, the suggested
power is less than 1 KW.  Note that the current limits the FCC uses
use E and H field limits and not conducted body current.  A new
standard is proposed that does include conducted body current.

    Limits for VHF and UHF (such as FM and TV) fields are also
listed in the ANSI standard.  These are generally checked using
measurements or the prediction measurements in the FCC bulletin OST
65.

    I've spoken with various agencies on radiation safety.  A
representative of OSHA in Salt Lake City agreed that there is very
limited evidence of harm done to workers by RF (especially at AM
frequencies), but he says that MAY be due to very limited data.  There
is no centralized "cause of death" database that also tracks the
occupational and other environmental considerations of a person's
lifetime.  He pointed out that it took at least 30 years to discover
the harmful effects of asbestos.  He also said OSHA will enforce
radiation standards for worker safety whether the new standards are
adopted by the FCC or not.  If a case ends up in court, it would
probably be best if the station were using the best "scientific" study
available.  Unfortunately, establishing "scientific" can be difficult.
There have been a lot of radiation scares based on flimsy evidence, if
any evidence at all.  Still, we need to look beyond our self interest
(I work in radio) and indeed look for the truth, even if it means we
have to change what we are doing.

    So ... summarizing, yes, I've climbed hot AM towers, and I
haven't died, but I plan to.


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 0:28:10 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


The Chief Moo said:

> I have worked around dozens of 50KW stations over the past twenty-
> five years or so and have NEVER observed my hair standing on end.
> What nonsense!

Hmmmm:

1) John does not carry a mirror while tower climbing.

2) His eyes are burned out by all that RF. Even if it
   DID stand on end.....

3) If the eyes are not fried, what about the other end
   of the optic nerves?

4) Does he have any left to lay flat, much less stand on end?

[Sorry, John - can't resist ...]


wb8foz

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill
Date: 10 Mar 1993 01:05:57 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> I still maintain a $15 item from a *telephone* information provider
> with nothing written to bind either party is of no concern to credit
> grantors except possibly telemarketers selling magazine subscriptions;
> bill collectors for the Columbia Record Club (talk about a depressing
> job -- "did you mail in your dollar ninety-eight for the fifteen
> records we sent you?" !) and the like.  PAT]

Ah, but it's a BIG deal to another telephone provider. In my instance,
the charge ($50) was being billed by AT&T. Thus, the outstanding
charge was not from some nobody IP, it was an outstanding balance owed
to AT&T, and that's exactly the way it appeared on my Equifax report.

And that $50 was plenty enough to make GTE refuse to install a line
until it was cleared up, and then demand a large deposit on the
account. Nothing like trying to move into a new apartment and trying
to deal with AT&T, GTE, and Pacific Bell at the same time.

And then what really burned me was that I found out that after all my
battling with AT&T over this matter (many weeks after receiving a
letter from the IP stating that they had gone out of business and
there was no money to make refunds) was that AT&T has stopped all
payments to that IP. So AT&T was apparently trying to recoup whatever
losses it could with the customer money.


Justin Leavens   Microcomputer Specialist   University of Souther California

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 14:35:46 GMT


> As for interception between the main phone lines, and the telco (such
> as someone going in a sewer and tapping the lines, I can't see how you
> can protect against that, unless you can get the telco to put a lock
> on your line, which (I just thought of that) is a good idea, but I'm
> not sure the telco offers such a security system, and even then, if
> someone tapped the line, they can get the number.  You'd have to set
> up a preety complex system to be 100% foolproof, which for most
> applications is way too expensive.

It would seem possible, especially given a PBX, to detect when a CO
line goes off-hook and it's NOT the inside line taking it off-hook.
(Modifying existing PBX circuits might be the easiest way, if you have
schematics, don't have to worry about warranties, and have a line to
experiment with).  Mutual-excluder circuits from Radio Shack and
line-in-use lights do parts of this.  You have to do something about
incoming calls not generating false alarms.

If you detect outside use of your line (someone at the demarc, on a
phone pole, elsewhere in your apartment building, in a manhole, or at
the CO), you can jam dialing.  Send out all touch-tone tones
simultaneously, and generate continuous pulse dialing (as though there
were a digit for "ten thousand" on your dial).  This should mess up
any attempts to dial a specific number, and the conversation if they
manage to complete a call.  Have it time out after a few minutes
unless it seems someone is still trying.  You'd better have a way to
shut this off if the phone company needs to work on your lines, and
have a way for it to just set off an alarm without jamming for a
while.  CO line testing might set it off.


Gordon L. Burditt   sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #165
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22598;
          10 Mar 93 14:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03447
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 12:11:41 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26673
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 12:11:19 -0600
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 12:11:19 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Voice BBS, 1+ Dialing, Other Stuff


The responses thus far to the Orange Calling Card have been gratifying.
I've mailed out several hundred brochures and applications, and they
are starting to be returned to the main office in Minneapolis. Still
more brochures and applications are in the mail now. A portion of the
revenue from this 25 cent per minute (billed in six second increments)
and no surcharge calling card are returned to TELECOM Digest.

Now some other companies have contacted me and asked if I would be
willing to operate on the same terms for 1+ dialing and 800 numbers.
I don't have agreements in place as of today with these companies, so
I can only speak in general terms, but would appreciate some feedback
to see if the support would be present.

Please respond only to [e-mail] with short answers. Please
do not quote extensively from this message unless you must.

If 1+ service from Sprint and/or AT&T were available -- meaning you
did not have to change your long distance carrier, but merely agreed
to be billed through a reselling service, with the reduced rates and
other features available, would you agree to do it if the commissions
came to TELECOM Digest?

    i.e. rates of 14-15 cents per minute on direct dial calls?
    i.e. the use of the AT&T Software Defined Network?

If 800 service was available with no start up or monthly charge, and
rates of 32 cents per minute which decreased to about 20 cents per
minute based on volume, would you subscribe if the commissions came to
TELECOM Digest?  When '800 portability' arrives (now definitly sched-
uled for May 1), would you be willing to consider this if you were
able to keep the same 800 number you have now?  The 800 numbers I will
be offering are real; not bogus 'add a four digit pin' numbers like
MCI.

   --- Note: The above rates on 1+ are *examples* only. They
       are giving me a bunch of plans to resell based on volume.
       Given the volume, rates would go down to 8 cents per
       minute with thousands of dollars of usage per month.
       Ditto the 800 service, where rates go down to about 10
       cents per minute when you use enough of it.


If there was a 'voice BBS' type service available strictly for use by
telecom people, where open messages could be left and responded to
by anyone calling, and private voicemail boxes were available as well
to readers of TELECOM Digest / comp.dcom.telecom, would you be likely
to use such a system?  It would be priced 'at cost' with rates of:

   $20 per year for voicemail box and open bulletin board for
   employed persons;

   $10 per year for the same features for students and unemployed
   persons;

   FREE to international users due to their increased toll charges
   in calling.

A call to Chicago on a regular POTS number would be required. (No
900/976 type numbers).

Please let me know if these services would be of interest to you or
used by you if they were available.

   *** I am not yet in a position to send literature or
       take requests to sign up, but hope to be soon. ***


Patrick Townson
TELECOM Digest Moderator











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25327;
          11 Mar 93 4:31 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12210
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 01:50:01 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11688
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 01:49:31 -0600
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 01:49:31 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #166

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 11 Mar 93 01:49:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 166

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number! (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Payphone Records in WTC Case (Jeff Wasilko)
    Distinctive Ring Discriminator With Caller ID (Greg Trotter)
    Facsimile CNG Tone (Richard W. Desaulniers)
    Inverse Paging Service? (Garrett Wollman)
    X.25 Over IP (Telematics and NCR Tower) (Ken Zmyslo)
    Come Here, Mr. Watson (John R. Levine)
    Information on USA Telephone System Wanted (4I Gymnazium Students Praha 9)
    800 and 900 in Canada ([e-mail])
    Pricing For MAN Access (Hank Nussbacher)
    Needed: T1 Channel Equipment Recommendation ([e-mail])
    Dialer Format Wanted (Joseph J. Snyder)
    Need Information on Fiber Optic Television (Martin Egan)
    RFC on SLIP (Robert L. McMillin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 11-MAR-1993 00:13:06.53
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number!


I got a call today from a friend of mine who was trying to reach me
via my 700 number. After verifying that he was dialing correctly, I
concluded that there must be some error at the payphone or the switch
he was on, and drove there later to investigate (I was in the area
anyhow.)

As it turns out, it was a NYTel coin phone, in the 516-931/Hicksville
exchange.  So I tried out 10288+0+700 etc., and it didn't work. (Got a
local error message.)

I called AT&T EasyReach Customer Service, and spoke to a rep named
Lynn.  I explained to her the nature of the problem, and asked her to
take a trouble report on it. She said that she would, but that it
could be that NYTel is blocking "700 and 900 numbers from that
payphone due to fraud". I asked her just how can can someone make
fraudulent calls with 700 numbers from payphones (and I stressed it
was not a private payphone but a Bell System station), and she went on
very sure of herself "Oh, well SWBell for example blocks out 700 calls
from their payphones all the time, because they don't want people
placing 700 calls and not paying for them."

At this point, I decided not to waste my time with her anymore, and
told her to have someone call me back within two days as to what was
being done to resolve the matter. She didn't sound too happy about
that, and said "You know, we gave you an 800 number so in cases like
this people can still reach you..!", to which I replied "Well, so I
should tell people: 'Call 0-700-555-1234, make sure you dial 0, and if
that doesn't work, dial 10288 first, and if that doesn't work, then
dial 1-800-824-5621, wait for the prompt, dial 1, wait for the tone,
then dial 700-555-1234, and then your calling card number' - if I had
to say THAT to people when they want my number then no one will call
me!"

This isn't the first instance where a given prefix (or even a coin
station line) is mis-programmed so that it denies EasyReach access.
The fact that the AT&T Rep (Lynn) didnt seem to think that it was too
unusual, and that she casually told me to burden my callers by making
them dial an extra 800 number in order to reach the 700 platform
indicates (to me at least) that some people at AT&T EasyReach don't
care too much that it is quite difficult and inconvenient for many
callers to reach me, and don't seem to care that this greatly
diminishes the utility of the service.

If any AT&T people are reading this, I'd suggest you make greater
efforts to train your people to be responsive to customers who whish
to get a specific (usully LEC related) problem corrected - AT&T
EasyReach is either misprogrammed or blocked from *many* areas
(although SWBell doesn't seem to be one of them!). Just a few weeks
ago I noticed that payphones along I-78 in Allentown wouldn't accept
0-700 AT&T calls, and callers needed to use the 800 access to get
through. The same was true last summer of the 516-621 exchange, and
the 203-728 exchange. Obviously AT&T can not check every single Bell
(or LEC) payphone in the country, but the considerable number of areas
that I have noted where 700 access isn't available indicates to me
that there are more than a few areas where my callers will have
problems reaching me. I am a bit disturbed by this, and Lynn did
nothing to alleviate my concerns.

Additionally, now that AT&T has announced EasyReach for business
customers, they have GOT to make more of an effort to improve access
to the service.  Presently, callers from Rochester Tel service areas
can not dial 0-700, and must use the 800 to access the EasyReach
platform, and pay the calling card surcharge (even if from a non-coin
phone). I doubt many cost-conscious businesses, once they realize that
they can place the same call directly for about a tenth as much (for
the first minute), will choose to utilize the service. AT&T has said
that the reason callers can't access EasyReach directly is because
Rochester Tel doesn't have the newest software generic for their 5ESS
switches - well, maybe (and I know this is a crazy idea ;) ) - just
maybe, AT&T could GIVE Roch Tel the relavent code so that peope with
700 numbers don't have to encumber friends and relatives in Rochester
with additional codes in order to be reachable? Nah ...too simple,
right? :(

Or how about the way that EasyReach supervises when you get to the
platform, and does not wait until the called party answers? Many
people are reluctant to call me from their cellular phones because
this means that they will pay airtime even if I am not available, or
my phone is busy. Now that EasyReach is a "business" service as well,
I think more and more "business" users will be annoyed by this
deficiency.

Overall, I DO like the service, and find it useful. But in my
experience, I find that there are MANY areas where 700 access is
denied, or where payphones don't offer 700 access, etc. I've noted
Bell (not GTE or Contel or whatever) payphones in Rhode Island, Mass,
Connecticut, New Hampshire, Maine, DC, Va, MD, Pennsylania and New
York which for some reason or other have 700 access blocked. Although
I may never get a call from any of these exchanges or payphones, I'd
like to know that I *could*, and not make my callers go through such a
rediculous procedure as using the 800 access that many may abandon the
attempt and just not call at all.

It is bad enough that many are reluctant to call me on the 700 (most
don't like the fact that they have to wait for the "AT&T EasyReach"
voice prompt, or enter extra keys ("#1")), but to make them use an 800
number to access the service on a seemingly regular basis goes too
far. As discussed on the Digest when EasyReach just started, the
"0-700" system is awkward for most callers, and it requires that they
and/or I take the time to understand/ explain the service to them.
1+700 would have been preferable, with a 0-700 for Calling Card access
and programming access. However, since AT&T for whatever reason chose
to implement the system via the more awkward 0-700 access method, the
LEAST that they can do is make sure that it is acessible from
everywhere.

I refuse to burden my callers with extra charges and procedures to
reach me, and feel that they will choose not to call if the EasyReach
service is too cumbersome. Already many have asked for a backup number
(POTS number) to reach me at because either they can't dial 0-700 from
their PBX, or they don't want to use the 800 and pay the Calling Card
surcharge, or because they don't want to pay airtime if I do not
answer, or becuase they are calling from a rotary phone and don't want
to wait 45 seconds for the service to time out.  Not to mention that
it generally costs them MORE to reach me , that *no* AT&T calling
plans include EasyReach, that you can't sequence call using the "#"
key from a previous call to EasyReach, that friends and relatives of
mine in Canada (and outside the US in general) can't call, and that I
can't use the "#" key to force calls to the number I am calling from.
Frankly, if *I* were told to call a friend with EasyReach, I'd just
ask for the "master pin", check to see where calls were being
forwarded to, and then use Sprint to place the call directly! :)

So it behooves AT&T, that when a customer such as myself who is
willing to put up with all these inconveniences, and who has friends
who are patient and understanding enough to put up with the burdensome
procedures mandated for EasyReach access, that when I do call to
report a problem in accessing the system that I get something in
response which is a bit more than mindless platitudes about how SW
Bell blocks access from their payphones, or how callers can "simply"
use the 800 number to access the service.

Simply? Give me a break! AT&T: Get your act together on EasyReach -
make it easier to use, and allow me to be reached from everywhere. The
novelty and even the utlity of the service quickly wears off if even
one person (not to mention almost everyone) complains about using "the
700 number" to call me. There are alternatives (like Cable and
Wireless's Programmable 800 service), and I suspect that in the future
there will be more.  If you expect to retain me as a customer, I would
expect you to address the issues raised in this post and make
EasyReach as convenient and simple as dialing any other telephone
number.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Subject: Payphone Records in WTC Case
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 23:18:37 EST
Organization: Univ of Fnord; Roslyn's Cafe Div.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I just heard on the news that the latest suspect in the WTC bombing
case was linked to the main previous suspect via payphone call logs.

It seems that the first suspect used the payphone in the storage
building lobby where the explosives were supposedly stored to call
Nidal Ayyad (a chemical engineer at Allied-Signal) at Nidal's office a
number of times.

It's very interesting to see the use of call detail that is availble
from public payphones. Remember that the Long Island kidnapping case
also involved police using payphone call records ...


Jeff
Jeff's Oasis at Home.   Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                                         [e-mail]

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

Subject: Distinctive Ring Discriminator with Caller ID
From: [e-mail] (Greg Trotter)
Date: 10 Mar 93 15:52:10 -0600
Organization: Gallifrey - Home of the Timelords


I posted a message a week or so ago asking for info on distinctive
ring discriminators. I got a lot of good information, but wonder if
anyone has been able to use a Caller ID device *after* the DRD has
split the line.  A lot of people recommended the splitter by Hello
Direct; their tech people say that Caller ID can't be detected after
the DRD has routed the call.

Has anyone successfully done this? Putting the Caller ID box inline
before the DRD is not an option; nor do I have a spare pair of wires
to route a "pure" telco line for the Caller ID box on.

Any help is appreciated!


Greg Trotter  Norman, Oklahoma   Internet: [e-mail]
Fidonet: 1:147/63 Treknet: 87:6012/8009    | I don't even represent me.


[Moderator's Note: Is it taking their box longer than one ring to
decide how to route the call?  Caller-ID comes between the first and
second ring; you'd think if the routing device responded on the first
ring the path would be clear when the Caller-ID came past a half
second or so later. I use a device which works the opposite way I got
 from Radio Shack (two separate lines go into the box, the line which
rings seizes control and gives its output to a single-line Caller-ID
phone.  Either line can be selected from the box for outgoing calls
but the incoming ring signal from either line trips the box in that
direction for incoming calls.) It always manages to wake up in time
and do its thing so the single line phone can display the Caller-ID
coming from either direction. Always? Well maybe it misses one call
out of a hundred or so.

Speaking of Caller-ID, it now works with Call Waiting here in Chicago.
Not immediatly ... but keep the waiting call on hold; finish the first
one and *hang up*, allowing the CO to give you a couple 'reminder
rings' to let you know a call was left on hold ... between the first
and second of *those* (reminder rings) the ID gets displayed. This,
despite the fact it may have 'rang' a few times to the calling party
before you answered and put them on hold. So even if you have to flash
and (like me) merely say 'please hold' and flash back to the first
party again, before actually talking to the new caller, we can get his
ID if we hang up and let the CO pass it.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 11:11:08
From: [e-mail] (Richard W. Desaulniers)
Subject: Facsimile CNG Tone


As I understand it a calling facsimile can send a series of CNG tone
(0.5 sec 1100Hz) that can be detected by a receiving unit when it
answers an incoming call.  The purpose of the tone is allow incoming
facsimile calls to be automatically switched over to a facsimile unit.

I don't think this feature (i.e. being able to send CNG tones) is
mandatory, but should one expect all facsimile units manufactured
today to have that feature? What about the older facsimile units, do
they have this feature?  Are there a lot of these older units out
there?

Replies via e-mail would be appreciated.

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

Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 14:53:57 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Inverse Paging Service?


Most TCD readers will remember the recent discussions of how to get a
computer to talk to a paging service switch, to send a message to a
paging subscriber.  I'm wondering if anybody has created the logical
inverse of such a service.

In particular, when people ask me for my phone number, I usually give
out two (one at home, one at work), with the caveat that I am rarely
ever available at either number.  However, during the times when I am
not available by a phone, I am almost always still reachable by
electronic mail.  I'd really like a service whereby I can give people
a "pager" number, which they could call up and punch in a return phone
number like usual, which would then get translated into an E-mail
message sent to me.  Does such a service exist?  (Note that
suggestions to buy equipment to "roll my own" are not useful; to do so
is really not worth the hassle for me.)


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


[Moderator's Note: What you are asking is available as an alphanumeric
pager. People using these get little one line messages, etc from the
caller.    PAT]

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

From: Ken Zmyslo <[e-mail]>
Subject: X.25 Over IP (Telematics and NCR Tower)
Date: 10 Mar 93 14:44:50 GMT
Organization: NCR Corporation - Dayton, OH USA


This is a general query regarding X25, TCP/IP, UNIX machines (NCR
Towers) and Telematics 2600s (NCR 5480s).

Currently, I have a Tower 32/700 communicating via async to a NCR 5480
(Telematics) box.  The 5480 provides the X.25 PAD function for
communications.

I had Host PAD and X.25 running on the Tower 32/700 but it was taking
CPU time to 0% free, (free CPU time is now acceptable).

It is my understanding that there is third party software for the 5480
(it does have the ELA and tpx software installed).

I wanted to take the X.25 calls (coming in to the 5480) and send them
over IP to my Tower 32/700.  Has anyone been able to do this or had
experience with this configuration?

If you can help with this situation, I'd appreciate it.  Possibly I
can help solve a different problem that you've been having.


Thanks,  please send your reply to:

Kenneth J. Zmyslo                  VoicePlus 622-1779
WIN Management Services            [phone]
[e-mail]   ...!uunet!ncrcom!wtcp!kzmyslo

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

Subject: Come Here, Mr. Watson
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 10:15:08 EST
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


Tomorrow [or by the time you print this, probably today], March 10, is
the 117th anniversary of the first phone call from A. Graham Bell to
Thomas A. Watson.  It took place in Scollay Square, Boston, at a site
now marked by a modest granite marker and a pair of pay phones.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 15:19:34 EDT
From: Class 4I Gymnazium Praha 9 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information on USA Telephone System Wanted
Organization: CSAV UTIA


[Moderator's Note: May I call on any Digest readers who wish to do so
to please answer this letter of inquiry I received. I am hoping there
will be several responses. If they have storage space for Archives
files or a way to receive the Digest via their school, I'll gladly add
them to the mailing list.  Do NOT send them the FAQ file; I mailed
that out to them myself; nor do they need this issue of the Digest
which has also been especially mailed to the school. Thanks to
everyone who replies!  :) PAT]

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

Dear Mr. Townson,

We are students from high school in Prague.  We would like to get some
information about telephone system in America.  We want to talk to our
telephone company in Czech Republic.  We are looking for more
telephones, improved service; because we believe American telephone
service is better than here.  How can it be better?

Please write us detailed information about American telephone system.
Write us soon because this information is important to us.  Write us
directly at our school computer address since we do not receive your
journal.


Vladimir Vojik              Andrea Kurova            Petra Zateckova
Lucie Fleischmannova        Maria Mejsnarova         Sasha Jungwirth
Linda Kosarova              Eva Pavlikova            Paul Schlitter

Students of Class 4I, Gymnazium Praha 9

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

Subject: 800 and 900 Service in Canada
From: [e-mail] (murphy)
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 23:48:58 EST
Organization: Switchboard BBS -  [phone]


I only had a very small question that's been bugging me for a while
now: Is there ANY way to call 800 and 900 numbers located in the U.S.
from Canada?

Just wondering.


[Moderator's Note: 900 numbers, no.  800 numbers, maybe, depending on
if the owner of the 800 number wants to receive international calls
and has had the line configured to do so.    PAT]

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

Organization: Bar-Ilan University Computing Center, Israel
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 11:25:03 IST
From: Hank Nussbacher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pricing For MAN Access


I am looking for places that already have MAN pricing in place.  For
example, what is the monthly charge for 10Mb/sec access?  Does your
PTT charge per gigabyte of traffic?  What is the price for 34Mb/sec
access?  Any and all information would be of help.


Thanks,

Hank Nussbacher   Israel

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Needed: T1 Channel Equipment Recommendations
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 15:36:03 GMT


I am going to be installing a T1 local loop at our site and need
recommendation/caveats on equip: T1 channel bank, CSU/DSU, the whole
works!

Can someone help?  I am not able to check this board as often as I
would like to so replies send directly to me will be appreciated.
Will be happy to summarize responses for the group.


Osman

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph J Snyder -- Graphic Data Inc)
Subject: Dialer Format Wanted
Organization: CONCERT-CONNECT -- Public Access UNIX
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 15:39:12 GMT


I am looking for the data transmission format used by security system
dialers to talk to a central station.  I believe that it is some kind
of a pulse stream at very low (20 pulses/sec) rate, set up many years
ago when phone lines were noisier and less reliable (?) than today.

Also, does any one know of any dialers that use Touch-Tone as the data
format (instead of pulses or modem)?


Thanks in advance.


Joe

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

From: Martin Egan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Need Information on Fiber Optic Television
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 14:57:56 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois


I am doing research on the competition between the telcos and cable
companies over the cable television market.  If you have any general
information, or if you have specific information on who may have the
competitive edge, please post it.  Thanks!

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 00:41:56 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: RFC on SLIP


I want to hear from people in net.land who've used SLIP (especially if
you've used it with Linux, assuming such a thing is currently
possible).  Specifically, I want to know how it stacks up as a file
transfer protocol versus UUCP 'g', XMODEM, YMODEM, ZMODEM, etc.  If I
get enough interest, I will post a summary to this group.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]
                         After June 25 : [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #166
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27430;
          11 Mar 93 5:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16989
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 02:58:35 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10407
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 02:58:02 -0600
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 02:58:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #167

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 11 Mar 93 02:58:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 167

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    An Alarming Circuit ID Technique! (Dave Levenson)
    Conference: Integrating Voice, Video and Data (Matt Lucas)
    Wanted: Novatel PTR825 Programming Information (Mike Brand)
    18kf Limit Measurement (Ken Hester)
    Local Phone Companies as Collection Agencies (Marc Kozam)
    Voice '93 BoF (Bill Cerny)
    Hearing-Impaired Teletype Connectivity (John Kerns)
    Listening in via Call Waiting? (Wolfgang Rupprecht)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: An Alarming Circuit ID Technique!
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 04:27:54 GMT


NJ Bell recently spent two weeks installing two private lines between
my business and residence locations.  The endpoints are actually about
six miles apart, and are both served by the same central office.

So what took them so long?  Well, it got a little bit complicated ...
the office is served by short copper loops from the nearby central
office.  The house is served by a SLC-96 system that uses fiber
between the central office and the remote terminal, and then a few
blocks of copper.

The NJ Bell technician connected the copper loops to the network
interface at my office.  Then he connected the copper between the SLC
remote terminal and the house.  Another NJ Bell employee connected the
copper loops from the office to the appropriate part of the SLC
central office terminal to complete the job.

The lines are called OSNA lines (in USOC-speak).  They connect from
station ports on the PBX at my office to a telephone set (actually,
one of them connects to a modem) at my house.  The SLC system provides
a little bit of gain, and repeats loop supervision toward the PBX, and
AC ringing toward the house.

I picked up a phone in my house, and I heard dial tone from the PBX at
the office.  I dialed 9 and I heard central office dial tone.  I
called a friend.  He said 'hello'.  I said 'hi, John'.  He said
'hello?' several more times, apparently unable to hear me.  I raised
my voice and spoke his name.  He finally reacted.  He could barely
hear me when I shouted at him.  I could hear him just fine.

I dragged out my box of telecom tools.  I placed a 1004 Hz tone at 0
dBm on the line at the house, and measured the level at the office.  I
swapped ends.  From the office to the house, the via-net-loss was
about 4.8 dB.  From the house to the office, the VNL was almost 8 dB.
No wonder John couldn't hear me.  The end-to-end loss from my house to
the office, through the PBX, and then out to the NJ Bell central
office was about 18 dB.

I called NJ Bell.  Then sent the technician back.  He said that he
could replace the line cards in the SLC with the older type that
allowed him to adjust the gain independently in each direction.  He
also brought some test gear with him, and confirmed my loss
measurements.  (The tariff says that OSNA lines will present a loss of
4.0 dB in each direction.)

The older SLC cards require a double-width slot.  Using them meant
moving two other subscribers' circuit packs to different slots, to
free up pairs of adjacent backplane slots to accomodate the older
card.

When he was done (it was late at night) he had the loss down to 4.0 dB
in each direction.  But he had cranked the gain up so high that the
circuit was right on the verge of oscillation.  Voices were loud
enough, but the sound was so badly distorted that people didn't
recognize my voice.  The echo was terrible.  The modem didn't even
detect carrier, let along pass data.

I reported trouble again.  NJ Bell sent the technician back again, and
he brought some of his friends.  With a man at my house, another at my
office, and a third in the hut that contained the remote terminal of
the SLC system, they reduced the gain to the original design, and then
sought to add gain at the central office, where the SLC was joined to
copper.

They got to this point at about 7:00pm, and the central office is
unattended at that hour.  A central office technician who doesn't
normally work this area was dispatched.  At about 8:00pm he got to the
central office, and told the technician that someone had removed all
of the identification from the SLC terminals at the office, and that
he could not identify the system that served the OSNA lines.

A conference call was set up (courtesy of my PBX) between the
technician at the remote SLC location, the technician at my house, the
technician at my office, and the technician at the central office.
After trying unsuccessfully for some time to locate the central office
end of the SLC, they came up with a plan ...

The man at the remote SLC location pulled the master control card out
of the SLC equipment bay serving the OSNA lines.  (The conference call
was disrupted by this process.  Approximately 96 of my neighbors were
probably cut off if they were on the phone at the time.)  The man at
the central office got some alarms and lots of red lights, but he
learned what SLC system we were trying to use!

Well, now the lines work as tariffed.  I have voice and data service
between my house and my office.  And except for the readers of this
article, nobody will ever know ...


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


[Moderator's Note: Ah, but I have lots of good NJB people reading this
Digest and they may recognize themselves or a co-worker!  :)   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 02:19:29 -0500
From: matt lucas <[e-mail]>
Subject: Conference: Integrating Voice, Video and Data


A TeleStrategies Conference:


                   INTEGRATING VOICE, VIDEO AND DATA
                      Opportunities in Multimedia
               for Computer and Communications Companies
                  April 29-30, 1993     Washington, DC


APRIL 29, 1993
8:30 - 9:00 Registration

9:00 - 10:15
MARKET ASSESSMENT AND OVERVIEW
Market size, market drivers and opportunities for revenues today
and in the future will be covered. The discussion will also
include: applications and services business users are demanding;
business alliances being formed and applications being created; how
vendors and users should position themselves for multimedia
services; case studies of where integrated voice, video and data
communications have succeeded and/or failed and why; integration
strategies; structured data issues; standards and compatibility;
and the significance of adjacent technologies associated with
multimedia (groupware, objects, languages).

Natasha Kroll, Vice President & Service Director
     Advanced Applications Development Strategies, META Group
Steve Reynolds, Director, Interactive Media Services
     Link Resources

10:15 - 10:45 Coffee Break

10:45 - 12:30
COMPUTER INDUSTRY EFFORTS IN MULTIMEDIA
Computer industry representatives will discuss their current
efforts to bring integrated voice, video and data applications to
the market. The role of network design, Pentium chips, new software
programs, CD-ROM, groupware, networked multimedia and compresssion,
ATM/SONET and other technologies will be assessed. The relationship
between the computer and telecommunications industries and how it
will influence the development of multimedia communications will
also be covered. Compatibility issues and standards bodies will be
discussed. What standards are most likely to be adopted in order to
bring multimedia applications to the market more quickly? Standards
such as H.261, H.243, DVI, MTP and the role of JPEG and MPEG will
be assessed.

Douglas Ehrenreich, Marketing Manager, Telcommunications Industry
     Sun Microsystems
Daniel Harple, Jr., President, InSoft, Inc.
Ken Severson, Section Manager, Multimedia Technology
     Laboratory, Hewlett-Packard Company
Representative, IBM Corporation

12:30 - 1:45 Hosted Lunch

1:45 - 3:30
TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIERS' PERSPECTIVES
The speakers will discuss their activities in support of
multimedia communications. Compression technologies, video
conferencing, the role of fiber optics, and the use of SMDS, frame
relay and ATM/SONET for multimedia communications will be
discussed. What are the network capabilities for multimedia now?
What's the process to turn multimedia applications into service
offerings? In a multimedia environment, how will landline services
be coordinated with wireless services? What are the benefits of
industry alliances? What types of multimedia services are users
requesting? When do the carriers expect acceptable revenue streams
from multimedia offerings? What services are operational now and
likely to be seen in the future?

Dennis Jennings, Director of Broadband Market Analysis
     Bellcore
John Strickland, Director, Broadband Technology
     U S WEST Advanced Communications Services
Richard Neugass, Product Manager, Video Conferencing
     MCI Telecommunications, Inc.
Steve Tabaska, Director, Systems & Hardware Development
     Wiltel
John McMenamin, Associate Director, Enterprise Services,
     Architecture & Design, New York Telephone

3:30 - 4:00 Coffee Break

4:00 - 5:15
LANs AND MULTIMEDIA COMMUNICATIONS WANs.
They will also highlight the drivers behind store-and-forward
and live video and other multimedia applications. Additional
subject matter includes: economic breakpoints of desktop video and
other applications; stored video applications such as training and
video databases; and how important standards and compatibility
issues are. More importantly, they will discuss how the successful
implementation of multimedia communications can improve response
time and cut costs and discuss the applications they expect from
the computer and communications companies.

Sam Shuler, Communications Strategy Manager
     Texas Instruments
Speaker to be Announced

For complete information and registration call TeleStrategies at
703-734-7050.

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

Subject: Wanted: Novatel PTR825 Programming Information
From: [e-mail] (Mike Brand)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 00:15:15 CST
Organization: The Keeper of Time BBS  [phone]


I have a Novatel PTR825 Portable Cellular Phone and I am looking for
the programming information. I would appreciate any infomation I could
get. Please send directly to me, and I will summarize if enough people
are interested.


Thanks,

Mike Brand - [e-mail]     The Keeper of Time BBS   1 708 389 1369

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 11 Mar 93 06:25:43 GMT
Subject: 18kf Limit Measurement


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Fred R. Goldstein) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> (Govindan Raghavan, XT-DL) writes:

> The ANSI Standard BRI (2B1Q code) goes 18,000 feet.

> Repeaters do exist.  However, they cost something over a thousand
> dollars apiece right now, so the telephone comapnies aren't exactly
> beating down a path to the vendors' doors.  Thus if you don't live
> within 18 kf of an ISDN line termination (CO or neighborhood mux,
> like a SLC-96, which handles ISDN), you're probably "SOL".

> PRI (T1) only goes 6000 feet, so they're used to repeaters. Besides,
> it's factored into the price.

Does this 18,000 ft measurement start at the CO or the neighborhood
mux (SLC-96, etc.)?

If the neighborhood mux is within the 18kf limit, are you considered
within the limit?

The reason I ask is I can see situations where the telco could
interpret the tariff to their advantage even if you are technically
within the limit.  The tariffs are usually vague about things like
this and telcos usually will do what they think they can get away with
and b.s. the customer with jargon when challenged.

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary W.
Sanders) writes:

> Ohio Bell's ISDN request was approved on Jan 20 by the PUCO (Ohio).
> In it they have a two tier pricing schedule, under 18kft and over
> 18kft.  If you're over 18Kft they bring in a T1 to your location and
> split out to the ISDN interface onsite.

> I am still waiting to find out what the pricing is really going to
> be. Will Ohio Bell offer reasonable priced ISDN service and sell a lot
> of price it out of site and sell a few? March 9 is the offical roll
> out date.

My home is served by Ohio Bell (but I work in Cincinnati Bell-land)
and I am waiting to hear if they are going to gig me for a distance
charge for my residential BRI.  Judging from my conversations with
Ohio Bell, I am the first residential customer (guinea pig) of their
new ISDN Direct Service.

The official rollout *IS* March 9th.  Here is an incomplete list of
per line charges (I left out the 60 Month rates):

PIPE:            MO-MO        12MO        36MO

Direct Line-Res        12.00        11.75        11.50
Direct Line-NonRes    12.00        11.75        11.50
CO Termination-Custom     7.10         7.10         7.10
CO Termination- NI-1     7.10         7.10         7.10
Distance Charge >18KF    26.00        26.10        26.10
EUCL - Single Pipe     3.50         3.50         3.50
EUCL - Multi  Pipe     4.15         4.15         4.15

BEARER SERVICES:
CSV, per B channel     3.00         2.60         2.60
Addt'l Call Appear ea.     2.00         2.00         2.00
Secondary DN         2.00         2.00         2.00
CSD, per B channel     8.00         7.80         7.60
Alt. CSV/CSD, per B     9.00         8.80         8.60
PSD, per B channel    85.00        80.00        75.00
PSD, D channel         6.50         6.30         6.10

NON-RECURRING CHARGES:

PIPE:
CO Termination - Custom        50.00
CO Termination - NI-1        50.00
Svc. Establishment Charge-Res.    50.00
Svc. Establishment Charge-Bus.    49.35

BEARER SERVICES:
CSV, per B channel         15.00
Addt'l Call Appear ea.         6.00
Secondary DN             6.00
CSD, per B channel        15.00
Alt. CSV/CSD, per B        15.00
PSD, per B channel           100.00
PSD, D channel            15.50

I am sure there are some minor errors in the above list, all I have is
a blurred fax.  I do not speak for Ohio Bell or Ameritech, only for
myself.


Ken Hester, Telcom Consultant    Internet: [e-mail]
Computer Sciences Corporation    Voice:    [phone]
Cincinnati, OH             Fax:      [phone]

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

From: mlksoft![e-mail]
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 00:24:42 EST
Subject: Local Phone Companies as Collection Agencies


    Local phone companies are now in the collection agency
business. When you use AT&T or dial a 1-900 number, the charges (and
errors) pop up on your local phone bill.  Have a billing dispute?
Your local company may (albeit ilegally) threaten to discontinue your
service.

    In C&P territory, the bottom of every bill states that "This
portion of your bill is provided as a service to AT&T.  There is no
connection between C&P and AT&T."  If there is NO connection between
C&P and AT&T, then what grounds do they have to discontinue your
service as long as the local portion is paid in full?  Sounds like a
connection to me.

    At one point, a local phone company supervisor explained that
C&P telephone BUYS AT&T's accounts receivable.  This means that AT&T
has been paid directly by C&P.  Since AT&T has the cash, they have no
incentive to resolve billing disputes.  C&P telephone has an incentive
to press for payment, and they have the stick (e.g. cancel your phone
service) to coerce payment.

    And yes, I know the legal rights with regard to bills in
dispute. But I also know the reality that resolving billing disputes
is going to be a double problem -- you must first keep your local
phone company from disconnecting your service, while at the same time
getting the information provider or long-distance company to correct
their error.

    It seems that being a collection agency is an inappropriate
activity for a public utility.  Otherwise, perhaps there could be
interesting arrangements between, say, a gasoline station and the
electric company.  Car repair bill in dispute?  Get your lights turned
off.

The incident that spawned this posting is long over.  It involved six
identical bills for a long distance phone call.  Six billing lines for
the same time and phone number.  Random check showed duplicate and
triplicate entries going back at least six months.  C&P says call
AT&T.  AT&T says OK, we'll credit you for the five duplicates.  I say
"but there are LOTS of these errors going back at least months -- it's
your problem, you audit my account, find them, fix them."  AT&T
replies, "OK, we'll look into it."  I estimate the overcharges and
deduct that from my C&P bill.  Seems that the problem really isn't in
AT&T's software -- it is in C&P's billing software.  AT&T keeps closing
the claim, never performs the audit, I reopen, start cycle again.  C&P
says "pay or else".  I finally wound up paying since the amount wasn't
worth another second of my time or energy.  A few other people
scrutinized their past bills and also saw the overcharges, so it
wasn't just me.

The error involved the way C&P telephone handled AT&T Reach Out
America charges.  Calls that spanned 10PM (e.g. evening and ROA
multirate) resulted in duplicates.  This occurred between June 1992
and March 1993.  C&P and AT&T were aware of the billing problem but
never made any effort to identify and reimburse customers who had been
billed in error.  And this is a company that is entrusted with a
public monopoly!



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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Voice '93 BoF
Organization: Sun, Surf 'n Sushi, San Diego, CA
Date: 11 Mar 93 06:58:12 GMT


Voice '93 is coming to San Diego March 30 - April 1.  I've received a
lot of e-mail already, so here's the public announcement: There will
be a Voice '93 Bof held at Dick's Last Resort in San Diego after the
exhibition hall closes on Tuesday March 30th.  We'll be easy to find,
just look for the table with the ash Comdial 2500 set in the middle.

Dick's is across Harbor Blvd. from the San Diego Convention Center.
Enter from the 300 block of either 3rd or 4th Streets, in the heart of
the historic Gaslamp Quarter.

Contrary to rumor, John Higdon wil not be present signing autographs
and mooing unmoderated remarks on GTE.  ;-)


Bill Cerny  <[e-mail]>   10288-0-700-FON-BILL

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

From: [e-mail] (John Kerns)
Subject: Hearing-Impaired Teletype Connectivity
Organization: Cadence Design Systems, San Diego Center
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 18:24:42 GMT


If anyone has information on connecting a teletype (TTD) for the
hearing- impaired to a PC through a modem over phone lines, it would
be much appreciated.  Since I'm posting this on behalf of someone
else, I don't have all the particulars, such as whether data needs to
be transmitted one-way or both ways.  Thanks for the help.


John W. Kerns        Cadence Design Systems
[e-mail]        San Diego R&D
{uunet|ncr-sd}!asihub!jon

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

Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 22:53:04 -0800
From: Wolfgang Rupprecht <[e-mail]>
Subject: Listening in via Call Waiting?
Organization: Wolfgang S. Rupprecht Computer Consulting, Fremont CA


This is something I found on rec.humor.  Does this work?

wolfgang

Another Tap

So, you have an enemy who talks behind your back, eh? Or, maybe you
just would like to "listen" in on your friend's conversations? Well,
if you have two phone lines and call waiting on one of them, you are in
luck. (Only one problem: your friend must also have call waiting!)

Procedure:

[1] Call up your friend with the phone you want to listen with.  When
he answers call waiting (he's already on the phone, and you are the
2nd caller), then you either sit there or say: sorry, I have the wrong
number.

[2] Next, you wait until he goes back to the other line (puts you on
hold).

[3] Then, pick up your other line and call -> YOUR <- call waiting.

[4]  Answer call waiting.

[5] Then go back to him. (Answer, and then click back.  Click -> 2 <-
times,  answer, and go back..)

[6]  Hang up your second line.

[7]  You are now on the line!

[8]  Listen and be Q U I E T ! He can hear you!

Techniques I use to prevent noise or confusion:

If you have call forwarding, turn it on and forward calls somewhere
before you start listening. If a call comes through on your call
waiting circuit, the people talking (your buddie and his pal) will not
hear anything, but after you answer call waiting and come back, they
will hear the other call hang up (two clicks).

If you don't have call forwarding, I suggest you get it if you are
going to make a habit of this, because it will become a major pain in
the ass. When your call waiting rings, you are removed from the
"listening" conversation and placed back on his hold circuit. In order
to get back on, you must answer the phone and wait for your party
(when you answer the phone, tell the guy you are in a hurry and you
have to go or you'll call him back later or something) to hang up.
When he or she hangs up, you will be back on the conversation. Then,
one of your pals will say: What was that? (because of the clicks) ...
so, try to use call forwarding if you can.

Remember: Have fun, and don't abuse it. I am not sure about it,
because I just discovered it. It is illegal (what isn't these days?)
because it is "invading privacy". I don't know if the phone company
just did not realize there was a flaw in it, or that it was planned
for line testing. I am not sure.  Have fun!


[Moderator's Note: Two observations: If you put your 'listening phone'
on call forwarding before you start this little gag, *how* do you get
through to that phone from your second line in order to activate the
call waiting on it which is so integral to your scheme? Maybe you
meant one should use *70 once the second call is up so as to prevent
any interupption. While this may *possibly* work between two calls on
the same malfunctioning switch (I've never seen or heard of such a
thing before), it certainly would not work when the caller and callee
were in different offices; I don't think it works that way at all.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #167
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17878;
          11 Mar 93 14:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09066
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:43:32 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29229
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:43:07 -0600
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:43:07 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #168

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 11 Mar 93 11:43:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 168

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Archives and the World-Wide Web (Frederick Roeber)
    Rural Network Setup (Steven Shulman)
    CT2 Digital Mobile Phones in Brisbane (Tom Worthington)
    IS-41 Roaming Question (John McHarry)
    AT&T Billing Practices --> Followup (Christopher Wolf)
    What is Telecom Gold? (Ted Koppel)
    Call Forward Don't Answer/Busy Line and Call Waiting (Mark Baker)
    Number Replacement (Vance Shipley)
    Public Service Usage for 900 Numbers (Joe Wiesenfeld)
    ATM and SS7 (Martin B. Weiss)
    Australia Privacy Document (Dave Leibold)
    Bell Canada Further Restricts Payphone Card Calling (Dave Leibold)
    Another Quiet Evening at Home (John Higdon)
    Bomb Scare (1970s) Forgot Area Code (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telecom Archives and the World-Wide Web
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CERN -- European Organization for Nuclear Research
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:40:05 GMT


I'd like to mention to everybody that the Telecom Archives are
available on the World-Wide Web, a global hypertext network.

 From the standard "Information by Subject" page, go to "Computing"
and then "telecom archive."  Currently, the archive structure seen is
merely the directory structure.  However, if people submit documents
in html (hypertext markup language), the document structure will be
visible.  This might be useful for a country code/city code list, for
example, or for files that contain references to other information,
either in the archive or elsewhere on the net.

If you are not familiar with the WWW, but would like to explore, I
would recommend the "xmosaic" X-windows web browser available by anon
ftp from ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu under Web/xmosaic.  If you use the web much
at all you'll probably want to set up your own home page, but to
start, try the CERN home page (under the "Documents" menubar item).
Its "other subjects" entry is the "information by subject" mentioned
above.

If you have image viewing software (like xv), you might be interested
in "Information by Subject" --> "Literature & Art" --> "Renaissance
Culture / Vatican exhibit."  This set of text files and jpeg images is
an "electronic exhibition" from the Library of Congress.  Xmosaic will
happily plug into other viewing software, and this makes walking
through the exhibition very easy.


Frederick G. M. Roeber | CERN -- European Center for Nuclear Research
e-mail: [e-mail] or [e-mail] | work: [phone]
r-mail: CERN/PPE, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland | home: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: My thanks to Mr. Roeber for bringing this to our
attention. The Archives (available using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu)
includes all the back issues (12 years worth!) of TELECOM Digest and
it is gradually becoming more and more accessible and easier to use
thanks to the various programs like Web, Gopher and others now avail-
able. And of course, our dialup sites have helped a lot also.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven Shulman)
Subject: Rural Network Setup
Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads).
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 10:16:50 GMT


I'm required to evaluate the feasibility of setting up a rural network
using cellular telephony as an honours project. The rural location is
not financially over-endowed and I was wondering if anyone had design
ideas on how to minimise the cost (and if so what the cost could be)
of setting up a rural network like this using GSM and cellular
telephony.

Please mail me or reply to the NET with any ideas.


Thanks,

Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Worthington)
Subject: CT2 Digital Mobile Phones in Brisbane
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 15:17:55 GMT


Telecom Australia   News Release

MEDIA INFORMATION   Tuesday 2 March 1993

TALKABOUT - WORLD'S BEST ANNOUNCED FOR BRISBANE

Telecom Talkabout, one of the world's most advanced personal
communication services, will make it's Australian debut in Brisbane
later this month, announced Telecom Australia today (Tuesday 2 March).


Mr Albert Sommer,  National Manager for Talkabout Services
Dyranda Hortle  or  Chadd McLisky   Telecom Australia
Tel: [phone] Tel: [phone]

* Talkabout is a registered trademark of Telecom Australia

ATTACHMENT A:

HOW TALKABOUT WORKS:

TALKABOUT is a personal communications service which works with
battery-powered, compact and lightweight high-quality personal
telephones.

To operate it in and around the office and home, a small private base
station is connected to the existing telephone installation on the
premises and typically would be placed discreetly on a desk or table.

Users are freed from their work station or the fixed telephone at
home, able to move around as they continue their conversations.

For public calls, there is a network of about 600 highly-visible base
stations found throughout the Brisbane metropolitan area. Host
businesses include major shopping centres, restaurants, hotels,
railway stations, fast food outlets, supermarkets, service stations
and post offices. They are also located on main shopping streets and
major roads.

The personal telephones can bc used up to a range of 100 metes away
from the base station on which particular calls are registered.

The three pencil-torch-sized batteries which power the personal
telephones provide up to 10 hours of continuous communications,
rechargeable battery packs are also available . Experience overseas
suggests the average duration of calls on this type of service is
about two minutes.

Telecom Australia, with it's network partner, GEC Plessey
Telecommunictions (GPI), enhanced overseas technology to develop a
world first with Talkabout's ability to enable the user to make and
receive calls when out and about. It achieved this by working closely
with the service's major equipment manufacturers.

Telecom's industry partners are GEC Plessey Telecommunications (GPT),
a world leder in public and business communication systems; and the
giant US specialist supplier of radio equipment, systems, components
and services, Motorola.

Talkabout is a personal communications service that meets owing
consumer demand for portable and flexible services that can be
affordably used in all the places that people want to use the phones
most often. That is the office, the home, and out and about at places
of entertainment and work.

Talkabout compliments Telecom's existing cellular mobile services
which provides for high out and about mobility needs which justifies
the associated costs.


ATrACHMENT B:

TALKABOUT PACKAGES AND PRICES:

TELECOM Australia will make Talkabout available in a range of
packages, with options to suit businesses and individuals, such as
managers and supervisors, sales and service representatives, the
self-employed and others working from their homes, for example, and
domestic users.

The personal telephone costs $499 while options include a private base
station, battery re-charger, voice-mail facility for taking messages
and communications to and from the user.

Talkabout's basic package of the personal telephone is especially
suited to people who are consistently out and about. They can respond
to a message immediately wherever they see a Talkabout sign.

Talkabout Priority teams the personal telephone with a pager for $699,
while Talkabout Plus, at $999, includes the personal telephone, a
private base stations and a battery re-charger.

A special introductory offer, available until June 30 1993, includes
free connection to the Telecom Talkabout network, as well as 60
minutes of regional peak hour calls free in the first month of use.

Around the office and home, the personal telephones are an extension
of existing telephone installations rather than an additional service,
so calls through private base stations cost the same as those made on
a conventional telephone and are included on the usual Telecom account
number for that telephone.

A $10 monthly subscription is paid for the use of the public network.
Regional calls made while out and about cost 29 cents a minute and all
out and about calls are recorded on a separate account. On this
network, 50 minutes of regional peak-hour calls everY month will cost
less than $15.

The subscription fee varies according to the communications needs of
the user.

Talkabout Access, for example, enables the user to receiYe calls or
messages when they are out and about. When the personal telephone is
registered on a base station, calls to the user's personal number will
be directed to them. At other times this option automatically stores
messages to which access can be gained whenever it suits the user.
Access costs $8 a month.


*Telecom Talkabout, Talkabout Access, Talkabout Priority, Talkabout Plus
are registered trademarks of Telecom Australia

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

Posted as a community service by Tom Worthington, Director of the
Community Affairs Board, Australian Computer Society Incorporated.

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

From: [e-mail] (McHarry)
Subject: IS-41 Roaming Question
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 8:52:05 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]


The IS-41 recommendation is emerging as a major way cellular
radiotelephone systems interconnect to handle roamers.  This allows
user profiles to be sent from the home system to the visited system
over an SS7 network.  I have a small question: Is the subscriber's
primary interexchange carrier (PIC) information sent to the visited
system, and does it honor that selection?  Related to that, does
anyone know which cellular systems lack Equal Access?  I believe any
system in which an RBOC holds an interest must implement Equal Access,
but that leaves many others, including (I think) McCaw systems that
have the option of making other arrangements.


John McHarry  ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (CHRISTOPHER WOLF)
Subject: AT&T Billing Practices --> Followup
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 09:58:41 -0500 (EST)


This is a follow-up to a post I made several weeks ago about AT&T's
Acus service, and billing problems with the system.

Seems that after I made the post here, it someone got back to the AT&T
Public Relations Department, and they spent my entire vacation trying
to reach me to make sure all my questions had been satisfactorily
answered.  Seems that while the bill may say that I will be charged
more than 10%, the computer will actually only charge 10% when it
actually adds it on.  In other words, it works out "in the end".

Queries as to why the printed warning amount is incorrect were
completely misunderstood ("...But sir, it does add the right amount!"
"Why does it print the wrong amount, then?"  "...But sir, it does add
the right amount!"  "But, why doesn't it print the right amount?"
"..But sir..."  etc etc ).  So i gave up.  Which is probably what they
wanted.

AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, they asked me several times during the
conversation if I would publish a "correction" to my previous post.  I
assume I am supposed to correct the fact that it will all work out "in
the end", as they have not fixed one of the original problems I
complained about, namely, the computer printing wrong amounts on the
warning.

Oh!  The power of E-Mail.


Christopher Wolf ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Koppel)
Subject: What is Telecom Gold?
Organization: CARL Systems Inc, Denver, Colo.
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 15:28:17 GMT


I have in front of me a business card from a gentleman in Great
Britain.  It has all of the normal stuff:

  Name
  Title, Department
  Address
  City

  Telephone #
  Telex #
  Fax #

and then a line that says:

Telecom Gold   followed by an alphanumeric string in the format:
  NN:aaannn   (where a=alpha and n=numeric)

What is it?


Ted Koppel  --  [e-mail]  or   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 09:53 CST
Subject: Call Forward Don't Answer/Busy Line and Call Waiting


There have been a couple of mentions lately about the interactions (or
lack thereof) between the Call Forward Don't Answer (CFDA) and Call
Forward Busy Line (CFBL) features and the Call Waiting (CWT) feature.
I thought I'd try to clear things up.

Keep in mind this discussion applies to 1A ESS(tm) and 5ESS(r)
Switching Systems.  I can't speak for other vendors.  Actually, I'm
not sure I can speak for AT&T either, but here goes ...

Until just recently (within the last year or so), if you had the CFDA
and/or CFBL features and CWT on the same line, CFDA would only forward
if you did not answer and were not being call waited.  In other words,
if you did not answer a second call which call waited you, the second
call would not forward.  CFBL would not do anything as CWT had
precedence.

Within the last year, some but not all RBOCs have purchased a feature
called Call Forward after Call Wait.  With this capability active in
your central office the features now interact differently.  If you do
not answer a second call which call waited you, the second call will
be forwarded to your CFDA number.  If you are already being call
waited by a second call or can not be call waited (e.g. your phone is
ringing), new calls will be forwarded to your CFBL number.  This is
much more useful for forwarding to a voice mail service.

I hope this helps.


Mark Baker - AT&T Network Systems

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

From: Vance Shipley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Number Replacement
Organization: Xenitec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 08:22:07 GMT


I spoke to someone at Bell Canada today about "Number Replacement".
This is apparently a new service they can apply to your line which
will allow outgoing CLID from your lines to show a more appropriate
number.  For example I have two lines with equiavalency at home;
555-1234 hunts to 555-1235.  I would have Number Replacement on the
second line set to 555-1234.  Thus when someone used automatic call
back, etc on a call placed from my second line they would ring in on
my first and consequently take advantage of the fact that I have two
lines.

Good News:  No monthly charge.
Bad News:   An $18.75 service charge applies. :(


Vance Shipley, [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu 11 Mar 1993 13:15:33 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Joe Wiesenfeld)
Subject: Public Service Usage for 900 Numbers


In a recent reply, the Moderator noted:

> the City of Chicago is considering a 900 number with no charge
> attached to calling it to be used for announcements to the citizens on
> a mass-calling basis. That night be a very good idea for the public
> transit system also.  PAT]

I would propose that the use of 900 numbers for this type of public
service is a poor choice.  Those of us who block 900 service would not
be able to access the public service messages.  Perhaps a new category
of phone service should be created.

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin B Weiss)
Subject: ATM and SS7
Date: 11 Mar 93 13:27:36 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


Many of the IXC's and LEC's are making significant investments in SS7
to provide new services and improved call setup time, etc.  As I
understand it, ATM defines a Virtual Circuit setup procedure as well.
How are SS7 and ATM services supposed to interact?  If the SS7 network
has to be scrapped, how will IN services be offered?


Martin Weiss   Telecommunications Program, University of Pittsburgh
Internet: [e-mail]   BITNET: mbw@pittvms

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 01:46:36 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Australia Privacy Document


I received a document regarding telecom privacy issues in Australia,
namely the one mentioned by Arthur Marsh a while ago in the Digest.

At present, it is available through the Fidonet under the file name
AUSTPRIV.ARJ which Fido nodes can file request here at 1:250/730. Size
of package is 94.5k.

The same contents are also available in the LHA compression by
requesting AUSTPRIV.LZH instead of .ARJ when making the file request.
The size came out larger at approximately 110k, however.

Thanx to Arthur Marsh for sending this file my way. I don't know when
I'll be able to submit it for the TELECOM Archives, but this is a
start.


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

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 22:15:26 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Bell Canada Further Restricts Payphone Card Calling


[from Bell News (Bell Canada, Bell Ontario division) 22 Feb 93]

Payphone fraud prompts more restrictions on overseas calling.

A continuing problem with payphone fraud to some overseas countries,
has prompted Bell to restrict calling card, credit card, or cash calls
from Millennium payphones in Bell Canada territory to China, Pakistan,
or Bangladesh.

The restriction became effective the weekend of February 13, and
applies to all Canadian, American and international calling cards.

Also affected are Visa, Mastercard, American Express and enRoute
credit cards.

Investigators continue to indicate that Bell is losing money from
calling card and recently credit card fraud.

Current figures show that a significant and growing amount of the
payphone fraud in Ontario and Quebec to China, Pakistan and Bangladesh
was with the use of stolen or counterfeit credit cards.

Over the past year, Bell has introduced a number of measures to deal
with the growing payphone fraud problem, including restricting the use
of calling cards from payphones to overseas destinations, and blocking
calling card calls from payphones or cellular phones to all 809-area
(Caribbean) countries.

Those customers, including consulates, who are frequent callers to
these three countries, are being notified by letter explaining the
situation and offering dialing options.

[end of article; content is that of Bell News]


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

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 03:07 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Subject: Another Quiet Evening at Home
Organization: Green Hills and Cows


Once again, the lack of Caller-ID has enabled me to spend a quiet,
productive evening at home. Since I could not screen out the one call
I was avoiding (from a client for whom I had no answer yet), I just
answered no calls.

I have, in essence, two numbers for talking: a published, public line
and a more private line for good clients, friends, and associates. The
first line is always answered by a machine; the second is never
answered except by me.

One evening last week, I just turned the bell off. Selective call
block (which features a recording that says, in essence, "the party
you are calling does not want to talk to you...",) is not horribly
subtle. Screening with a machine on a line that is not intended to be
machine-answered does not do the trick. No, folks, Caller-ID would
have returned the use of my phone to me this evening as nothing else
would have.

Oh, well, the work needed to be done anyway and I did not waste my
time talking on the phone.


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

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 10:32:27 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bomb Scare (1970s) Forgot Area Code


In the 1970s (middle to late?) there was a case I saw in a newspaper
(Wilmington, Del.) where an attempted bomb-scare call to a building in
New York City was received at a Cedar Grove, NJ service station.  Its
attendant replied "You've reached a service station in New Jersey.
What am I supposed to do?" and the line went dead.  Police theorized
that the caller was in New Jersey and forgot to dial the NYC area
code.  (Notice the use of "forgot to dial"; I am warning you NOT to
say "should have dialed", because out of context it could be inter-
preted to mean that the call should have been placed!)  I think a good
guess for the phone prefix for the intended and actual reception of
the call is 239.

At that time, there would be no N0X/N1X prefixes (except in 213 in
California), and no area codes 908,718,917.  Whether the call was
direct-dial, cash from a pay phone, or 0+ (and assuming the call did
indeed start in 201), you would only have to insert area code 212 to
distinguish between a call within 201 and a call to NYC.


[Moderator's Note: Ah yes, bomb threats and the early seventies Vietnam
era. It got to the point we were getting 'em once a month at the
credit card billing office in those days. The callers always claimed
to be Weathermen or some other radical group. The background Muzak
would stop and a voice on the speaker in each office would say "It is
necessary for all employees to leave the building at this time. Please
leave immediatly and wait outside until instructed to return." All the
chickens which had been roosting at their desk-nests would flutter and
cackle and carry-on as they flooded down the stairwells and out onto
Canal Street along with their fellow nesters from the Social Security
Administration's back-office on the 11th floor, for whom I think the
bomb threats were intended most of the time. A half-dozen of us (our
lives were not as valuable, perhaps?) would always be called and told
to report to the phone room and work the switchboard for the duration.
Kids in school call in bomb threats on warm spring days; so do office
workers, believe me. A couple of ours were inside jobs.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #168
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20547;
          11 Mar 93 15:35 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01723
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 12:35:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24994
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 12:35:01 -0600
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 12:35:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #169

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 11 Mar 93 11:35:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 169

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    "457 Channels and Nothin' on..." (Paul Robinson)
    Coventry Teletext Transfer Open Format (W. J. G. Overington)
    CLID vs ANI in California (Laurence Chiu)
    Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing (Craig Moynihan)
    Internet Access From Home (Chris Norley)
    DigitalLink DL551VX <-> Canoga 2240 (Mark Scannapieco)
    Need Card For Speech-Out and DTMF-In, Preferably For PC (Laird Broadfield)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 10:36:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: "457 Channels and Nothin' on..."


Back during November on the cartoon show "Tiny Toons" they did a
parody of television in general, and Cable TV in particular, with an
episode about a cable system which had 400 channels.  When I was
watching it, I was laughing about such a silly thing because it was so
obviously ridiculous.

They may have the last laugh after all.  There is a new system for
Cable-TV coming out which will offer over 500 channels.  It looks like
Bruce Springsteen underestimated capacity in the song whose name is
misquoted above.

More details later as soon as I can find out some information about
it.  But someone had better tell the local stations and the TV
networks to get their act together and make better programs or they
are going to be destroyed by this type of development.  Correction:
they will not 'be destroyed'; they will have committed mass suicide.
Broadcast television is dying from its lack of quality in writing,
script development and idea content.  And its anathema to taking risks
and making hard choices over carrying material some fringe group might
not like or be opposed to.

A lot of material appearing on Cable Television is boring or
uninteresting; it has been that way because of the large capacity of
most systems that can carry 40 channels or more, that you can't get a
large part of the audience when they can choose from 39 competitors.
Cable networks know they have to work with a fractional audience;
that's why a large number are using older material from shows which
were cancelled or have been off for a while; these shows often had
some good writing and ideas, and because they've already had a
broadcast run, are available much cheaper than equivalent material (if
it was even available.)

A subset of 'Gresham's Law' (Bad money drives good money out of
circulation) has come into effect in the broadcast industry: Bad (and
cheap) television drives good (and expensive) television off the air.
One need only look at the kind of garbage that makes the top 10
broadcast shows to know that there is a famine of ideas in network
television.  "Hill Street Blues", at the height of its effort, was
costing a million dollars an episode to make.  For that kind of money,
no cable network could come close to afford to make a show like that.
And the level of audience needed to support that kind of cost can only
be done by a Broadcast network.

Broadcast television has the money and the audience to put on shows
that require a larger audience to be profitable to do so.  But what
has been happening has been the constant 'eating the seed corn' in
which shows are being pushed out into broadcast where they have to be
instant, massive hits or are cancelled within *weeks*.  Some of the
best television programs on took two or more *years* to build an
audience: Hill Street Blues, 60 Minutes, Family Ties, Cosby, Cheers,
and others.  You can't build up a clientele who wants to come in for
good material when you keep changing the menu.  Also, I hear
complaints about good shows being 'poisoned' because the good content
of some shows were damaged by 'too many cooks spoling the broth.'
(The usual comment around my house I hear is 'They destroyed that
show, I want my "old Torkelsons" back').

A clear and obvious example of where quality will destroy lack of
quality, can be compared in the recent syndication of the new "Star
Trek: Deep Space Nine" and the cancelled CBS show "Space Rangers".  I
only watched two episodes of each, and while I thought that both shows
were valid expressions of science fiction, comparing the two shows
production values and quality of content was like looking at the
difference between AT&T Long distance and the Brazillian Telephone
Company, which is probably the only system worthy of the moniker,
"Worse than GTE."

So what has happened: since there's no guarantee a TV show will be
allowed enough time to build an audience, there is no risk taking
because the stakes are too high and the chance of failure is virtually
certain.  So what do we end up with: documentaries, talk shows and
amateur video -- all of which cost next to nothing to make, take almost
no brains to write scripts for, and provide no significant content.
(Those who think "U.S.  Best Snuff Video" represents a good use of
television should think twice.)

Next is the issue of cost.  In the past, a company would make a TV
show pilot for a small amount of money; if the pilot was successful,
the network would pay some, but not all, of the cost of the production
of the series, and the company making the show would gamble on it
staying on long enough for them to be able to put it in syndication
and make money off of it from that.  But no more; the constant demand
for 'instant success' means that no one is going to seriously be
willing to absorb the cost of production on a wghow that they know
will have almost no chance of succeeding; the networks will end up
having to fully fund, plus profit, the cost of these shows from the
beginning.  Otherwise the shows they will be able to obtain will be
reduced even further, as only large companies with huge, deep pockets
will be able to afford to make new programs.  This may even cause a
scandal if it comes out that some Japanese companies end up financing
some of these show ventures, as almost started over the issue of a
group of Japanese investors who wanted to purchase the remainder of
the Seattle baseball team.

Another problem is the continual attempts to do something or put on a
show that you have been unable to do.  Nobody can be all things to all
people.  The National Broadcasting Company has tried at least 23 times
to make a news analysis program like "20/20" or "60 Minutes" that
would be successful, and has failed miserably in every case.  It may
just not be possible in that culture to do this.  Jack Welch should
try and save General Electric some money: order NBC to not attempt any
more news analysis programs.  Which brings up another issue, that
because of their despiration to do something that they've been unable
to accomplish, has lead them to commit very serious breaches of
ethics, let alone honesty and integrity.  (This would be on the order
of Pat Townson, the Moderator, telling how people used to have problems
with AT&T's billing until they switched to the Orange Card, then we
discover the commentary was all faked.  [Note that this is an example;
I believe Mr. Townson has a higher level of ethical conduct than some of
the people working for NBC]).

The people who run these systems should be thinking long term.  Sure,
you can make money running cheap videos, talk shows or any of the
other things that local and network stations are doing.  But so can
their competitors in Cable, and since a cable channel carried
nationally or regionally on multiple systems could potentially have a
wider audience than any single broadcast station, local stations that
fall into this are risking their market share to someone else who can
provide the same thing, and perhaps do better.  (If there are 12
restaurants on one block all offering the identical thing, and one
which is offering something different, the one which is different has
the potential to steal customers who are bored of everyone else.  But
if they run a filthy counter and slovenly help, people will go back to
the other places.)  UPS washes its trucks every day, in order to show
a professional appearance.  They do deliver packages on time, which is
the main issue: but the 'spotless trucks' and 'spotless drivers'
inform people -- who may not yet be customers -- of how efficient their
operation is.

Broadcast television has the capacity to make more money than cable
networks because of its larger available audience, and its ability to
reach people who cannot afford or will not purchase Cable TV, which
means it can sometimes target people which are unreachable by other
means.  Note that more people get their knowledge of the world's
situation from the evening news than from anything else, including
magazines, newspapers, cable or radio.  This makes broadcast, and
network television, one of the last major mass communications methods
which is able to reach a significant segment of the public.

The telephone industry shows us the whole thing in a nutshell: since
the competitors to AT&T cannot compete on quality, the *only* thing
they can compete on is price.  With broadcast television dropping
quality, they have nothing to make people watch them in place of
virtually identical material on cable or on other broadcast stations.
(Someone want to tell me if there's a dime's bit of difference between
Oprah, Donohue, S.J.Raffael, Jenny Jones, Whoopi, and the next group
down from there?)  My mother complained because a cable network is
cancelling "the good movies" they used to run in the afternoon in
favor of a talk show.  Broadcast networks can compete on quality and
the money they have to spend to keep it, or they can fight for market
share against cable networks that can make the same cheap shows as
they run.  When they work on making shows based on cost alone,
broadcast will lose over cable because anything they can make cheap,
cable can do the same.

If you look at the wretched state of broadcast television, I think you
will discover that it was the 'flight to quick profit' and away from
quality, that has damaged their market share and in the long run will
damage their profitability.  Until they return to quality and
providing a much more expensive and well-done product than Cable
companies can afford to make, they will keep losing market share.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (W. J. G. Overington)
Subject: Coventry Teletext Transfer Open Format
Organization: Coventry University
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:31:54 GMT


Coventry Teletext Transfer Open Format for expressing the information
content of teletext pages with conventional computing equipment.

Issue 1.0

4th March 1993

W. J. G. Overington  Management Division,  School of Engineering,
Coventry University, Coventry, CV1 5FB   United Kingdom.
Telephone: [phone]   (within UK Telephone: [phone])
Fax:       [phone]   (within UK Fax:       [phone])
e-mail:    [e-mail]


Teletext pages are broadcast in the vertical blanking interval of some
television channels.  Teletext pages appear on a television screen in
a selection of colours, with various graphic mosaics and so on.  In
the engineering management of a teletext system, both of a working
service and within research and development, the need arises to be
able to express the information content of a teletext page using
conventional computing equipment.

The Coventry Teletext Transfer Open Format is designed to be usable in
a number of circumstances.  Files of information can be processed by
specially written software to give teletext format displays using, for
example, a vga display on a PC.  Only printable characters are used,
so that pages can also be viewed and edited using ordinary text
manipulating software which has not been designed for teletext format
usage.

The display will not, in such cases, be a teletext display, but a
knowledgeable person will be able to understand what is intended in a
straightforward manner.  It can be used easily in hand written notes,
may be expressed in documents typed on ordinary typewriters and can be
faxed.  In everyday speech, please refer to pages expressed using this
format as being in "Coventry format".  You may like to give computer
files containing information in Coventry format the suffix .ctt (from
the initial letters of the three words Coventry Teletext Transfer).
This is not obligatory but will often help file organization in a
system with many such pages, as the ready to broadcast file can have
the same name but with a different suffix.

The Coventry Teletext Transfer Open Format consists of the central
core, the simple method and the general method.

The Central Core:

Each line of text that appears upon a teletext page is expressed in
Coventry format by two lines of text, namely the text line and the
command line.  The text line is always above the command line and the
two lines are regarded as one line unit.

In analysing the meaning of the character to be placed at any one
character position of a teletext page one considers the two
corresponding characters in the Coventry format representation of the
page, namely one character from the command line and one character
from the text line.

If the command line character is any one of . ; : | then the page
character is taken to be simply the text line character as a level one
teletext character.

The four characters . ; : | are regarded as equivalent to comments.
The use of four such comment characters is so that | may be used every
five or ten character positions as desired or that ; and : may be used
every alternate fifth position.  Some typewriters do not have the |
symbol.

Here is an example.

  The snow is falling.
 ....;....:....;....:....;....:....;....:

The Simple Method:

Using the simple method one can express any level one teletext page.

Simply place the appropriate character in the appropriate place in the
command line and a space in the text line.

For example,

  Strawberries, lemons and aubergines.
 R...;....:....Y....:.G..;M...:....;....:

The commands listed below are defined.  Please note that, as
appropriate to a system intended for international usage, there is
both an English and a French influence in the choice of the command
characters.  For example, J reflects the French word jaune and U and D
the French words un and deux.

R  Red alphanumerics           r  Red mosaics
G  Green alphanumerics         g  Green mosaics
V  Green alphanumerics         v  Green mosaics
J  Yellow alphanumerics        j  Yellow mosaics
Y  Yellow alphanumerics        y  Yellow mosaics
B  Blue alphanumerics          b  Blue mosaics
M  Magenta alphanumerics       m  Magenta mosaics
P  Magenta alphanumerics       p  Magenta mosaics
C  Cyan alphanumerics          c  Cyan mosaics
T  Cyan alphanumerics          t  Cyan mosaics
A  White alphanumerics *       a  White mosaics
W  White alphanumerics *       w  White mosaics
F  Flash                       ?  Conceal display
S  Steady *                    O  Contiguous mosaics *
K  End Box                     E  Separated mosaics
I  Start Box                   Q  Escape
U  Normal height *             Z  Black background *
D  Double height               N  New background
                               H  Hold graphics
                               L  Release graphics *

                               X  Character 7/15

The commands marked * are the defaults at the start of the row of the
teletext page.

The General Method:

The general method, which can be stated as a method, but which is
still under development, and for which representations may be made, is
that the command character is a digit character and that the text
character is then also used in the procedure of deciding what
character is intended on the teletext page.  A figure 1 character in
the command line together with the same letter in the text line as
would appear in the command line for the simple method has the same
meaning as with the simple method.

For example,

 RStrawberries,YlemonsGandMaubergines.
 1...;....:....1....:.1..;1...:....;....:

has the same effect as

  Strawberries, lemons and aubergines.
 R...;....:....Y....:.G..;M...:....;....:

Clearly, for simple level one pages, the simple method is much clearer
to read when the Coventry format page is viewed by a person, whether
on a screen or a printed page.

However, the general method will allow the expression of more
complicated cases.  Where two character sets are used on the teletext
page, the Coventry format equivalent could also have figures as
commands beneath characters intended to be displayed as text
characters.  This will give an explicit indication of which character
set is to be used at the character position itself.

Consideration is also being given to using characters such as % & and
so on as command characters so that the contents of rows 25 to 31 of a
teletext page may be expressed in a .ctt file unambiguously.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: CLID vs ANI in California
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 03:47:25 GMT


I recently read an article in the {San Francisco Chronicle} which did
not appear to correct to me. I wonder if more Telecom literate readers
might comment.

The writer was reporting on the surprise of a caller who has an
unlisted number when he called a 800 number and the service provider,
addressed him by name, presumably based on his calling number and a
lookup database.

The writer went on to say after some investigation, that although
California has no CLID yet, 800 service providers can get the calling
number because 1) they are paying for the call and need it for
demographic purposes 2) although CLID is not available in CA, there is
nothing to stop the number from being sent out of state. From there
the 800 serivce provider could use a reverse lookup database to locate
the name of the caller. This was an invasion of privacy and a direct
contradiction to the idea of have an unlisted number.

This seems wrong to me.  Recent postings here have indicated that even
if the appropriate SS7 signalling is in place from CA to another
state, and the callee has CLID enabled, they do not see a number but
some message to the effect that the number is not available. I am
guessing that in the above scenario, the 800 service provider received
the number via ANI and the caller was a repeat customer who had to
give his phone number on a previous occasion to make a credit card
order or such. Thus there was a record in the database of the 800
service provider.

Comments?


Laurence Chiu   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: As you note, ANI is *not* Caller-ID although the
end results are the same. The California requirements do not pertain
to ANI -- only to Caller-ID. Out of state calls would not be part of
this requirement in any event.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig Moynihan)
Subject: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing
Organization: Balr Corporation
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 05:11:33 GMT


Can anyone explain to me why the following scenario can occur:

A phone can use an analog phone line to orignate and receive phone
calls. A modem is hooked up to this same phone line. This modem is set
answer on the third ring (S0=3). Another modem calls this modem.  The
AA light flashes on and off, but the modem does not answer.

Occasionally, the modem will answer after a hundred rings or so.

Does this behavior indicate that the modem is sensative to ring
voltage and this ring voltage is too low? Should the polarity of the
two wire phone connection have any impact on the modem answering?

Can anyone provide some general answers on why a phone would work on
this line, but a modem typically won't.


Thanks in advance.

Craig A. Moynihan   Naperville,IL
nalco@balr     ..!balr.com!nalco

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 07:50:39 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Internet Access From Home


I am interested in getting internet access capabilities from my home
computer.  How do I do that? I have a Mac IIvx. What hardware/software
will I need and who do I call to allow access and get the internet
access phone number?

Thanks in advance for any information.


Chris Norley    Internet: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: There is no single point of contact for access or
single 'internet access phone number'. For example, if the administrator
of pwfl.com okayed it, you could call into that system from home with
a terminal program for your Mac and a modem. There are numerous public
access services which connect with the internet. Some which come to
mind are the Freenet sites, Portal Communications in San Jose, CA, and
Chinet in Chicago run by Randy Suess. All you need at home is a modem
and a terminal (program). Lots of places sell or give away (depending
on circumstances) access. Check out the 'nixpub' file if it is still
being published.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scannapieco)
Subject: DigitalLink DL551VX <-> Canoga 2240
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Scannapieco)
Organization: Cornell National Computer Facility
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 21:37:44 GMT


Folks,

    I'm attempting to connect a DL with a T1 feed to a Canoga
fiber modem via a V.35. I realize a standard v.35 cable won't cut it
but my "null modem" isn't either. Here are the pin assignments I'm
using:

pins    CSU    LINE DRIVER

P-R    TDa    RDa
T-S    TDb    RDb

R-P    RDa    TDa
S-T    RDb    TDb


V-U    RCa    XTCa
X-W    RCb    XTCb

U-V    XTCa    RCa
W-X    XTCb    RCb

C-D    RTS    CTS

D-C    CTS    RTS

E-H    DSR    DTR

H-E    DTR    DSR


    Has anyone had any experience or success in doing this ?

    Any and all insight would be appreciated. Please respond to me
directly. Suggestions for a more appropriate group would also be
welcomed.


Thanks,

Mark Scannapieco   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Need Card For Speech-Out and DTMF-In, Preferably For PC
Date: 11 Mar 93 20:14:03 GMT


I need to find a card that will receive calls, accept DTMF digits, and
play speech back, with a decent API.  My preferred target is PCs, but
I'll look at anything right now.

The ability to support multiple lines, whether through several cards
or through several ports per card, is a big plus.

The name Dialogic comes to mind, but that's all I know, so contact
info would be appreciated, as would other vendors, feedback, etc.  I'm
just starting this project, so I'm looking for anything at this point.


Thanks!

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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #169
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17537;
          12 Mar 93 2:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24593
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 23:35:42 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14179
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 23:35:06 -0600
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 23:35:06 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #170

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 11 Mar 93 23:35:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 170

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Brent Whitlock)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Andrew Funk)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (John Higdon)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Tommy O'Lin)
    Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (Meg Arnold)
    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Jim DePorter)
    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (John R. Levine)
    Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada (David G. Lewis)
    Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada (Steve Forrette)
    Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada (Brad Kollmyer)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Ed Oliveri)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (John Higdon)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Jeffrey Jonas)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 19:50:24 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brent
> Whitlock) writes:

>> Neither would I.  My brother, who is also an avid reader of this
>> digest, told me that at an AM radio station for which he used to be a
>> part time DJ, they could not use IBM PC's because the broadcast tower
>> interfered with the keyboard preventing it from working properly.

> Rather than indicate any mysterious forces at work, the fact that the
> PC did not work properly simply indicates a lack of knowledge on
> someone's part concerning proper grounding and shielding. I know of a
> number of 50KW AM stations that have studios and transmitters
> co-located. They also have PCs that work just fine.

The key to the IBM PC's not working was their keyboards.  So, the
problem is, as you said, shielding.  The capacitive mechanisms of the
keyboard would not work in the environment at the radio station.
Keyboards which use a different technology than IBM's would work.


    * * * * * * --> 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

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Funk)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 01:53:53 GMT


I spoke with Debbie Matut (the pregnant WCBS-TV technician) today and
mentioned this discussion.  First of all, she says "Hi!" to everyone.

Apparently the FCC measures the RF field strength at the WTC at least
once each year.  Debbie had the same measurements done at her home.
The levels at the WCBS-TV transmitter site are extremely low!  There
is considerable shielding installed there to protect workers, as well
as shielding protecting the tourists at the other tower's observation
deck.

I've found a worthwhile charity which I'll be supporting with some of
my overtime pay -- the NY Firefighters Burn Center.  It's part of the
NYU/Cornell Medical Center, and treats victims of serious burns (not
just firefighters).  I'm waiting to receive their literature ... if
anyone wants info let me know.


Andrew Funk, KB7UV
Chair, Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society (RATS)
ENG Editor/Microwave Control, WCBS-TV Channel 2 News, New York
Internet: [e-mail]      Packet: kb7uv@kb7uv.#nli.ny.usa

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 18:45 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News


David Lesher <[e-mail]> writes:

> The Chief Moo said:

>> I have worked around dozens of 50KW stations over the past twenty-
>> five years or so and have NEVER observed my hair standing on end.
>> What nonsense!

> 4) Does he have any left to lay flat, much less stand on end?

As a matter of fact, while all of the color has left, most of the hair
is still there. Quote from my barber: "Jeez, your hair is thick!" So
in the tradition of my father and those who went before him, I have a
full head of white hair.

Believe me, if any hair was going to be standing on end at any of my
transmitter sites, I would be the first to notice. And I can prove it:
my mug shot was in the 3/7 of the {San Jose Mercury}. The picture was
taken the week before.

Neeeeah!


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


[Moderator's Note: Don't let John fool you. His picture in the papers,
like that of Ann Slanders and her twin sister Scabby Van Buren was
taken thirty years ago. :) I've heard rumors that he is bald-headed,
his hair having fallen out after working around that radiation all
these years. :)   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 07:23:39 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News


The news yesterday made mention of the type of bomb used in the WTC
disaster.  It seems that there were at least four different types of
acids, that when combined, would be able to create a blast the size of
the one that exploded there.

It was assembled in a 10x10 foot room away from the WTC and then taken
there in parts and stored in the parking garage until it was fully
assembled and placed in the van that was involved.

Now a movie company wants to make a film about it and is going to
offer money to the people who were affected by the disaster.
Unfortunately, the students who were there won't get any of this but
the movie company said that it will make sizeable donations to the
schools.


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

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 08:48:57 EST
From: adiron![e-mail] (Tommy O'Lin)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Reply-To: [e-mail]


> [Moderator's Note: .... In that Texas confrontation with Jesus Christ (at
> least that's who he says he is) ....

He claims to be Jesus Christ and says he's waiting for further
instructions from God.

Can't we find somebody who claims to be God and have them tell "JC" to
surrender peacefully?


  Tom Olin    [e-mail]    uunet!adiron!tro    [phone] Ext 638
PAR Technology Corporation * 220 Seneca Turnpike * New Hartford NY 13413-1191


[Moderator's Note: I gave him direct orders last week to surrender.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Meg Arnold)
Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada
Date: 11 Mar 93 20:24:49 GMT
Organization: SRI International


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John
Higdon) wrote:

>> Which brings us to the subject of telecommunications.  Canada's
>> telephone system and the services related to it are world class.

> From correspondence with Canadians, I have determined that the US has
> benefitted greatly for deregulation and divestiture. While Canada
> still has step equipment and multi-party lines in rural areas, that
> equipment and facility arrangement has all but disappeared in this
> country. Bell Canada has no technical superiority with regard to the
> typical service provided in the US; and frequently the reverse is
> actually the case.

 From living in Canada and working in telecommunications (for a
corporate user) in Canada, I can say that Canadian telecom is not
considered truly "world class" by many (knowledgeable) people.  My
personal residential LD rates were substantially higher than they
would have been for same distance/same length phone calls in the US
(Toronto-California for 20 minutes at 9 p.m. was once four times as
much as Buffalo-California for 20 minutes at 9 p.m., including AT&T's
calling card surcharge).

Business rates were astronomical.  For a dedicated T1 running from
Toronto to NYC, the Toronto-Buffalo link was -twice- as expensive as
the Buffalo-NYC link, even though it was -half- as long.  Not to
mention that such services as Virtual Private Networks, taken as a
given in the U.S., have only recently been tariffed forintroduction in
Canada.  At my employer, we were implementing LANs in satellite
offices across the country, but ran into a brick wall of cost when it
came to automated software distribution to those LANs from the
operating center.  Even running distributions in the middle of the
night was prohibitive.

Not to mention that telcos were often unwilling to comply with our
requests for redundant routing for contingency planning purposes, and,
in one instance, a route we had set up as redundant had been
disconnected at the CO, which we unfortunately discovered exactly when
we needed to put it to use.  I'm not saying that recalcitrant telcos
do not exist under competition, but at least you don't have to use
them!

Needless to say, the movement toward competition in Canada is strongly
supported throughout the business community -- and among knowledgable
consumers.  During the recent competition hearings, the consumers
advocacy groups opposed competition -only- if it raised local rates.
Under the recently-issued decision, a mechanism for keeping local
rates low has been set forth, quieting those fears of consumer groups.

However, the TWU's position did not really _surprise_ me...


Meg Arnold, Business Intelligence Center, SRI International
333 Ravenswood Avenue, Menlo Park, CA  94025.
phone: [phone]    internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim DePorter)
Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls
Organization: Supercomputer System Division, Intel
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 23:41:43 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> This brings up an interesting question.  What would happen if such a
> loop were set up.  For example, suppose phone A forward to phone B,
> which forwards to phone C, which forwards back to phone A.  Assume no
> number of calls that can be forwarded at one time limits are in place.
> (i.e. assume that if X just forwards to Y, that there is no limit of
> how many calls can be forwarded, except that once Y runs out of trunks
> in the hunt group callers will get a busy signal).

With the call forwarding that I have the number you are forwarding to
has to answer; if there's no answer or a busy there'll be no
forwarding. If C tries to call A, C is already off hook and the call
will not be completed (a busy). Sounds easy to me.  Is there different
forms of call forwarding where you don't have to answer? There have
been times that I've wanted to call forward to a cabin/house/etc for
the weekend, but since I'm not there I can't answer the phone to
complete the forward.


jimd


[Moderator's Note: I thought all call forwarding routines allowed for
the conditions you describe by entering the number *twice*. Dial it,
and if BY or DA, dial it again to confirm. IBT has always had it that
way.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 11 Mar 93 01:36:31 EST (Thu)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> If we are talking about chains that run forever, then
> the important thing is to stop the process when a previously visited
> number is found again in the chain. ...

It is my impression that the standard technique used to prevent
call-forwarding loops is to allow only one unsupervised call per
forwarding number at a time.  Once a call either supervises or is
abandoned, then more calls can be forwarded unless the switch is
programmed (as it usually is) to arbitrarily restrict the number of
forwarded calls per forwarding number.

Trying to detect forwarding loops by recognizing the incoming number
seems unlikely to work in the absence of 100% perfect SS7 signalling,
since without that there's no reliable way to tell that two incoming
calls are in fact the same call looped around.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 14:38:47 GMT


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

> I only had a very small question that's been bugging me for a while
> now: Is there ANY way to call 800 and 900 numbers located in the U.S.
> from Canada?

> [Moderator's Note: 900 numbers, no.  800 numbers, maybe, depending on
> if the owner of the 800 number wants to receive international calls
> and has had the line configured to do so.    PAT]

If it's an AT&T 800 service, there are additional service offerings
which allow inbound international 800 calls from Canada and the
Caribbean.  I'm not sure of the exact tariff -- whether they have to be
purchased in addition to domestic 800, or can be purchased separately.


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada
Date: 11 Mar 1993 14:45:58 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> I only had a very small question that's been bugging me for a while
> now: Is there ANY way to call 800 and 900 numbers located in the U.S.
> from Canada?

> [Moderator's Note: 900 numbers, no.  800 numbers, maybe, depending on
> if the owner of the 800 number wants to receive international calls
> and has had the line configured to do so.    PAT]

AT&T ReadyLine numbers (the ones that route to a POTS line for $20 per
month) have Canadian calling enabled by default.  I think most AT&T
plans now have Canada turn on, unless the subscriber specifically
requests that it be disabled.  My experience with other carriers is
that they charge extra for Canadian access.

This brings up an interesting issue: What happens with calls to Canada
with respect to 800 portability?  Will the local telcos in Canada be
connected to "the big database" and do ten-digit lookups themselves?
Or will this be done at the gateway point into the US?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brad Kollmyer)
Subject: Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada
Date: 11 Mar 1993 09:33:22 GMT
Organization: CERFnet Dial n' CERF Customer Group


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

> now: Is there ANY way to call 800 and 900 numbers located in the U.S.
> from Canada?

You can if you use a long distance service that offers this option in
Canada. When I lived in Vancouver I used CamNet to dial US only 800
numbers. They would charge me for the call though.


Brad

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Oliveri)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 18:36:59 GMT


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

> You would think maybe the US Post Office would have something as
> simple and common as a fax machine ...

I don't see a smiley, but you must be joking.  You expect the USPS to
employ the very same technology that will eventually help put them out
of business?

On the same note, I wonder how long it took Western Union to start
using telephones?


Ed Oliveri, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: WUTCO and AT&T fought back and forth about patents
and one thing or another until early in this century. Then for about
seventy years they were best of buddies. WUTCO in fact was the
original 'charge it to your phone bill' service: For seven decades at
least (maybe still today?) we could send telegrams by phoning the
local telegraph agent (invariably at the phone number xxx-4321) and
charging it to our phone bill. From pay stations, the instruction card
said instead of calling 4321 to 'tell the operator to connect you with
Western Union' ... the idea being when you had finished dictating the
telegram, the agent would flash for the operator to come back on the
line and tell the operator to have you deposit the proper amount of
money in the phone. Telegrams could also be sent 'collect', but unlike
phone calls, WUTCO let you read the message first, *then* decide if
you wanted to accept it and pay for it. If not, it went back to the
sender for payment. The two giants fought and squabbled over TWX and
Telex in the 1960's; WUTCO took over TWX but continued to operate it
out of the Bell central offices.

The Post Office has made some concessions to modern technology. They
have an agreement with MCI Mail and ATT Mail (as well as Western
Union's 'Mailgram' program) to accept email on printers, stuff it in
envelopes and mail it at the post office nearest the delivery address.
The Post Office is involved in faxes, as another article in this issue
will note, but it is poorly advertised.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 00:51 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?
Organization: Green Hills and Cows


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

> You would think maybe the US Post Office would have something as
> simple and common as a fax machine ...

Expecting the US Post Office to have a fax machine would be the
equivalent of expecting the village smithy to have a tire changing
machine. The fax machine will probably be largely responsible for the
ultimate demise of snail mail. After all, why spend $.29 when you can
spend less, get instant delivery (or even delivery at all), and get
conveniently billed for the transactions? If you need to send physical
documents, then use one of the DEPENDABLE services, rather than taking
the crap shoot with good ol' USPS.

No, I am not surprised that the post office lacks a fax.


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

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 10:44:52 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology


> I called the Maryland zip code information line and told the person on
> the other end that I had five addresses I wished to find the ZIP+4
> for.  I asked if it would be easier for him if I faxed the list to him
> and called him back later.  I was told, with a chuckle, that they
> don't have a fax machine.  You would think maybe the US Post Office
> would have something as simple and common as a fax machine ...

Perhaps one of the best kept secrets of the U.S. Postal Service is
that they have a public fax service called INTELPOST.  Not all post
offices have it.  You can fax documents to another fax machine, or
have it mailed after being faxed across the country or even to other
participating countries.

I agree that it's archaic that not all post offices have FAX machines
for internal use, but the Post Office is an archaic organization.
It's probably cheaper for them to add their internal correspondences
to the regular truck/plane deliveries instead of paying a phone bill.

Please don't take this as an invitation for Post Office bashing.  Many
good and intelligent people are employed by the Post Office, some of
whom are friends.  The PO has real challenges such as dealing with
unions and the caliber of the typical worker.  They do a good job most
of the time, just like the phone company :-)


[Moderator's Note: The trouble is, their labor disputes take very
vicious turns:  consider Royal Oak, Michigan and Edmund, Oklahoma as
two examples. Crazy person gets angry at supervisor, comes in with gun
and shoots everyone. We've had a few 'post office massacres' in recent
years and there are lots of angry and demoralized people working for
the US Postal Service. Its a sad state of affairs.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #170
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21033;
          12 Mar 93 4:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03034
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 01:25:57 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28374
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 01:25:16 -0600
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 01:25:16 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #171

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 12 Mar 93 01:25:15 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 171

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Centel and Sprint Merger Complete (TELECOM Moderator)
    Telecom in Brazil, BAD? (Cris Pedregal-Martin)
    FBI Provides Update on Telemarketing Fraud (Nigel Allen)
    U.C. Berkeley Short Courses on Broadband Communications (Harvey Stern)
    DS0 Test Equipment Advice Wanted (Norman Gillaspie)
    Seek History on Computerized Message Switching (Jim Haynes)
    Simple Project Ideas For K-2? (Sue Miller)
    Disabling *70 (Francis J. Park)
    Call Waiting Disabling (Rob Henry)
    Non Phone Things on Phone Bills (Jeffrey Jonas)
    AT&T Free Time Rewards (Randall K. Smith)
    900-Number FCC Rules in Telecom Archives (James Olsen)
    Thanks to Those Who Replied (Eric Miller)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 00:30:41 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom>
Subject: Centel and Sprint Merger Complete


The merger between Centel and Sprint which has been going on for a
while now was completed earlier this week. There is no more Centel as
such.  Some parts of Centel were absored into Sprint and are now known
as Sprint ... other parts, such as the cellular operations will
henceforth be known as Sprint Cellular Services.  So now, the two
local telcos here in Chicago are Illinois Bell and Sprint (Centel has
a very small wedge on the far northwest side of the city known as the
Chicago-Newcastle CO plus the suburbs of Des Plaines and Hillary's
home town of Park Ridge, IL.)


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (Cris Pedregal-Martin)
Subject: Telecom in Brazil, BAD?
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 15:52:53 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Greetings.  I couldn't help but smile on reading Mr. Robinson's
([e-mail]) remarks on cable TV; he made several interesting
points.

But more on a telecom side, I have a comment and a question.  The
comment, on his saying:

> [...] the difference between AT&T Long distance and the Brazillian
> Telephone Company, which is probably the only system worthy of the
> moniker, "Worse than GTE." [...]

I haven't been to Brazil recently, but I used to go there fairly
often.  There used to be a two-tiered system (similar to the US in Ma
Bell's time): Telebras/Embratel, handling LD and communications
abroad, and regional companies, at the state level, like TeleRJ
(RJ=Rio de Janeiro), TeleSP (SP=Sao Paulo), etc.

In the wealthier part of the country (the Southeast, i.e., RJ, SP,
etc.), the system worked very well; I can't tell about the rest of the
country as I haven't been there.  IMHO, the service was on par with
that of Western European countries such as France, Germany, and the
UK; it was clearly better than Spain's or Italy's.  This is when I
last looked, four or five years ago.

The technology might not have been dazzling (e.g., pulse instead of
tone), but it worked (high call completion rates, good intercepts,
very few wrong numbers).  And, also, rates were very cheap (compared
with other state-owned, third-world rates such as neighboring
Argentina's. Problems associated with wider-ranging (political,
economical) issues, of course, existed: sometimes bad customer service
(labor conflict), use of tokens instead of coins (inflation).  And
there were some pearls too, like automated collect calls (even within
a city); I think one dialled 9+number and two synchronized recordings
would come on, opening a short window to say one's name (or whatever);
hanging up meaning non-acceptance of charges. There were also calling
cards (charge, like in the US); all these things at least since the
late 70s.

I had a couple of chances to meet with some of the members of the
technical staff of the research lab of Telebras (in Campinas, SP).
These were people with PhDs from top notch schools in the US and
Western Europe (mostly France and the UK).  In the mid-80s they were
well on their way to achieving vertical integration in the production
of VLSI (they were negotiating installation of a plant, but with
technology transfer).  Since I was even less telecom- literate than I
am now, I couldn't say how much of the telecom technology in use was
being produced locally, but it was clear that these people were not
your usual turn-key systems buyers.

There's other related things, like Brazil's forays into communication
satellites and the like; my recollections are way too vague on that.

My "comment" (more bordering on an essay, sorry) is not very current,
but I just felt I had to challenge a stereotype ...

Now, the question: I am sure there are readers of c.d.t. qualified to
tell us more on the current telecom situation in Brazil.  Any takers?
I am sure it will be an interesting topic!


Regards,

com saudades do Brasil,

Cristobal Pedregal Martin     [e-mail]
Computer Science Department   UMass / Amherst, MA 01003

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: FBI Provides Update on Telemarketing Fraud
Organization: Echo Beach


Here is a press release from the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation.
I do not work for the FBI; I just find interesting press releases on
other systems and post them on relevant newsgroups.

 FBI Provides Update on Telemarketing Fraud
 To: National and Business Desks
 Contact: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Press Office,
          202-324-3691

   WASHINGTON, March 10 -- FBI Director William S. Sessions, said
today that 210 persons have been arrested in 16 states in connection
with "Operation Disconnect," a nationwide crackdown on telemarketing
fraud.  FBI Agents have conducted 63 searches and have seized over $4
million in bank accounts, weapons, computers, cars, boats, Rolex
watches, jet skis and other items.

   "The best method of combatting telemarketing fraud is an educated
consumer who recognizes it as fraud before falling victim to it,"
Sessions said.  To help consumers the FBI offers the following tips to
avoid becoming a victim of telemarketing fraud:

   1) Be skeptical of offers that sound too good to be true; they
usually are.

  2) Resist high pressure sales tactics.  Don't allow yourself to be
hurried into a decision.

  3) Do not give your credit card number or checking account informa-
tion to anyone over the telephone unless you know with whom you are
dealing.

  4) Don't make any purchase or investment you don't fully understand.
Don't spend or invest more than you can afford.

  5) Companies should be willing to provide their name, address, phone
number and references.  If not, be skeptical. Verify this information
before making a purchase.

   6) If you are skeptical about a company, check with the Better
Business Bureau, your State Attorney General's office, or the local
consumer protection agency before you make a purchase.

   7) Report incidents of telemarketing fraud to your local Better
Business Bureau, your state, or local law enforcement authority or
your nearest FBI field office.  You may also contact the National
Fraud Information Center at 1-800-876-7060 for information concerning
telephone frauds.

                             ---------

Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario
416-629-7000/629-7044

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: U.C. Berkeley Short Courses on Broadband Communications
Date: 12 Mar 1993 01:47:16 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


U.C. Berkeley    Continuing Education in Engineering
Announces Two Short Courses on Communications Technology

SONET/ATM-Based Broadband Networks: Systems, Architectures and
Designs
(May 17-18, 1993)

It is widely accepted that future broadband networks will be based on
the SONET (Synchronous Optical Network) standards and the ATM
(Asynchronous transfer Mode) technique.  This course is an in-depth
examination of the fundamental concepts and the implementation issues
for development of future high-speed networks.  Topics include:
Broadband ISDN Transfer Protocol, high speed computer/network
interface (HiPPI), ATM switch architectures, ATM network
congestion/flow control, VLSI designs in SONET/ATM networks.

Lecturer: H. Jonathan Chao, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Brooklyn
Polytechnic University


Gigabit/sec Data and Communications Networks
(May 19-20, 1993)

This short course provides a general understanding of the key
protocols and networking elements needed to design and implement
gigabit local area and wide area networks, including the protocols and
implementations for HiPPI, SONET, ATM, and FCS.

Lecturer:  William E. Stephens, Ph.D., Director, High Speed Switching
and Storage Technology
Research, Bellcore Applied Research


For more information (complete course descriptions, outlines, instructor
bios, etc.) contact:

Harvey Stern  U.C. Berkeley Extension/Southbay
800 El Camino Real Ste. 150  Menlo Park, CA 94025
Tel: [phone]   Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Norman Gillaspie)
Subject: DS0 Test Equipment Advice Wanted
Organization: Netsys Inc.
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:34:19 GMT


I am looking for a good general purpose piece of test equipment for
checking DS0 rate channel bank cards,DDS lines etc. I would like to
have a piece of equipment that most carriers such as WillTel,Pac-Bell
etc would use and be familiar with. Any recommendations?


Regards,

Norman Gillaspie

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 12:12:29 -0800
Subject: Seek History on Computerized Message Switching
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz


I'm thinking of writing a piece about the transition from punched
paper tape and relays to computer-based switching of messages.  I'm
dimly aware of some machines designed for the purpose: G.E.s Datanet
30, and IBMs 7740.  Believe Collins Radio was in on it too.  Anyway
I'd like to hear from people who have something to say on the subject,
even if it's just knowing when a particular old-technology system was
replaced by a new one.

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

From: [e-mail] (Sue Miller)
Subject: Simple Project Ideas for K-2?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 21:39:00 GMT


I've been given an assignment to come up with a 1/2 hour "seminar" for
K-2 (5 - 8 yrs) age kids on how telephones work for a science fair.

Is there anyone out there who has done this sort of thing and who
wouldn't mind sharing some ideas with me?  I do know how telephones
work but I would like to come up with an interesting demo or hands-on
thing that the children could do.  Other than cups and string.

Any ideas or experiences gratefully received!

Thanks in advance.


Sue Miller   [e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Francis J Park)
Subject: Disabling *70
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 08:04:27 GST
Organization: Homewood Academic Computing, Johns Hopkins U, Baltimore, Md


I am dealing with a highly annoying roommate who is fond of turning on
*70 to disable call waiting when he calls out voice.

Is there any way to call the C&P business office, or perhaps TSPS
Engineering, to disable the feature, specific to my line?  The few
times I'm using a modem I can live without using the *70 feature.  I
also want to be able to kill 1170, the rotary dial equivalent (which
also works for DTMF) which does likewise.

Please help.


Francis Park, Johns Hopkins Univ '94, Dept/History  [e-mail]
The Baltimore Chainsaw Massacre BBS:410-467-2617, WWIVLink @14060


[Moderator's Note: All I can suggest is that you get on an exchange
which does not have the *70 feature, if there are any in your community.
I know there are people in a couple northern suburbs of Chicago with
older ESS generics who would love to be able to use *70 if only it
were available to them. I take it you pay the phone bill and control
how the instrument is used ... why not just tell him to quit it?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Henry)
Subject: Call Waiting Disable?
Date: 12 Mar 1993 12:11:04 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Rob Henry)


Could someone please mail me the code to turn off call waiting for one
phpne call on a pulse dial phone?


Thanks alot,

Rob


[Moderator's Note: *If* the feature is available in your CO, then the
code from a rotary dial phone is either 1170 (hear tone spurts and
continue dialing) or just '70' (wait for timeout, hear tone spurts and
continue dialing.) If dialing 1170 or 70 does not work and you get
either a reorder tone or 'call cannot be completed as dialed' then
your CO is not equipped for this. If it works, good for you. As soon
as you replace the receiver, the line will return to its normal
status.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 11:04:33 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas)
Subject: Non Phone Things on Phone Bills


> The problem that is left is that if a slimy IP charges you for
> something that legitimately you should not have been charged for, and
> you cannot get the IP to reverse the charge, the balance stays on your
> account and then is reported to Equifax as a deliquent balance. Then
> see if you can get new phone service established in a new
> residence ... not likely.

That's a frightening thought, but denial of ANY credit or accounts can
be based on incorrect or fraudulent information be it credit cards or
store accounts.  Phone accounts are not unique in this risk, which is
why people are getting quite aware and concerned about the credit
reporting agencies.

In the business world, Standard and Poors and Moody's rate companies
and rate their creditworthiness.  A company's ability to borrow money
and issue debit/bonds depends on these ratings.  I suppose they try to
work on solid fact only, but the slightest problem with their credit
rating causes very unpleasant repercussions.  I guess that's why most
stockholder's reports have a disclaimer that pending legal action
against the company is not expected to negatively impact their rating
or earnings -- just like a bad bill, they're trying to shrug off the
negative effects of bill collectors.

> It still boggles my mind that the second most powerful collection
> agency (referring to the collective Phone Company) in the country can
> be used by any patch of slime to do what they wish. I think the whole
> concept of "putting the charge on the phone bill" for any service
> other than phone company charges is insane. I can't use $15 worth of
> stamps on a package to buy a compact disc mail order, I can't put my
> grocery charges on to my gas bill, and I can't pay for pool
> maintenance on my water bill. If IPs can use the telco billing
> procedures, why can't I order Chinese food for delivery and put *that*
> on my phone bill ...

While I want to agree with you, there's a contradiction.  Before
divestiture, the phone bill was only for phone service: rental/leasing
of the equipment and the service provided and used.  Everything was
originated and operated by the phone company.  They originated all the
information.

Post divestiture, the idea of 'phone services' has expanded into
'information services'.  You can call several different places for
directory information.  Certainly you can agree that calling somebody
to look something up for you is a service that requires payment above
and beyond the cost of the call.  You can pay for the service by a
separate billing arrangement, such as a credit card.

Ah, but if "THE" phone company can bill you directly for directory
assistance and any other must bill you separately, that's an unfair
home ground advantage, so the billing was opened and made available
for all.

I agree that many places are abusing the definition of what
constitutes phone service.  Renting a phone is reasonable.  But
ordering the paper pads for phone messages, pens and pencils?

Perhaps there's an analogy between the phone system and the postal
service.  Both are "common carriers" that deliver packages but not the
content.  Paying postage on a letter gets it delivered, but says
nothing about ownership of the contents.

The Post Office can act as a billing agent by allowing me to send the
parcel COD (Cash On Delivery) where you must pay for the contents of
the box BEFORE opening the box and examining the contents.  If I send
you a box, you're not expected to pay for it unless it's solicited.
But here's where the analogy breaks down: by placing the call, you're
soliciting the information.  Is a puzzlement!


Jeffrey Jonas   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: As mentioned yesterday, long before there was any
900 or 976 service, there were 'charge to your phone bill' services,
although not as many, and certainly none that were naughty. Western
Union allowed telegram charges to be placed on the phone bill as did a
company called Postal Telegraph. If at a pay station, the telco
operator was flashed to come in on the line and collect the amount
specified by the telegraph agent. Another long time system called FTD,
or Florists Telegraph Delivery delivered flowers anywhere in the USA
via wire to a local florist (in the town of delivery); these charges
could be put on a business or residence phone bill for many years.
This was not something that came up at divestiture except for the
growing number of such services, the automated 900 billing versus the
manual billing where the agent told the telco operator how much to
collect or write the ticket for, etc, and the nature of the services
provided.  All that changed was the use of 900/976 in lieu of a manual
billing ticket in the same way that 800 replaced 'Enterprise' and
'Zenith' numbers by automating the process of automatic reverse charge
or 'collect' calling.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Randall K. Smith)
Subject: AT&T Free Time Rewards
Organization: Space Physics, UW - Madison
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 19:30:44 GMT


The Free Time promotion sounded too good to pass up, so I called and
tried to sign up for it.  But, unfortunately, it's a "targeted"
promotion and if you're not one of the targeted few, it's no go.
(According to the person I spoke to, your account will be flagged if
you were selected, and if the account isn't flagged, you can't sign
up.)

Oh well ... worth a try, I guess!


Randy Smith    [e-mail]

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

Subject: 900-Number FCC Rules in Telecom Archives
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 09:55:15 -0500
From: James Olsen <[e-mail]>


For inclusion in the Archives, I have submitted the full text of the
FCC's 'Interstate 900 Telecommunications Services' rulemaking order,
as published in the Federal Register on November 1, 1991 (56 FR
56160).

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Miller)
Subject: Thanks to All Those Who Replied
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 14:29:35 GMT


Thanks to those of you who sent me information on T1 cards for the ISA
bus.  I unfortunately didn't give enough info on my application, but
was able to find what I needed anyway.

I needed a full 1.536 Mbit/second signal as this is a Video on Demand
application.  This precluded several of the suggestions for cards
which were essentially voice only solutions.  I finally found a card
from a company called Niwot Networks in Boulder.  It seems to be
exactly what I was looking for.


Anyway, thanks again.

Eric Miller

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #171
******************************











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22421;
          12 Mar 93 4:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16788
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:01:46 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14235
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:01:11 -0600
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:01:11 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #172

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 12 Mar 93 02:00:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 172

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing (Bob Longo)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (John Higdon)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Jim Haynes)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (John M. Sullivan)
    Re: Telephone Express/Penny Express (Klaus Dimmler)
    Re: Telephone Express/Penny Express (Telephone Express Customer Support)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Guy Hadsal)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Mark Williams)
    Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (James Borynec)
    Re: Payphone Records in WTC Case (Steve Forrette)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 22:24:54 GMT
From: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 22:24:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Craig
Moynihan) writes:

> Can anyone explain to me why the following scenario can occur:

> A phone can use an analog phone line to orignate and receive phone
> calls. A modem is hooked up to this same phone line. This modem is set
> answer on the third ring (S0=3). Another modem calls this modem.  The
> AA light flashes on and off, but the modem does not answer.

> Occasionally, the modem will answer after a hundred rings or so.

    One problem I've noticed with most modems is that they are
easily confused if they are receiving data on the RS232 port (or thru
the computer bus) while the line is ringing.  We often want to be able
to call a system that has a modem and terminals connected to a single
serial port.  If there is data being sent to the terminals (and the
modem, which is then in the command mode) when the line rings, the
modem will often answer for a very short time, then go back on hook.


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: Bob Longo <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing
Date: 11 Mar 93 19:55:31 PST
Organization: Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Craig
Moynihan) writes:

> Occasionally, the modem will answer after a hundred rings or so.

> Does this behavior indicate that the modem is sensative to ring
> voltage and this ring voltage is too low? Should the polarity of the
> two wire phone connection have any impact on the modem answering?

I would guess that your computer (or whatever the modem is connected
to) is not raising the proper signals (i.e. DTR) for the modem to
answer.


Bob Longo ([e-mail])  Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines   Los Angeles, CA

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 18:34 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!


> [Moderator's Note: We've had the 'surname once, first name indented'
> style in many of our suburban directories for a few years now, along
> with the businesses listed separately.

Yes, after I naively posted my message, I was informed by more
knowledgable collegues that this "split white pages; surname once" is
a very common midwest format. It is sort of the thing you find in
Kansas, Nebraska -- all the fly-over states. Apparently it is also in
Chicago.  And now, unfortunately, it is here. I have already expressed
my displeasure with Pacific Bell.

> In a consolidated list, someone trying to find 'John Higdon and
> Associates' would not find it but they would find John Higdon and
> assume it to be one and the same, which of course is what you want,
> i.e. you have residence service and get to conduct business on that
> line.

Except for the fact that in my case, the name of my business is not
related in any way to my own name. And it is definitely listed in the
business section; after all, I have more business service (at my
business location) than residence service at my residence. I mention
this to emphasize that I have no investment whatsoever concerning how
my residence lines are listed. In fact, the one simple listing is
there for the convenience of people who which to contact me on a
PERSONAL basis and may have no other way of getting my number.
Otherwise, it would not be listed at all. It has no effect on my
business.

> But under the new system, if I am looking for a BUSINESS in San Jose
> called 'John Higdon and Associates' I will find nothing. It does not
> occur to me to check in the residence listings, because after all, I
> am trying to reach a business, or at least that's what I was told you
> were running.

But this has a reverse problem. Shortly after receiving the new
directory, I tried looking up a person whom I knew to be listed. It
was not in the book. So I called (at $.25) directory assistance who
gave me the number. Why was it not in the book? It seems that for some
reason or another, he has BUSINESS service. Sure enough, there in the
damn business section was his listing -- a simple name and address.

> This is a very clever ploy by telco and a perfectly legal, perfectly
> logical way of organizing their directory

It may be legal, but it is certainly not logical. Telephone service is
telephone service. The artificial categories of "business" and
"residence" form a quasi-political hack designed to subsidize one
service with another (or in more modern times to screw one category of
customer more than another). I strongly resent having midwestern
nonsense contaminating what has worked just fine in California for
countless decades.

> ... but it has resulted in many a small time, one person
> operating-from-home business man being forced to pay for business
> service ('but why would you want to be listed in the business section,
> sir? are you running a business? well in that case you need a business
> phone line ...')  PAT]

Oh, really! I am sure that all of those BBS operators in SWBT
territory who are being given the shaft with the threat of business
service will be heartbroken that their modem lines are not in the
"business" section of the directory!

What I suspect has happened here is that the new directory contractor
is midwest-based and just assumed that Californians would put up with
the same silly-style directories that are issued to the "great
heartland".

Phooey!


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 11:10:55 -0800
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books are Here


On this side of The Hill, Pac Bell has been running ads in the local
paper for several days -- picture of a new phone book in a plastic bag
 -- text to the effect that it's NOT that time yet; new phone books
aren't due out until October; if you get a new phone book now it's not
the genuine article, so don't throw away your old one.  I guess this
means somebody is distributing phony phone books.

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

From: [e-mail] (John M. Sullivan)
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!
Organization: Geometry Center, Univ. of Minnesota
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 18:49:34 GMT


Minneapolis White Pages from US West have had separate business
listings for two years now (first in the front of the book, now in the
back).  Apart from questions of why this is beneficial for the phone
company, I find it very convenient.  Especially when looking for a
business it's nice not to have to wade through the rest of the
listings.  (Our's is only about 20-25% business listings.)

On another note, the newspaper said a couple of weeks ago that US West
is planning to introduce Caller ID here, maybe by the end of the year.


John [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Klaus Dimmler)
Subject: Re: Telephone Express/Penny Express
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 19:58:05 GMT


Telephone Express is my long distance service. In addition to long
distance they provide Internet access services. There address is
[e-mail].  Perhaps they can answer this question directly.

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

From: [e-mail] (Telephone Express Customer Support)
Subject: Re: Telephone Express/Penny Express
Organization: Community_News_Service
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 21:08:27 GMT


We're Telephone Express, and you're right. Your first ten minute call
is only one cent, and after ten more calls, your next call is only one
cent -- within the contiguous 48 states. The program allows you to try
us without having to switch long distance carriers. It is currently
offered in Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona.

We also offer a full line of long distance products for business and
residential customers on a subscribed basis. You probably have not
heard of us because we're new to the Arizona market.

If you have any more questions, you can send e-mail to [e-mail]
or call 1-800-748-1748. Telephone Express also offers Internet
services. For more information on this call 1-800-748-1200.

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 09:02:09 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager


I am suprised your paging/cellular vendor hasn't been bombarbing you
with pager/cellular business "applications".  My favorite is the
"alpha" pager where you recieve actual text messages, or the new
"wireless" Apple Newton's and HP Palmtop text/file messages.  Really
*neat* stuff coming down the wireless "pike".


Guy

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Date: 12 Mar 1993 04:16:59 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> The monthly rates on pagers are sure a lot better than the
> airtime use on cellular phones.

I recently got a pager, and was surprised at how cheap the service has
gotten.  I have service from PacTel Paging, and for $21 a month, I get
coverage throughout WA, OR, CA, and AZ.  This is for a display pager.
Local coverage only is $9 a month.

> Now and then I have to travel outside the coverage are of the
> system.  It would sure be great if the various pager companies would
> set up a co-op where I could tell my pager company I'm going to be
> somewhere for a couple weeks and they'd give me a telephone access
> number for that area.

Unfortunately, this is not feasable, as far as I can tell.  Before I
moved to PacTel, I was with Telepage Northwest for a couple of months.
I asked them about coverage in California, and their solution was to
go to a SkyPager at $60 per month plus a per-page charge with no
allowance.

What I thought I could do is find a paging company in California that
operated on the same frequency as Telepage Northwest, and sign up for
service with them, independantly of my service here.  Even if this
were possible, the total bills would have been more than what I'm
paying now, and I would not have had as much coverage.

In any event, at least in the calling around that I did, most paging
companies have the frequency they use reserved nationwide.  So, if
that particular company does not service a particular area, and in the
absense of any sharing arrangement, their frequency is just not in use
there.  PacTel works well for me because they have a presence through-
out the West.

> To help those of us that occasionally travel, it'd be great to
> have "communications stores" in airports.  They'd offer pagers and
> cellular phones for rent while you're in that city.  I've seen (as I
> recall) car rental companies that are renting cellular phones, but
> have generally not seen pager rental.

What I think would be a good idea is for the paging companies that are
affiliated with SkyPage to rent SkyPagers on a short-term basis as a
service to their customers.  So, when you're in-town, you use your
regular local pager, and when you're out of the area, you pick up a
SkyPager for a nominal daily fee.  They could even automatically
forward any pages from your regular number to the SkyPager.

> We intend to utilize the paging network in one of our broadcast
> transmitter control systems.  On an alarm, the system would dump
> transmitter parameters to the on call tech's pager (alphanumeric).

What about using paging to get data TO remote equipment?  Are there
any devices that are pagers with an RS-232 port, instead of a display?
This way, you could send (short) commands to remote locations, without
requiring a phone line be present.

Also, why is there a delay in the delivery of pages?  I can understand
when the system may get busy during the day, and pages are stacked up
in the queue, but even in the middle of the night, it can take upwards
of a minute for a page to be delivered.  Sometimes, they come almost
instantly, then just a moment later, take almost a minute.  There's no
way that the queue was empty, then suddenly built up to a big backlog,
all of a sudden in the middle of the night.  Why are pages not just
sent out immediately?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: 12 Mar 1993 05:44:56 +0000 (GMT)
From: [e-mail] (Mark Williams)
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Organization: Texas Christian University


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

> [e-mail] (jack lowry) writes:

>> will probably work for you.  I think that there are several other
>> companies offering nationwide service, and some local companies (like
>> PacTel Paging, I think) can offer service in more than one metro area
>> on the same pager.

> Personally, I would think that a cellular phone would be a necessity
> nowadays as a supplement to a pager rather than a replacement for it.

I have PacTel service in Texas.  It's $12.95 a month for a Motorola
Bravo Plus (some more-than-reasonable quantity of stored messages
timestamped) with coverage all over the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex.
It's an additional $5.00 per month to pick up all the major urban
areas of Texas (Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Midland/Odessa,
Beaumont, Abilene, El Paso, etc.) and many interstate highway areas
connecting them.  That's reasonable in my book.

Also, for $1.50 a month, per, I have a local phone number in each city
(I only have Houston) and they were even able to assign a local number
that matched my main one (817-xxx-4028 in Fort Worth and 713-xxx-4028
in Houston).

You just have to make sure that people enter their NPA or you don't
know where to call them back.


Mark Williams    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (James Borynec; AGT Researcher)
Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 00:33:16 -0700


[e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein) writes:

> competitive with a big one.  Long distance, even per Huber's quote, is
> almost exactly the opposite, a competitive commodity.  In economics, a
> commodity has many vendors entering and exiting, and the price is
> always near "cost", and nobody makes "economic profit" (greater than
> required rate of return on capital invested).  That's just what LD
> telecom is doing now, save AT&T's slipping umbrella.

I believe that the argument goes like this: fiber has almost unlimited
bandwidth.  Once the outside plant has been paid for, the costs are
associated with maintaining the line.  This means that the person who
most "fills up" the fiber pipe gets the lowest average cost.
Therefore, they can charge the lowest prices.  AT&T has the most
traffic and they have an advantage in their access to the LEC (about a
15% cost advantage held back by the FCC).  Therefore, in a 'free'
market AT&T could put MCI and Sprint out of business.

I have a question, if long distance were REALLY competitive, wouldn't
we see AT&T, Sprint, and MCI competing on PRICE?  Their prices have
gotten a lot closer to each other in the last few years!


j.b [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Payphone Records in WTC Case
Date: 12 Mar 1993 04:32:03 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> I just heard on the news that the latest suspect in the WTC bombing
> case was linked to the main previous suspect via payphone call logs.

> It seems that the first suspect used the payphone in the storage
> building lobby where the explosives were supposedly stored to call
> Nidal Ayyad (a chemical engineer at Allied-Signal) at Nidal's office a
> number of times.

These people don't seem too bright.  Repeatedly using the same
payphone in a place that could be linked to them if they were to
become suspect doesn't sound like a good idea.  Also, they've got some
nerve to go back and want the deposit back on the truck they blew up.

> It's very interesting to see the use of call detail that is available
> from public payphones. Remember that the Long Island kidnapping case
> also involved police using payphone call records ...

There was a case a couple of years back in Berkeley, CA that was big
news in the Bay Area.  She just disappeared one night.  Everybody
thought she had been kidnapped, but she turned out in Utah or
somewhere around there a few weeks later -- it turns out that she just
took off on her own accord without telling anyone, and ran off with
some bus driver.  Anyway, on the night she disappeared, she had called
home (in Walnut Creek) from a payphone in Berkeley.  They located the
payphone, and used its location as a starting point to try to find
witnesses.

As for the phone company keeping detailed records of even coin-paid
calls, I'm sure these are necessary at least for audits, if no other
reason.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #172
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24690;
          12 Mar 93 5:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04528
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:50:37 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17789
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:50:01 -0600
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:50:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #173

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 12 Mar 93 02:50:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 173

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number! (John J. Butz)
    Re: No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number! (John Higdon)
    Re: OSPS and ANI Failures (Ihor Kinal)
    Re: OSPS and ANI failures (Matt Healy)
    Re: Inverse Paging Service? (Barry Margolin)
    Re: Inverse Paging Service? (Guy Hadsal)
    Re: Hearing-Impaired Teletype Connectivity (Paul Cook)
    Re: Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer (Carl Moore)
    Re: Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer (Steve Forrette)
    Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (Derek Andrew)
    Re: NAFTA Implications for Telecommunications in Canada (Richard Cox)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 14:18:30 EST
Subject: Re: No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number!


Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]> writes:

 [text omitted]

I've been waiting for this one ...

Did you know that when microwave ovens were first sold, no one would
buy them?  Consumers back then knew that microwaves were mostly used
to reheat precooked foods in large institutional and industrial type
applications, like airlines, cafeterias and hospitals.  We all know
that food cooked in a nuker just doesn't taste the same as if it were
cooked in a conventional oven.  Add on top, the associations one may
have with airline, hospital and cafeteria cuisine and you had a recipe
for success, Right?  **NOT!**

So some slick marketers figured they had better come up with some new
ideas to reposition their product and make it sell.  Today, just about
everyone owns one. (Except for me, and when you come right down to
it, how many folks use it merely to cook pop-corn, quickly reheat
left-overs or see what happens when you put metal inside it anyway?)

The EasyReach 700 service is in on the steep part of the learning
curve.  Yes, people associate 700 and 900.  Yes, there are lines that
block AT&T.  Yes to Rochester Tel, yes to 10288, yes, yes, yes, yes ...

The service isn't "God-like" perfect, but Rome wasn't built in day
either.

We have been live in the AT&T network for less than a year.  Our first
feature release gives forward and reverse billing options, vanity
numbers, nationwide, remote call forwarding ability with limited call
screening, a call home capability and full rep support.  We just
recently put out our second feature release, with new features planned
and being implemented.  The problems you describe are being addressed.
I'm not a spokesperson, but I think if you have a little patience and
are willing to grow with us and the EasyReach service, you will be a
"delighted" customer.  This service promises to be very exciting.

> Overall, I DO like the service, and find it useful.

Thanks for the feedback, I have forwarded your posting to our product
managers.

Our competition does not have a similar service.


J Butz     ER700 Sys Eng   [e-mail]    AT&T - BL

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 10:37 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number!


Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]> writes:

> Simply? Give me a break! AT&T: Get your act together on EasyReach -
> make it easier to use, and allow me to be reached from everywhere. The
> novelty and even the utlity of the service quickly wears off if even
> one person (not to mention almost everyone) complains about using "the
> 700 number" to call me.

Methinks you bitch at AT&T too much. If you will recall, there was
this little matter of divestiture. AT&T no longer runs all those local
telephone companies; their non-compliance with standards is out of
AT&T's control. Just as AT&T cannot force COCOTs to place and route
calls properly, it cannot be responsible for the LEC mishandling of
calls. Your complaint is with each of the local companies who are not
completing your 700 calls.

> There are alternatives (like Cable and Wireless's Programmable 800
> service), and I suspect that in the future there will be more.  If you
> expect to retain me as a customer, I would expect you to address the
> issues raised in this post and make EasyReach as convenient and simple
> as dialing any other telephone number.

What it sounds like is that you really want the programmable 800
service in the first place. Perhaps you should more carefully assess
your requirements and properly select a product before you lambaste
the provider for not meeting your misdirected expectations.


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

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 13:33:40 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failures
Organization: AT&T


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

> Now, given that the number of calls generated on the network by
> automatic devices is increasing exponentially, feeble attempts to
> "rescue" a call via operator intervention would seem to be a complete
> waste of time and resources.

> I guess what I am trying to say is, "why bother?" Just let the call
> die; why take up more time?

I don't know for sure, but I believe the LECs will charge the LD
company an access charge even in such cases.  Consequently, it does
make financial sense to attempt to complete the call.

No, I don't know the financial details -- I just write db software.
[And other standard disclaimers apply]


Ihor Kinal   att!trumpet!ijk

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Healy)
Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failures
Organization: Yale U. - Genetics
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 14:15:56 GMT


I know of at least one situation where the operator _always_ had to
ask for the number.  In my college dorm, circa 1982, there was a
_bell_ in each room.  However, the _phones_ were in the hall.  The
number on the dial was missing the last two digits; each room had a
unique number that would only ring its bell on incoming calls.

To call home (COLLECT ONLY), you had to tell the operator your phone
number because that phone had six different numbers for various rooms.

My senior year they finally upgraded the system:

   1. replaced the University switchboard, which
      had been installed during World War Two;

   2. Put in new phones, replacing the noisy old
      black wall phones in the hall with nice
      white phones in the rooms;

   3. Started allowing credit card billing at
      direct-dial rates.

(By this time several phreaky phriends had figured out how to wire
room phones to the bells in the rooms!)


Matt Healy    [e-mail]

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

From: Barry Margolin <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 18:15:49 EST
Subject: Re: Inverse Paging Service?
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA


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

> In particular, when people ask me for my phone number, I usually give
> out two (one at home, one at work), with the caveat that I am rarely
> ever available at either number.  However, during the times when I am
> not available by a phone, I am almost always still reachable by
> electronic mail.  I'd really like a service whereby I can give people
> a "pager" number, which they could call up and punch in a return phone
> number like usual, which would then get translated into an E-mail
> message sent to me.  Does such a service exist?  (Note that
> suggestions to buy equipment to "roll my own" are not useful; to do so
> is really not worth the hassle for me.)

> [Moderator's Note: What you are asking is available as an alphanumeric
> pager. People using these get little one line messages, etc from the
> caller.    PAT]

I don't think alphanumeric paging is what he wants, since it only
broadcasts to pagers.  He didn't say he had a pager, he said he was
reachable by electronic mail when he's not reachable by phone.  He
wants a touchtone service that converts the keyed message into an
electronic mail message.


Barry Margolin   System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp.
[e-mail]          {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar


[Moderator's Note: Well, he *did* say he wanted to have a 'pager'
number, and as a practical matter, how much text can a person key in
using the phone pad?  Probably two or three words without too much
trouble. That is why it seemed tome his best 'email' under the desired
circumstances would be via the display on an alphanumeric pager.  PAT]

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 09:53:33 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Inverse Paging Service?


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

> I'd really like a service whereby I can give people
> a "pager" number, which they could call up and punch in a return phone
> number like usual, which would then get translated into an E-mail
> message sent to me.  Does such a service exist?  (Note that

Yes.  Its a technology that again is considered by the industry to be
"out of date" and thus is not about to be offered.  Early years of
"alphanumeric" paging used the telephone (tone) as the *input* device.
ie: 2-1 = A, 2-2 = B, etc They quickly discovered that it was not
likley that a user would take the time necessary to spell/punch out
the message; it was strapped (except in Arizona for some reason).

The next step was to try another input device/technology.  Things like
Voice-Input and Electronic Input were explored and tested.  The Voice-
Input is still yet to be perfected enough for end-users on a broad
range.  The Electronic Input took off fast and has dominated the
"input technology".

The are a *range* of supporting electronic input devices; IXO,
Teltype, Modex, Motorola's Alphamate, and software dedicated to paging
like PcPage, SAMpage, PC-IXO, HP-page, and many others.  None of the
hardware devices were designed to dump to email, however some of the
later software package did do it.

SAMpage (hehe ... of Arizona again) wrote a sotware package (LAN
based) for "messaging centers" or Answering Services that was
1economically proced and simple to use ... it sell for about $700 a
node.

The dedicated Answering Service hardware designers realizing that
their market was being threatend jump on the development bandwagon and
did their own upgrade modules to the exsisting hardware (and software)
of their systems ... StarTel and a few others ... at about $5,000-
$15,000 each.

Now, to *answer* your question specifically; YES, *but* you still need
and input (human using an electronic or an electronic alone) to do it.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 19:41 GMT
From: Proctor & Associates <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Hearing-Impaired Teletype Connectivity


[e-mail] (John Kerns) writes:

> If anyone has information on connecting a teletype (TTD) for the
> hearing-impaired to a PC through a modem over phone lines, it would
> be much appreciated.  Since I'm posting this on behalf of someone
> else, I don't have all the particulars, such as whether data needs to
> be transmitted one-way or both ways.  Thanks for the help.

There are a couple of ways to do this.

If you are using one of the newer TDDs, they should have a 300 bps
ASCII mode, which will be compatible with the lowest speed on your
modem.  I have used CHAT mode in Telix to talk to TDDs this way, but
the TDD *MUST* have the 300 bps ASCII mode.  Otherwise, TDDs use 45.5
baud BAUDOT code, which conventional computer modems do not do.

I understand that there is some MSDOS shareware that aids
communications between PCs with conventional modems and ASCII
compatible TDDs.  (Note that the TDD must be ASCII compatible ... this
program does NOT magically make your modem compatible with BAUDOT).

Here is some information on this program, which I lifted off of
the SilenTalk echo on Fidonet:

"The Technology Assessment Program (TAP) at Gallaudet University
offers a freeware program for use with standard modem that lets you
communicate with ASCII TDD devices. You can download ASCII-TDD11.ZIP
(16347k) from TAP's BBS at 202-544-3623 or receive the program on-
disk by sending $3 for postage and handling to Technology Assessment
Program, 800 Florida Ave. N.E., MSSD-200, WASHINGTON, DC 20002."

If the TDD does not have ASCII, then you must communicate in 45.5 baud
Baudot code.  To do this, you must use a modem that can do Baudot.

Here are some sources for TDD compatible modems, again lifted from
SilenTalk, from a message posted there recently by Mark Rejhon:


Ultratec InteleDModem:      Ultratec
($329)                      6442 Normandy Lane
[Recommended]               Madison, WI  53719
                            (608) 273D0707 (Voice/TDD)

Notes: Has pulse/touchDtone dialing, builtDin speaker, busy signal
detector (Futura-TDD will redial busy numbers), and is near 100% Hayes
compatiable. Works best with Futura-TDD.

     -------

Krown Research Smart Modem: Krown Research, Inc.
($349)                      10371 West Jefferson Blvd.
                            Culver City, CA  90232
                            (800) 833D4968 (Voice/TDD)
                            (213) 839D0181 (Voice/TDD)

 Notes: Has Pulse/Touchtone dialing.

     -------

Phone-TTY CM-4:             Phone-TTY, Inc.
($349)                      202 Lexington Ave.
                            Hackensack, NJ  07601
                            (201) 489D7889 (Voice)
                            (201) 489D7890 (TDD)

Notes: Fastest initializing modem. Fast pulse dialing.  Best TDD
compatiablity Not Hayes compatiable.

     --------

I also heard about another modem and software that automatically
switches over to 45.5 Baud BAUDOT from normal ASCII mode on an
incoming call.

This information was provided by Mauro Magnani, also on SilenTalk:

"Fulltalk is a software working with a modem called MIC300i.  Included
with Fulltalk there is FlipTalk, TSR version of FullTalk yhat takes
about 40K of RAM and can be popped up over text based applications to
provide TDD communications on the fly ....

Outstanding features:

 . answering machine with remote access: pre-record/edit outgoing msgs.
 . auto detection for TDD or ASCII: and auto set-up
 . auto redial
 . infrared interface: great for flashing lights
 . bulletin board
 . electronic mail
 . incoming call flashing
 . Memo & message editor
 . scrolling five pages of conversation (18 lines per page)

*** MIC300i Internal Modem is NOT Hayes Compatible ***
*** Coexist with any 1200/2400/9600/Faxmodem ***

Price: 349 $ (modem + software)

Address: MICROFLIP, INC.
11211 Petsworth Lane  GLENN DALE, MD 20769
TDD: 301 588 0965    VOICE: 301 262 6020


Hope this helps!

Paul Cook                           206-881-7000
Proctor & Associates           MCI Mail 399-1080
15050 NE 36th St.              fax: [phone]
Redmond, WA  98052-5378      [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 10:35:14 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer


[e-mail] writes:

> I was wondering, is this charging of not-completed calls done in any
> other country in the world?

There have been previous blurbs here about hotel room phones charging
after a stated number of ringing signals even if the call is not
answered.

Also, there were notes in the Digest about the (previous) practice of
radio-talk-show host Larry King telling people just to let the line
keep on ringing.  (That resulted in at least AT&T limiting the number
of rings and disconnecting the call if it was still unanswered.)

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer
Date: 11 Mar 1993 21:20:44 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> I was wondering, is this charging of not-completed calls done in any
> other country in the world?

I think that there was a message here a year or so ago stating that
this is indeed the case in Sweden and/or Norway.  In fact, you get
local message charges from the time you lift the receiver.  The poster
stated that just lifting the receiver, getting a dialtone, then
hanging up with no dialing, would cause 1 message unit to be charged.
Also, both cellular carriers in Los Angeles charge a half-minute of
airtime for any uncompleted calls, including those that never leave
their switch because of a bad called number or any other reason.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Derek Andrew)
Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada
Date: 12 Mar 1993 07:51:50 GMT
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Reply-To: [e-mail]


 From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail]
(John Higdon):

> From correspondence with Canadians, I have determined that the US has
> benefitted greatly for deregulation and divestiture. While Canada
> still has step equipment and multi-party lines in rural areas, that
> equipment and facility arrangement has all but disappeared in this
> country. Bell Canada has no technical superiority with regard to the
> typical service provided in the US; and frequently the reverse is
> actually the case.

I just wanted to point out that Bell Canada only services some of the
Eastern provinces of Canada. It probably compares to GTE!

Fibre was installed in Saskatchewan at a faster rate than any other
North American phone company.  We got no stinkin step by steps left
and I am not aware of any multi-party lines left.


Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskatchewan, Canada, S7N 0W0
[e-mail], [phone],  52 11 23N 106 48 48W
Our prayers are with all who stood in Andrew's path. - President Bush.

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 23:51 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications for Telecommunications in Canada
Reply-To: [e-mail]


PAT included the paper forwarded by to telecom by Sid Shniad, Burnaby
BC <[e-mail]>: called "The North American Free Trade Agreement
and its Implications For the Telecommunications Industry in Canada"

In that paper was the assertion that:

> Cable and Wireless -- a subsidiary of the giant British Telecom --
> would be free to charge whatever it wants for its services.

In case anyone is in any doubt, Cable and Wireless is not a subsidiary
of British Telecom.  In fact Cable and Wireless owns Mercury Commun-
ications, BT's only competitor for long-haul traffic in the UK at the
moment !


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]     Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #173
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25747;
          12 Mar 93 5:51 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07809
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 03:26:50 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00367
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 03:26:16 -0600
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 03:26:16 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #174

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 12 Mar 93 03:26:15 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 174

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Coventry Telesoftware Teletext Open Shell &c (W. J. G. Overington)
    Wired (was Hacked Cellular Phones) (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Bell Canada Applies to Hike Local Rates (Mark Brader)
    Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Carl Livecchia)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (W. J. G. Overington)
Subject: Coventry Telesoftware Teletext Open Shell &c
Organization: Coventry University
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:35:20 GMT


Telesoftware defined; a representation to the European Broadcasting
Union and an overview of Coventry Telesoftware Teletext Open Shell and
1456 object code.

Issue 1.0

8th March 1993

W. J. G. Overington  Management Division,  School of Engineering,
Coventry University,  Coventry,  CV1 5FB   United Kingdom.
Telephone: [phone]  (within UK Telephone: [phone])
Fax:       [phone]  (within UK Fax:       [phone])
e-mail:    [e-mail]


The word telesoftware is defined as follows.

TelesoftwareL

The concept of producing a remote access computer system by means of
the unidirectional cyclic broadcasting of software and its selective
use by an unlimited number of independent terminals each having its
own processing element and each characterized by a reception only
telecommunications facility.

Concept invented and word coined by W. J. G. Overington in 1974.

Telesoftware is interactive with no return information link whatsoever
to the central broadcasting computer.

The symbol of telesoftware is the rete of an astrolabe in cyan upon a
red field.

* * *

I make the suggestion that the European Broadcasting Union add to its
teletext specification a feature that I suggest be called The EBU
Shell.

The EBU Shell.

Where information upon a notionally displayable teletext page is
intended for processing by a local computing system, be it a computer
as such or a microprocessor system that is part of an intelligent
television system, the local computing system should look for, and be
able to act upon, keywords that begin with three characters 5/10, that
is ZZZ in the ordinary character set.

The following keywords are specified in the EBU shell:

ZZZFILE:

The keyword ZZZFILE is always followed by a space and then the name of
a computer file.  It provides a convenient common way of designating
any file to which the incoming information should be sent.  Its use is
optional, as incoming software may be being dynamically obeyed rather
than stored in a file.

ZZZSYSTEME:

The keyword ZZZSYSTEME is always followed by a space and then an
Independent Infrastructure Name.  After that, the information is in
the format of the named independent infrastructure.  The local
computing system may well only act on a subset of the possible
independent infrastructures, but should be capable of recognizing all
EBU shell keywords.

A process of consultation should aim at a fairly small collection of
EBU shell keywords as a common collection of keywords recognizable by
all such local computing systems.

I suggest that the following could be added:

Any person, who may, but need not, be representing an organization,
may deposit with the European Broadcasting Union an Independent
Infrastructure Name together with such other information as appears
reasonable to act as a short overview and provide details of how to
obtain further information.  The European Broadcasting Union will
maintain a collection of such deposited information and may, from time
to time, publish it in such form as it sees fit.

For example, such a list would contain the following:

ZZZSYSTEME 1456:

1456 object code.  A portable object code intended for compilation and
translation to the local code of the local computing system, designed
specifically for telesoftware.  An open system available for general
use.

ZZZSYSTEME COVENTRY:

Coventry Telesoftware Teletext Open Shell.  The short name is Coventry
shell.  A forth-like language with powerful high level constructs and
specialist libraries.  Capable of having 1456 object code routines
embedded within it.  All keywords begin with a triple letter sequence
(but not ZZZ to avoid conflict with the EBU shell).  An open system
available for general use.

These are two systems designed by the present author and are, in fact,
open systems for general use.  This is because I feel that my own role
is to work on open systems and publish papers.  It would be entirely
possible that some entries for independent infrastructures would
contain sentences such as "A proprietary system, details of which are
not published" or "A proprietary system, details of which are only
available to customers of this company" and so on.

I suggest, however, that the inclusion of such statements in an EBU
list of independent infrastructures would be helpful for
identification purposes and engineering management.

* * *

The Coventry shell contains powerful structuring commands such as
zzzdefine which can specify new keywords containing zzzif zzzthen
zzzelse zzzelseif zzzendif and so on within their definitions.  There
is strong typing of variables, with words such as III+ and III*
available for adding and multiplying integers respectively; together
with words such as CCC+ and CCC* for manipulating complex numbers.

Various keyword triple letter keys are used in different ways.  For
example, some, such as III and CCC are used for manipulation of typed
variables; keywords beginning with fff are freely defineable for use
as database field names, such as fffquantity, fffprice and so on;
keywords beginning with ppp constitute the Turquoise Lattice library
to control programmed learning presentations, with words such as
pppDisplayText (which needs a file name following it) and
pppGetOneCharacter and so on.

* * *

Here is a short introduction to writing software in 1456 object code.

An interesting feature of 1456 object code is that the actual codes
broadcast are the normal way of writing 1456 object code.  That is,
although there is an assembler equivalent, it is not regarded as the
main way of writing 1456 object code, as 1456 object code is designed
for ease of being directly written.

Consider the following assembler style language program.  It is not
for any particular processor, but, if you have used assemblers, you
will probably recognize the general flavour of a label field, which
may be left empty, an operation code field and a parameter field,
which may or may not have anything in it, depending upon the
particular operation code.

START LOAD #3
      ADD  #2
      STORE ALPHA
      HALT
ALPHA DATA 0

For the avoidance of doubt, this program loads the immediate data of
value 3 into a register called 1456A, adds the immediate data of value
2, stores the result in the data storage unit at the label ALPHA and
then halts.

Consider now rewriting the program so that there is not a separate
label field, but that instead there is a pseudo-operation called
LABEL, that generates no code, but merely informs us where the label
is located.


LABEL START
LOAD #3
ADD  #2
STORE ALPHA
HALT
LABEL ALPHA
DATA 0

Consider now using numbers instead of names for labels.  The program
can now be written as below.

LABEL 1
LOAD #3
ADD #2
STORE 2
HALT
LABEL 2
DATA 0

In most, possibly all, microprocessor assembly languages that I have
studied, the operation codes for LOAD IMMEDIATE and LOAD FROM MEMORY
are different, but which of these operation codes is used in
assembling any given use of a LOAD instruction is determined by
examining the parameter field, not the LOAD instruction itself.

For example,

LOAD #$40
and
LOAD $40
respectively, and not, say,

LOAD# $40
and
LOADM $40

In 1456 object code, each operation code is either one letter, or two
characters, the first of which is ! (in speech "super").  There are
100 operation codes available, namely,

A .. N, P .. Z, a .. k, m .. z,
!A .. !N, !P .. !Z, !a .. !k, !m .. !z

The letters uppercase O and lowercase l are omitted in order to avoid
confusion between uppercase O and the figure 0 and between lowercase l
and figure 1.

The LOAD IMMEDIATE is w in 1456 object code and the LOAD FROM MEMORY
is W with the argument being a label number, in octal.

In 1456 object code there is also what I call software punctuation.
These are items that in an assembler language would be called
pseudo-operation codes. This software punctuation consists of label
identification, generation of data spaces and so on.  So we may
convert our example to something approaching 1456 object code, though
as we shall see, there are a few extra steps yet.

: 1
w 3
p 2
S 2
H
: 2
/ 0

In order to avoid, when assembling the above, having to look beyond
the length of the last digit in the parameter, because one does not
know that it is the last digit of the parameter until one has already
looked beyond it, the order of the operation code and its parameter,
if any, are reversed. This means that a parameter, which must be a
number, in octal, is ended by the operation code that uses that
parameter.

We thus have the following.

1 :
3 w
2 p
2 S
H
2 :
0 /

We also convert all numbers to being in octal format, though, as the
numbers in this example are all of value less than 8, there is not any
observable difference in doing that here.

A space character and a return character have no significance in the
code thus produced, so it is perfectly acceptable to place it in free
format on as few or as many lines as is desired.  We need to add an =
sign, to signify that that is the end of the program, and we could
then have,

1:3w2p2SH2:0/=

but that is somewhat confusing to a human, so it is conventional to
separate each operation by a space character, though it is usual to
omit the space after a : symbol, so as to reinforce the fact that the
: is but a label and is not assembled to give output code of itself.

1:3w 2p 2S H 2:0/ =

In the above example, note that the figure 2 appears three times.  In
the first usage it is immediate data, because p uses it as immediate
data; in the second usage it is the use of a label address, because S
uses it as a label address; in the third usage it is the definition of
label 2, because : is used to define a label.

Comments can be included in 1456 object code between a * character and
a ; character.

The 1456 object code system supports separate compilation of modules
in a program.  This is performed by using a + character to signify the
end of the module.  Compilation of a 1456 object code program is by
two pass assembly.  When a module is separately compiled, both passes
of that module are performed before the first pass of the next module
is started.  This means that any label address may be used locally
within two or more different modules without conflict.  Only label
addresses that need to be referenced from outside the module need be
chosen to avoid conflict.  A practice that is used is that label
addresses in the range 1 to 77 octal may be freely used as local
labels within a module and that higher numbers are allocated to
external entry points to modules.  Labels in the range 100 to 177
octal are for your own module library.

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

Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 00:41:10 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Wired (was Hacked Cellular Phones)


Ron Dippold <[e-mail]> writes:

> I picked up the premiere issue of a new magazine called "Wired" which
> is trying to spread the word about the Digital Revolution.  And
> editorial blurb from the inside page is repeated here:

[ stuff deleted ]

I subscribed to Wired based on the first issue.  Repeat after me: It's
much better than "Cats"... I want to read it again and again ...
(apologies to Lorne Michaels)

Seriously, I've written the editor (<[e-mail]>), and have
discussed it with other people on the net.  I at first agreed with one
correspondant that {Wired} is a fashion magazine, sort of a digital
{Cosmopolitan} for those who can't hack {Communications of the ACM}.
I think my feelings have mellowed somewhat since then.  Comparing
{Wired} with {Mondo 2000} is like night and day; {M2K} really DOES
have fashion articles.  The sad thing is that {Time} took {M2K}
seriously in their recent cover story on cyberpunk, something I took
them to task for (amazing! they printed my letter...).

> Along with this they had an interesting article on "Cellular Phreaks
> and Code Dudes" by John Markoff ([e-mail]), which discusses how
> the latest rage of Silicon Valley hackers is cellular phones.  He
> gives an example of how two phreaks hacked into an OKI 900 cellular
> phone and some of the features they discovered:

[more stuff elided]

What one correspondant found irritating with this was the author's
claim that people who hack cellphones using the maintenance codes use
"consumer appliances ... augmented in ways their designers never
conceived."  Fact is, those codes were put there on purpose.

> The down side was the really annoying format, which seems to be
> "Techno-babble-obnoxious" with arbitrary changes in typeface,
> orientation, etc as you flip through pages.

Yep.  {Wired} definitely has the feel of a magazine trying hard to
present itself as Art, and at the same time slip in some cool-sounding
buzzwords.  But at least they're (mostly) clear: {M2K} confuses
incoherence with style.

So why did I subscribe?  The essayists are first-rate (the story on
cellphone hacking notwithstanding).  Lewis J. Perelman's essay on the
reason for the deterioration of public schools and suggestions for
possible cures was outstanding, as was Nicholas Negropointe's column
on what's wrong with HDTV.  Bruce Sterling looked into the Future of
War -- SIMNET and all that.  Lastly, {Wired} published an essay I
thought masterfully rebutted the entire concept of that magazine,
saying that Digital Art, because of its newness, makes people feel
they're doing great things -- BUT this greatness is ephemeral and
directly tied to the medium.

You should be able to find {Wired} at B. Dalton booksellers near you.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]
                         After June 25 : [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Applies to Hike Local Rates
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 09:54:15 GMT


In issue 13.72 (February 8), Nigel Allen ([e-mail])
posted under the above Subject line a fairly long article about a
package of rate changes proposed by Bell Canada.

One part of the package is called the Community Calling Plan (CCP),
which would affect customers in the areas centered on Toronto,
Montreal, and Ottawa.  Nigel wrote that the CCP:

> ... effective September 1 [November 1 for Montreal] ...
> would eliminate toll charges between many suburban exchanges
> that are local to the same major city ... but long distance
> from each other.  But local phone rates would rise sharply
> [in addition to the other increase also requested] ...

I responded in issue 13.82 (February 11) to query that point:

> Why is that?  The policy here has been that local phone rates are
> based on how many telephones *you* can call locally [note to those
> in less civilized :-) areas: this means free].  I think that a
> large local calling area makes sense in the neighborhood of a
> big city, so it's probably a good idea for different Toronto
> suburbs to become local to each other.  But why should my rates
> in Toronto go up because people in nearby cities are getting
> this service?

And in my latest phone bill, I have the answer.  There is an insert,
which unfolds to about 14x22 inches, covered with fine print in
English on one side and French on the other.  It provides full details
of the proposed rates, and of Bell's second-choice plan if the
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission does not
approve the CCP.

And it includes maps of the CCP areas, and they are *larger* than the
current local calling areas.  So that answers my point quoted above.
Curiously, this detail is buried -- the maps do not show the extent of
the current local calling areas, only the new CCP areas.  Comparing
them against the list of exchanges in the current (April 1992) phone
book, I find that the following 22 places, now long-distance, would
become local to Toronto under the plan:

  Burlington, Milton, Campbellville, Georgetown, Acton#, Erin#,
  Hillsburgh#, Caledon#, Victoria, Caledon East, Tottenham,
  Beeton, Bradford, Newmarket, Queensville, Mt. Albert, Uxbridge,
  Port Perry, Brooklin, Whitby, Oshawa, Bowmanville.

These places form an almost contiguous belt -- the Caledon East and
Tottenham exchanges don't quite touch each other, so in that direction
a small part of the boundary wouldn't move.

The four places marked # are in area code 519, so this means that
local-but-outside-of-area-code dialing would come to Toronto, not in
October when area code 905 splits off 416, but in September.  The plan
is that after the split such calls would be dialed as ten digits
(since Bell Canada uses the "1 = toll" principle); logically, then,
calls from Toronto to Acton, Erin, Hillsburgh, and Caledon would also
be dialed as 10 digits, i.e. 519-xxx-xxxx.  Since the insert is only
about rates, it doesn't cover this point.

The present Toronto local calling area is roughly bounded by a
quadrilateral whose vertices are at Oakville, Palgrave, Claremont, and
Ajax-Pickering; thus it extends about 20-30 miles from downtown
Toronto in most (landward) directions.  The outermost "bumps" in the
proposed new boundary are Burlington, Hillsburgh, Port Perry, and
Bowmanville, which extend as far as 40 miles from downtown -- and
since they would be local to each other, it would be possible to make
a local call of some 80 miles.

I have given the details for Toronto because I have in my phone book
the information about its present local calling area.  The insert also
shows the boundaries of the CCP areas for the other two cities, but I
don't know how much of an *increase* in calling area this implies for
those cities.

For Ottawa, the CCP area would extend about 30 miles from that city's
downtown, including such places as Plantagenet, Chester- ville,
Merrickville, Carleton Place, and Arnprior in Ontario; and Quyon, Low,
and Papineauville in Quebec.

For Montreal, the CCP would again extend about 40 miles from that
city's downtown, thus encompassing a larger area than Toronto's CCP
since Montreal is not on a lake.  Its boundary would follow the US
border from Clarenceville to Hemmingford, then jog north to the St.
Lawrence at Beauharnois, then west to roughly the Ontario border, then
northeast to St-Andre Est and Rawdon, southeast to L'Epiphanie-
L'Assomption and Lanoriae, and finally south to Beloiel and back to
Clarenceville.

The insert points out that within each CCP area, the central city's
customers would have the lowest rate, then the suburbs a slightly
higher rate, and suburbs near the outside of the area that can also
call locally to points outside of it would have a slightly higher rate
yet.  I understand the latter dif- ference but not the former.  The
insert says it is "because customers outside the core would have
relatively more exchanges added to their current local calling area
than those in the core", and I don't see why that should affect
anything.


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 11:11:22 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted


I have read many messages on this bulletin board in which people
mention Cellular System A and System B settings on their phones.  Can
anyone explain to me, in plain English, the difference between system
A and system B?


Thanks in advance,

Carl Livecchia    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Some say A = Awfully expensive and B = Bad customer
service.  :)  Really, the B carriers are owned by the local 'wireline'
telephone company in the area. For example, in Chicago, Ameritech
Mobile is the B carrier; they also operate Illinois Bell, our telco.
The A carriers are the 'non-wireline' carriers. They will frequently
be telephone companies also, but in some other part of the country.
The A carriers often times use the generic name 'Cellular One'. Here
in Chicago, Cellular One (the A carrier) is owned by Southwestern
Bell, a telephone company in another part of the USA.  On the other
hand, the same Southwestern Bell is the B carrier operating in the St.
Louis, Missouri area.  So if a telco goes to the territory of some
other telco to operate cellular, they do it as an A carrier. The telco
which 'belongs there' (or has historically always been the telco in
that community) is the B carrier.  Is all that clear? :) In addition,
the A carriers stick among themselves with things like roaming
agreements; the B carriers do the same.     PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #174
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02656;
          12 Mar 93 19:30 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04823
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 16:54:30 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31883
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 16:54:02 -0600
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 16:54:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Now Open For Business! 1+, 800, Calling Cards


I now have agreements in place with various telecommunications
carriers to offer 'affinity' long distance calling packages to readers
of TELECOM Digest, comp.dcom.telecom and the other telecom news groups
where the Digest is circulated.

All commissions and residuals from your use of these services are returned
to TELECOM Digest to offset the costs involved in editing and publishing
this e-journal, which has grown to the point that several hours daily are
required to read, sort, edit and publish the volume of mail which arrives
here.

     ** There is no connection of any sort between these services
        and the editorial content of TELECOM Digest. You are free
        to use these services or not as you wish with no regard to
        what is published in the Digest. I am not going to kiss your
        posterior to encourage you to use these things, nor are you
        required to kiss my posterior. Enough said? **

Dial One Plus:
==============

     Primarily for small (under three hundred dollars per month)
     users of long distance, but anyone can subscribe:

     All plans include:

     1) 100% fiber optic network;
     2) Detailed billing in six-second increments;
     3) Free travel card  (NOT the Orange Card; see below);
     4) No monthly minimums, start up or installation fees.

 Plan 1:
     Interstate rates 18.9 cents per minute  (7 am to 7 pm)
                      14.5 cents per minute  (7 pm to 7 am and weekends)
     Intrastate rates average 22 cents per minute. Ask about your state.
     There is a $5 per month service charge.
     Daytime rates go down to 18 cents per minute over $200 per month.
     Daytime rates go down to 17.5 cents per minute over $800 per month.

 Plan 2:
     Interstate rates are 16.9 cents per minute at all hours, all days.
     Intrastate rates average 22 cents per minute. Ask about your state.
     No additional discounts are given.
     Account codes are available:
              Non-verified account codes are FREE.
              Verified account codes (calls won't complete without
              using them) are $15 per month in total. A great way
              to reduce fraud and misuse.
     There is a $5 per month service charge. ($20 in total if you
     want verified account codes required when dialing calls.)

Plan 3:
     Interstate rates are 14.9 cents per minute at all hours, all days.
     Intrastate rates average 22 cents per minute. Ask about your state.
     No additional discounts are given.
     As above in plan 2, account codes are available, verified or
     non verified, as you require.
     There is a $14.90 per month service charge ($34.90 if you want
     verified account codes required when dialing calls.)

Plans 1 or 2 make the best sense for small users, and whether you want
a straight rate at all hours or a higher day rate and smaller night
rate will depend on your calling patterns. Plan 3 is a better deal if
your long distance bill tends to run over a hundred dollars per month.

Since calls are carried via Sprint, if you are currently a customer of
Sprint you need not change your 1+ default carrier. The three plans
above simply require a 'paperwork change' through my office.

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

AT&T Software Defined Network:

For somewhat larger users, with long distance billings of at least
$300-400 per month or higher, the AT&T Software Defined Network is
available, and again, existing customers of AT&T would not need to
change their default, or 1+ carrier.

Plan includes:
   30 second initial billing period;
   6 second additional billing increments;
   Authorization codes:
     mandatory to complete calls, or voluntary, your choice.
     All calls are billed by authorization code if you use them.
   Your own network definitions:
     Block NPA's, NPA-xxx's, NPA-xxx-xxxx's as you wish.
     Block from only certain outgoing lines or all lines.
     Block only at certain times of day, or days of week, For
     example, block international calls on weekends but not
     during the week. Or, require account codes at night and on
     weekends, but not during the business day.

There is *no additional charge* for any/all of the above features:

Rates are distance-sensitive:
     From 17.71 cents per minute up to 23.62 cents per minute days.
     From 12.67 cents per minute up to 16.91 cents per minute evenings.
     From  9.49 cents per minute up to 13.28 cents per minute nights.
     Most points in area 809 are 24 cents per minute days, 20 cents nights.

A discount of 8 percent is given on traffic of up to $2000 per month.
A discount of 20 percent is given on traffic over $2000 per month.

Minimum traffic per month to use this plan is $300 per month. There
are no discounts on traffic less than $300 per month.

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

800 Number Service:
===================

You can have one of my 800 numbers,  - or - you can keep your existing
800 number once '800 portability' starts, now scheduled for May 1, 1993.
These are actual 800 numbers, not the bogus 'add a four digit pin' style
offered by one carrier.

Both plans:
   Include a single 800 number for inter-/intra-state incoming calls.
   Use existing lines. No installations or changes required.
   Have billing in six second increments.
   Can be configured to include international service if desired at
      additional cost per minute of traffic, of course.
   100 percent fiber optic network.
   Include detailed billing of the phone numbers calling you. (ANI).
   Have no monthly minimums, start up or installation fees.

Plan 1:
   If monthly billing is less than $25,  32.9 cents per minute and
            a $5 monthly service fee.

   If monthly billing is $25-50, rates are 22.9 cents per minute.
   If monthly billing is $50-100, rates are 18.9 cents per minute.
   If monthly billing is more than $100, rates are 16.9 cents per minute.

If your usage is less than $25 per month, an 800 number cannot be
recommended, but is available (see above) at the highest rate per
minute and with a $5 service fee for keeping the account 'in the system'.

Plan 2:
   Rate is 17.9 cents per minute, all hours, all days on interstate.
   Intrastate rates average 22 cents per minute. Ask about your state.
   A monthly $15 service charge applies.

Whether you choose plan 1 or plan 2 would depend on your volume of
calls, bearing in mind with plan 1 although the rates are higher to
begin with, they are less expensive than plan 2 if you use more than
$100 per month. In addition, plan 1 does not diferentiate between
calls interstate or intrastate. Therefore, my personal recommendation
is that plan 1 is a better deal. But it is your choice.

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

Orange Calling Card:

As earlier described here, this is a no-surcharge calling card which
allows calling anywhere in the USA at the flat rate of 25 cents per
minute. You dial an 800 number, then the card number and the number
you wish to call, followed by a PIN. The best use for this card is
when you make a lot of daytime, short duration calls from payphones or
hotels where you would otherwise pay a surcharge. There is a one time
$10 fee to sign up. You are billed for your usage monthly. This is
also a good deal if you live in dormitory housing using a common
PBX phone system, make personal calls from a company PBX, etc.

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

These services were chosen as a way for readers to help support the
increased costs of publishing TELECOM Digest without having to do
anything they wouldn't be doing otherwise: using the phone each day.
A residual, typically 5-10 percent of the billings on your phone usage
will be paid to TELECOM Digest if you subscribe to these programs.

If you don't subscribe, I'll survive! :)  But your help will mean a
lot and enable me to quit worrying about how I am going to feed the
cats, our three-year old child and the rest of my nuclear family ...
and let me spend more time getting the Digest out to you each day.

For information or to sign up for any of the above, send email to:

   [e-mail]    or   fax:  [phone]

Be sure to include a snail-mail address where brochures and applications
should be sent. Remember, if you wish to use the one plus service and
you are already on Sprint, you won't need to change carriers. If you
wish to use the larger volume AT&T SDN and you are already on AT&T, you
won't need to change carriers.

Your 800 number is independent of your one plus carrier, as is the
Orange Calling Card.

Thanks for your continued support of TELECOM Digest. Here's hoping I
at least get my phone bill paid each month by your generosity and support.


Patick Townson
TELECOM Moderator











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16700;
          14 Mar 93 17:36 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06340
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 14 Mar 1993 15:07:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31029
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 14 Mar 1993 15:06:59 -0600
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 15:06:59 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #175

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 14 Mar 93 15:07:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 175

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Dave Levenson)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Monty Solomon)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Tom Coradeschi)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Paul Robichaux)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (John Higdon)
    Re: What is Telecom Gold? (Richard Cox)
    Re: What is Telecom Gold? (Nigel Allen)
    Re: No One Calls Me on AT&T EasyReach! (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Richard Cox)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 06:49:56 GMT


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

> Yes, after I naively posted my message, I was informed by more
> knowledgable collegues that this "split white pages; surname once" is
> a very common midwest format. It is sort of the thing you find in
> Kansas, Nebraska -- all the fly-over states. Apparently it is also in
> Chicago.  And now, unfortunately, it is here. I have already expressed
> my displeasure with Pacific Bell.

Washington, DC, and its suburbs, now have white pages organized in
this way.  I think it increases the density of the white pages
listings, and so may save a few trees.


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

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

From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!
Reply-To: Monty Solomon <roscom![e-mail]>
Organization: Proponent
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 11:45:17 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Higdon) writes:

> The new Pacific Bell telephone directories for San Jose/Santa Clara
> have two interesting format variations in the White Pages. The first
> splits the directory into two approximately equal-size sections:

The new Nynex phone books in Massacusetts also have the new format.

> The second change is the way residence listings are presented. Instead
> of the traditional approach, each surname is listed with the customers
> of that name in the column underneath, but indented.  Something like
> this:

> HIGDON
>   Fred.......
>   George A.......
>   John......

In our new book, the listings have a bizarre alphabetization:

  SOLOMON Alan.......
    Ann.......
    ...
    Marilyn.......
    Michael.......
  SOLOMON-MITTLEMAN J & Robt.......
  SOLOMON Robt.......
    Sherwin.......
    ...

Their algorithm has problems with hyphenated last names.


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 07:25:57 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!


In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 172 [e-mail] (John
Higdon) writes:

> Yes, after I naively posted my message, I was informed by more
> knowledgable collegues that this "split white pages; surname once" is
> a very common midwest format. It is sort of the thing you find in
> Kansas, Nebraska -- all the fly-over states. Apparently it is also in
> Chicago.  And now, unfortunately, it is here. I have already expressed
> my displeasure with Pacific Bell.

NYTel has had a split white pages for about two years in at least the
Nassau County portion of area code 516.  Suffolk went this way last
year.  The first part is general information (excerpts from the
tarrifs, the second is community services, then the residence listings
ordered by surname in bold, given name indented and in plain
lettering, followed by the business listings ending with the "blue
pages" for governments.

The yellow pages are in a separate book.

I have to disagree with John since I like the new format.  If I don't
know the name of a business, I'll use the yellow pages in the
appropriate category; on the other hand, if I know the business name
but not the number I'll use the business listings.


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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 9:08:29 EST
From: Tom Coradeschi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here
Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ


[e-mail] (Jim Haynes) writes:

> On this side of The Hill, Pac Bell has been running ads in the local
> paper for several days -- picture of a new phone book in a plastic bag
> -- text to the effect that it's NOT that time yet; new phone books
> aren't due out until October; if you get a new phone book now it's not
> the genuine article, so don't throw away your old one.  I guess this
> means somebody is distributing phony phone books.

Not "phony" books, per se. In many areas of the country, there are
"primary" and "secondary" directories for a given area (my
terminology, cuz I cain't remember what they're really called). The
primary book is typically that of the RBOC (in my case NJBell). The
secondary is "someone else" (in my case United Telephone). The
coverage, particularly in terms of Yellow Pages adverts, can be quite
different -- remember that Yellow Pages isn't free, and cost is
proportional to the size/type of ad placed. PacBell likely wants as
many folks as possible to keep & use their directories, so they can
justify the prices they charge for YP advertising.


tom coradeschi    <+>    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Robichaux)
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: New Technology, Inc.
Date: Sun 14 Mar 1993 14:43:15 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Higdon)
writes about the "new and somewhat improved" PacBell directories.

Here in BellSouth (= {South Central Bell | Southern Bell}) land, the
directories featured both the split business/residence listings and
the last-name/first-name listing format for several years.

I like the split business/residence listings; it makes it quite a bit
easier to do a binary search through the book when I'm looking for a
particular listing. The BellSouth directories also have a separate
middle section (the "blue pages") which include city, county, state,
and federal government listings -- very handy!


Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG
Mission Software Development Div. New Technology, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 13:55:53 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


> What I suspect has happened here is that the new directory contractor
> is midwest-based and just assumed that Californians would put up with
> the same silly-style directories that are issued to the "great
> heartland".

Sorry, John, but it's really not that way, although I sympathize!

This format of phone books is spreading all over the RBOCs. US West
adopted it about a decade ago and it has been very popular. I don't
like it, but I'm told that customer satisfaction with the format is
high. My sister thinks I'm crazy in not liking it! (Of course, she is
also opposed to CLID and is totally unable to understand why anyone
would tolerate such a thing.)

I believe the format was first used in the Chicago area by an
"alternative" phone book publisher and met with great success. Since
the Yellow Pages business is highly competitive, IBT was not too crazy
about people throwing out their "real" phone books and keeping the
others. So IBT switched. This is all hearsay, since I have never spent
more than a week at a time in the Chicago area. Pat may know a lot
more than I do about it.

I do know that Mountain Bell (now US West) switched formats in
Colorado (with much ballyhoo) about two years after another directory
publisher (Donnelly?)  started distributing there. My sister kept both
books, but only used the other one.

So I can't really blame PacBell for this one. It looks like the
consumer has spoken.


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

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


[Moderator's Note: Sprint (nee Centel) did it in their local directory
quite a few years ago. Illinois Bell started doing it in the regional
directories a few years ago; now they do it in some of the local books
for the suburbs as well, but the Chicago book is still 'traditional'.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 11:24 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What is Telecom Gold?
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Ted Koppel) asks:

> Telecom Gold   followed by an alphanumeric string in the format:
> NN:aaannn   (where a=alpha and n=numeric)
> What is it?

Telecom Gold is a slow, very ancient, email service run by BT in the
UK.  It has very limited connectivity over here ... there are one-way
gateways which are reported to be difficult to access. There is
believed to be connectivity with DIALCOM in the USA.

The NN is the "system" number, and the aaannn (which can be aaannnn)
is the mailbox id.  I used to be 84:POW9999 but not now -- there are
better and more cost effective ways of communicating!


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]     Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 09:13:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Re: What is Telecom Gold?
Organization: R-node Public Access Unix - 1 416 249 5366


Ted Koppel ([e-mail]) writes in article <telecom13.
[e-mail]>:

> I have in front of me a business card from a gentleman in Great
> Britain.  It has all of the normal stuff:
> and then a line that says:

> Telecom Gold   followed by an alphanumeric string in the format:
> NN:aaannn   (where a=alpha and n=numeric)

Telecom Gold is an e-mail service operated in the United Kingdom by
British Telecom, which now prefers to be known simply as BT.

It is interconnected with similar e-mail systems in other countries.
The corresponding service in Canada, for example, is Dialcom, offered
by Unitel Communications Inc.

Perhaps BT North America (I don't have its phone number, but ask 800
service directory assistance at 800-555-1212) could give you more
information on Dialcom and Telecom Gold.

I don't think Telecom Gold is interconected with the Internet, but I
could be wrong.

It may be possible to send a message to a Telecom Gold mailbox from
AT&T Mail or MCI Mail, but you would have to contact those e-mail
companies to find out how.


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Oh my gosh! Is Dialcom still around? I looked into
that service back in 1983-84 or thereabouts; I was not impressed.  PAT]

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

Date: 14-MAR-1993 07:11:27.53
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: No One Calls Me on AT&T EasyReach!


On Thu, 11 Mar 93 10:37 PST, [e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

[stuff about how I called AT&T ER700 Cust Svc. to have them correct what
I perceive to be a switch programming error denying ER700 access via
10288 from a NYTel coin phone]

> Your complaint is with each of the local companies who are not
> completing your 700 calls.

Of course it is, but they either don't care, or don't care to listen
to you.  It will take me a week to get an LEC to fix it myself (if
they decide to even pay attention). AT&T in the past has been very
willing to deal with the LECs to provide ER700 access w/o the
800-824-5621 access number, and my complaint was with Lynn who more or
less had the attitude that "Well, just have your caller use the 800
number ... what's the big deal?".

I got a call back from an ER700 Specialist, and he said it will be
fixed right away. They did the same thing for SNET and NETel. So they
DO deal with the LEC, and quite effectively at that. I commend the
AT&T ER700 people in this regard, and didn't mean to indicate
otherwise. Its just that to GET to a Specialist requires talking to
mindless customer service reps, which I think discourages people from
reporting these difficulties in the first place.

> Perhaps you should more carefully assess your requirements and
> properly select a product before you lambaste the provider for not
> meeting your misdirected expectations.

Oh, I knew EXACTLY what I wanted and the C&W programmable 800 did not
fit the bill. I wanted a way for people to reach me at whatever number
I happen to be at, without my having to incur extra toll charges. So
unlike LEC-offered remotely-programmable Call Forwarding (which is
nevertheless an attractive offering), I wanted a service where the
caller paid a modest toll charge to reach me and *no* (toll) charge on
my part, one that forwarded quickly, and one that could be programmed
remotely and for free. C&W meets all the above except #1, which was
the main reason I got AT&T ER700.

All in all, I think ER700 fits the bill quite nicely. I think you
misperceive my complaint: The service and the concept behind it are
(is?) great; it is the implementation of ER700 that is flaky and
awkward.

I don't think callers should have to be inconvenienced to call me, as
I realize that they have other things to do besides always having to
remember a myriad of codes and conditions for accessing ER700 just to
get in touch with me.

AT&T needs to make access to ME (not necessarily the ER700 Platform)
easier and more universal, so I can feel secure that when I give out
my 700 number I'll be able to receive calls from that person. Right
now, I apparently can't say that.

BTW, I note John's and another response to my initial posting, BUT, I
never saw my post! That is, I got some replies to my posting
(thanks!), saw some followups, but didn't see the post that I had sent
it. Its not here at Wesleyan, nor at NYU, nor at holonet.net. I've
noticed this before, but thought it was just some distribution
problem. Is this common, or an error?


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


[Moderator's Note: I don't know why your original posting did not make
it back to your site. You are not the first person to mention this
happening (never seeing the original, but getting the followups, etc)
and all I can say is someday I hope to figure it out. Right now I am
in survival mode pending the successful start up of my telecom resale
programs in the hopes I can quit worrying about money and start worry-
ing more about the Digest. If things go well, in the next couple
months readers will hopefully see some improved software, etc.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 06:58:04 GMT


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

> Also, why is there a delay in the delivery of pages?  I can understand
> when the system may get busy during the day, and pages are stacked up
> in the queue, but even in the middle of the night, it can take upwards
> of a minute for a page to be delivered.  Sometimes, they come almost
> instantly, then just a moment later, take almost a minute.  There's no
> way that the queue was empty, then suddenly built up to a big backlog,
> all of a sudden in the middle of the night.  Why are pages not just
> sent out immediately?

My understanding is that in some areas, the same radio channels are
shared by several paging companies.  Each company gets a shot at the
channel during its allocated time slot (every few minutes).  Also,
each channel is served by multiple transmitter sites.  To prevent
interference to pagers located within range of more than one, they all
transmit at slightly different times.

The effect of both of these designs is that there is a quantizing of
the delivery time.  If you happened to queue your message immediately
after your local tower's time-slot, it probably had to wait for the
next one.


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


[Moderator's Note: Long ago, klutzy answering service operators could
get the queue all jammed up also. At Rogers Answering Service, each
position had a little red 'beehive lamp' which when illuminated told
them the frequency was available to them. The operators would sit
there with their finger on a key that put them on a tie-line to the
transmitter; that 'on the air' light came on and it was like a contest
to see who could hit their button first and start speaking.  The old
voice pagers of twenty years ago were very airtime intensive.  On the
one I used, if you left the squelch open to listen, the operators
would never shut up. They were on there (from several answering
services) just seconds behind each other. Sometimes they would walk
all over each other by accident in their rush to run their boards and
handle pages, etc.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 22:25 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) asks:

> Why is there a delay in the delivery of pages?  Why are pages not
> just sent out immediately?

Perhaps your paging system controller is driving a number of base
stations and talks to each in turn.  This reduces the risk of pagers
halfway between bases receiving a corrupted message due to both bases
transmitting at once.


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]     Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA


[Moderator's Note: I am reminded of when I used to have a voice pager
back about 1970-72. It was a big bulky thing given to me by Rogers
Telephone Answering Service. Callers dialed a seven digit number, then
an 'extension number' to specifically trigger my unit. They'd then
speak a ten second message into their phone. To my chagrin after I had
used the pager a couple months I found out that Rogers was sharing the
frequency with two long-time mobile radio users who also had licenses
for that frequency. They had agreed to keep their communications
'short', but none the less when they got on, the air was theirs until
they got off. These mobile customers were patched through *their*
answering service somehow. Of idle curiosity one day, I had the
squelch open on my unit listening to other pages, and here comes this
guy keying up from his car: "Service, would you gimme <some phone
number>" ... okay she says, and dials it.

Must have been a very busy service, since as soon as she dialed it,
she split to go on with other calls. She never supervised him, and for
that matter dialed a non working number since the air was filled with
'... check the number and dial again or ask the operator for
assistance ...' for about twenty minutes after the mobile user had
abandoned it before 'Service' woke up and pulled the cord or whatever.
Well! Within ten seconds of that call coming down, the two or three
other answering services with voice pagers on the frequency came
rolling through with backed-up pages waiting in the queue. Operators
from the different answering services all out there coming through
right after each other along with the automated (left in the system
directly by callers) pages. For ten or fifteen minutes it was one
voice page after another as the logjam got undone. Some had no doubt
waited more than 30 minutes. What fun! I am sure those old systems
left the answering service operators frustrated as well.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #175
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27288;
          14 Mar 93 22:45 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25499
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 14 Mar 1993 20:12:32 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17494
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 14 Mar 1993 20:11:59 -0600
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 20:11:59 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #176

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 14 Mar 93 20:12:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 176

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: An Alarming Circuit ID Technique! (Dave Levenson)
    Re: An Alarming Circuit ID Technique! ([e-mail])
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (H. Hallikainen)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Dave Levenson)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Marvin Sirbu)
    Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Brad S. Hicks)
    Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: AT&T Free Time Rewards ([e-mail])
    Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing (Dan Danz)
    Re: Internet Access From Home (Carl Oppedahl)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: An Alarming Circuit ID Technique!
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 05:56:45 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (that's
me) writes:

> NJ Bell recently spent two weeks installing two private lines between
> my business and residence locations.  The endpoints are actually about
> six miles apart, and are both served by the same central office.

> Well, now the lines work as tariffed.  I have voice and data service
> between my house and my office.  And except for the readers of this
> article, nobody will ever know ...

> [Moderator's Note: Ah, but I have lots of good NJB people reading this
> Digest and they may recognize themselves or a co-worker!  :)   PAT]

Yes, but they are included in the phrase 'readers of this article',
aren't they Pat?


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


[Moderator's Note: The actual people who did the work may not be
readers here, but their supervisors or managers may be, and the word
will filter down.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 09:27:06 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: An Alarming Circuit ID Technique!
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


 From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail]
(Dave Levenson):

> I called NJ Bell.  Then sent the technician back.  He said that he
> could replace the line cards in the SLC with the older type that
> allowed him to adjust the gain independently in each direction.  He
> also brought some test gear with him, and confirmed my loss
> measurements.  (The tariff says that OSNA lines will present a loss of
> 4.0 dB in each direction.)

 From your description it sounds like NJ Bell tried to use a dual
SPOTS (Super POTS) (TM of AT&T) channel unit to provide the service.
This application for this card is not recommended but, since it
frequently works, the telcos often try it. The correct channel unit is
the single FXO (at the CO end) and FXS (station end) pair of units
which have gain adjustment and appears to be what they used to fix it.
It is not an older card; it's just more expensive and requires a
craftsperson to manualy set the gain. The SPOTS units just slap right
in.

> The older SLC cards require a double-width slot.  Using them meant
> moving two other subscribers' circuit packs to different slots, to
> free up pairs of adjacent backplane slots to accomodate the older
> card.  The FXS/FXO are the same width as SPOTS but the SPOTS serves
> two customers. The man at the remote SLC location pulled the master
> control card out of the SLC equipment bay serving the OSNA lines.

> (The conference call was disrupted by this process.  Approximately 96
> of my neighbors were Since I`m not aware of a "master control card" on
> a SLC96, I assume he pulled out a power supply card to take the entire
> system out. However, I bet he really just pulled an LIU (Line
> Interface Unit) to take out a single T1 line (24 customers) since this
> takes fewer customers out of service and provides the same
> identification.

Did you ever find out what was actually wrong? I mean the SPOTS should
definitely NOT had 18 db of loss in one direction and, in fact, the
FXS/FXO pair can`t provide that much gain.

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 18:37:35 GMT


    Although fax and email have been around for several years now,
the volume of letter mail at the usps is still increasing, I think.
I got a tour of the usps sorting station in Goleta a couple years ago.
They are using some very fancy technology to sort letter mail.  Most
letter mail is now machine sorted at various locations around the
country.  Incoming mail that is not barcoded (I think large mail
users get a little discount for barcoding their mail) is sent to a
barcoding station.  Mail with typed addresses  have the address read
by an OCR machine, which then sprays the zip code bar code onto the
envelope.

Even if the writer did not use the nine digit zip, the system looks up
the nine digit zip for that address and codes the envelope with it.
For hand-written addresses, a person reads the address, keys it in,
then the machine codes the envelope.  I'm not sure of what the
operator has to key in.  I'd expect it to be something like number,
street, city, state, zip so the envelope does get coded with a full
nine digit zip.  At the destination sorting station (Goleta for us),
the mail is sorted into route order based on the 9 digit zip.  All
this for 29 cents.

    As far as I know, ups and fed ex are still hand sorting
everything.  Both services are barcoding packages, but the barcodes
are with a package serial number to allow tracking.  They are not
coding with a zip code to allow sorting.

    So, realizing it's popular to bash the usps, I was quite
impressed with what they're doing.


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 03:19:13 GMT


Our Esteemed Moderator said:

> The Post Office has made some concessions to modern technology. They
> have an agreement with MCI Mail and ATT Mail (as well as Western
> Union's 'Mailgram' program) to accept email on printers, stuff it in
> envelopes and mail it at the post office nearest the delivery address.
> The Post Office is involved in faxes, as another article in this issue
> will note, but it is poorly advertised.   PAT]

In the early eighties, the post office tried to get into electronic
mail in a big way with the E-COM program. Unfortunately, the enabling
regulations bore the marks of lobbying by the value-added network
providers, who feared that a modernized post office might take their
business away, and the resulting beast was a resounding fiasco.

The original idea was a sound one: Large amounts of mail come from
mass mailers, and it ought to be a good idea to avoid sorting
envelopes, by receiving the material on magnetic tape from multiple
mailers, merge the records and sort them by carrier route before
printing.

About 32 large post offices around the country were equipped with
E-COM processing centers designed by RCA in the old Victrola factory
in Camden NJ, and including some really interesting paper handling
devices made by specialty companies in faraway places (I remember an
automatic advertizing insert selector/folder/stuffer made in Italy).

The people that they were really targeting were the utility companies
and insurance companies. Mailings could be submitted on magnetic tape
or online via remote job entry (IBM2780-like, async or X.25). You
could submit any number of entries in a single mailing, but you had to
pay for at least 200.

The problem that killed them was that they were not allowed to
transfer data electronically between the 30+ processing centers. The
customer had to split the batch into pieces for each of the centers,
or dump it all into the mailstream at a single center and lose the
processing advantages of the electronic injection.

Other significant problems included:

Utility commissions mandated bill inserts for all sorts of regulatory
garbage. This meant customized print setups at the post office.
Again, this nullified the inherent processing advantages of the
system.

The electronic submission formats were designed by someone with a
textbook in hand and no real-life experience. As a result, the
IBM-2780 like submission format was not useable by any of the many
word processing systems with 2780-like communication options. It also
was not compatible with real IBM2780 RJE terminals, and in fact
happened to require a feature that could not be provided by stock IBM
communication controllers used by the very large companies they were
courting.

Finally, this was implemented a couple of years before high-resolution
page printers (commonly known as laser printers) became available.
These would have allowed printing of envelope stuffer brochures and
return envelopes on the fly.

I think the system went online in 1982, and when the legally mandated
five year period was over, the systems were dismantled and sold for
scrap.

I worked for the company that supplied the communications interfaces
to the system, and we did quite a bit of benchmarking to prove that we
could handle the large loads of data transfers that were envisaged.
We were very proud when the system when online, and I still think this
could have been great.


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] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 05:28:42 GMT


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

> You would think maybe the US Post Office would have something as
> simple and common as a fax machine ...

What amazes me is that the US Post Office can get away with charging
$0.29 for a one-ounce letter.  A one- to two-page fax costs less than
that between almost any two places in the US, and gets there faster.


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


[Moderator's Note: Except of course, there are times when original
documents are required, such as checks in payment, signatures on other
documents, etc.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 16:42:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Marvin Sirbu <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?


If the U.S. Postal Service began offering fax service there would be
an incredible hew and cry from companies like Mailboxes Etc. and
others that a Fedral Government agency that does not have to pay taxes
was competing unfairly with a private sector business.

About a dozen years ago the Post Office proposed an innovative service
with the airlines: they would install ticket printers in Post Offices
around the country and provide next day delivery of airline tickets
ordered directly from the airlines.  Travel agencies, which account
for about half of all ticket sales for the airlines saw this as a
direct attack on one of their major comaprative advantages: local
delivery.  They threatened to stop writing tickets on any airline that
signed up for the USPS service.  Needless to say the service was
stillborn.

The USPS is incredibly sophisticated at things which don't bring
about an outcry from competitors -- like using neural network
technology to build OCR decoders that can process 30,000 addresses per
hour and spray bar codes on an envelope to simplify further sorting.
But let them try and expand the services offered from their post
offices and hear the howls from retailers who would be hurt
competitively.


Marvin Sirbu

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 14 Mar 93 21:25:13 GMT
Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted


> I have read many messages on this bulletin board ...

Apropos of nothing, except the way Carl started his message: I love
the "blind men and the elephant" wording that I see here all the time.
I get this via email; to me, it is and will always be Telecom Digest.
But I see messages here from UseNetters who would never think to call
it anything other than comp.dcom.telecom; it's transparent to them
that this starts out as a mailing list. And the FidoNetters who are
getting it gatewayed via EchoMail either see it as "this echo" or if
they're new enough, just as "this BBS."

But anyway, something Pat said in response struck me as odd; is this
really true?  And if so, how counter-intuitive!

> ... the B carriers are owned by the local 'wireline' telephone
> company in the area. ... Here in Chicago, Cellular One (the A carrier)
> is owned by Southwestern Bell, a telephone company in another part of
> the USA.  On the other hand, the same Southwestern Bell is the B
> carrier operating in the St.  Louis, Missouri area. ...  Is all that
> clear?

OK, I'm not very familiar with cellular, but so far I think I'm still
with you. But the thing that struck me as weird, given this, is that:

> the A carriers stick among themselves with things like roaming
> agreements; the B carriers do the same.

Now wait a minute. Suppose I run down to Southwestern Bell Mobile
Systems (as I've been thinking about doing) and pick myself up a
cellular phone; since I live in SWBT territory, I'd be on a B carrier.

Now suppose that I ask for roaming and take my SWBT "B" phone up to
Chicago. Are you telling me that SWBT would rather I use Ameritech's
"B" service, sharing the revenue, than refer me to their own Chicago
"A" service?  Why in Eris' name would they do that?

For that matter, if I got a Cybertel (St. Louis' "A carrier") mobile
phone, why would they rather I use SWBT's "A carrier" service while I
was in Chicago, given that in my home market SWBT and Cybertel are
direct competitors?


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


[Moderator's Note: A cellular company gets very little from you as a
customer when you roam *elsewhere* -- the distant cellular company
gets most of it. All your home company gets is a few cents for the
billing aggravations. When you are in Chicago, so little is at stake to
them financially they probably don't care if a subsidiary of their
direct competitor gets the money or some third party (in this context)
like Ameritech gets it. That being the case, what is the tie which
binds?  I think back in 1983 or so when cellular started, divestiture
dictated that in order to have 'competition' in the cellular industry
(yuk!) there had to be two carriers in each place: yes, the local
telco, ever eager, could be in the cellular business if they wished,
but to offset potential monopolies there had to be a 'non-local-telco'
in the business also, so consumers would have a choice and not get
ripped off (too badly, yuk!) by the sole provider, the greedy old local
telco, which up until 1983 generally meant the Mother Company.

So they said, come one, come all, let's everyone be in the cellular
business and give some rough competition to Mother's Daughters ... it
will be gpod for the consumers, you know ... trouble is, there were
not that many applicants other than telcos, and some small rural areas
still have only one carrier from lack of anyone else wanting the local
market. So they cheated (or revised their definitions a little) and
said telcos from other towns could come in to fill the 'alternate to
telco' choice, but they could not be telcos as such.  That is why SWBT
cannot come to Illinois and do business in cellular as SWBT. They use
the name 'Cellular One' instead.  Ameritech Mobile operates as the B
carrier in the central states where they are the local telco (Ohio,
Indiana. Michigan, Illinois) and as the A carrier in other places
where they have gotten into the market.  A couple of Ameritech's 'A'
locations do business as guess what? Why, Cellular One, of course, the
catch-all generic name for a large collection of cellular companies
unrelated in any way (in theory) except their stated duty to provide
competition to the local telco. Ameritech cannot go to Texas, for
example, and operate as 'Illinois Bell Cellular', but they can operate
there under some other name. So the tie that binds the B carriers and
the A carriers is "us" versus "them" in the spirit of divestiture.
Given time outside the watchful eye of the court, I suspect all sorts
of cozy alliances outside the A/B scheme would develop among the
cellular providers.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 20:44:55 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: Really, the B carriers are owned by the local
> 'wireline' telephone company in the area. For example, in Chicago,
> Ameritech Mobile is the B carrier; they also operate Illinois Bell,
> our telco.  The A carriers are the 'non-wireline' carriers. They will
> frequently be telephone companies also, but in some other part of the
> country.  The A carriers often times use the generic name 'Cellular
> One'. Here in Chicago, Cellular One (the A carrier) is owned by
> Southwestern Bell, a telephone company in another part of the USA.  On
> the other hand, the same Southwestern Bell is the B carrier operating
> in the St.  Louis, Missouri area.  So if a telco goes to the territory
> of some other telco to operate cellular, they do it as an A carrier.
> The telco which 'belongs there' (or has historically always been the
> telco in that community) is the B carrier.  Is all that clear? :) In
> addition, the A carriers stick among themselves with things like
> roaming agreements; the B carriers do the same.  PAT]

    So, is GTE MobilNet here in San Luis Obispo an A carrier or a
B carrier?  We are served by Pacific Bell, but the GTE Mobilnet system
is based in Santa Barbara, where GTE is the local telco.  The border
between GTE and PacBell is at the county line, about 30 miles south of
here.  As I understand the system, GTE does all their cellular
switching in Santa Barbara and just has cell sites up here, connected
to SB by T-1 lines.  So, a call across the room goes to SB and back.
So, is GTE Mobilnet a B carrier here, or do they switch from B to A
when they cross the Santa Maria River?


Harold


[Moderator's Note: Good question. I don't know anything about that
part of the country. Where you have two major telcos serving one metro
area like Los Angeles (Bell and GTE) and they both are in the cellular
business as well, then I guess some arbitrary decision was made in the
past.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: AT&T Free Time Rewards
Organization: ProLine [pro-gallup]
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 07:58:52 MST


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Randall K. Smith) writes:

> The Free Time promotion sounded too good to pass up, so I called and
> tried to sign up for it.  But, unfortunately, it's a "targeted"
> promotion and if you're not one of the targeted few, it's no go.

For my Reach Out America service, AT&T offered me one month free if I
continue to average $25 in charges per month for the next six months.
Since I do average considerably more than $25 a month in AT&T charges,
and the free month will be based on the average of six months of
calls, I couldn't refuse the offer. :)

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Danz)
Subject: Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing
Date: 14 Mar 1993 00:09:45 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Harold Hallikainen writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Craig
> Moynihan) writes:

>> A phone can use an analog phone line to orignate and receive phone
>> calls. A modem is hooked up to this same phone line. This modem is set
>> answer on the third ring (S0=3). Another modem calls this modem.  The
>> AA light flashes on and off, but the modem does not answer.
>> Occasionally, the modem will answer after a hundred rings or so.

> One problem I've noticed with most modems is that they are
> easily confused if they are receiving data on the RS232 port (or thru
> the computer bus) while the line is ringing.  We often want to be able
> to call a system that has a modem and terminals connected to a single
> serial port.  If there is data being sent to the terminals (and the
> modem, which is then in the command mode) when the line rings, the
> modem will often answer for a very short time, then go back on hook.

I had a problem like this with a Racal-Vadic VA 212 modem at a
customer site once. It seems that the PBX that handled the incoming
call to the modem had discriminating ringing enabled.  This is a
feature that rings two short tones for outside calls and one long ring
for internal calls.  The two short rings were not recognized as
ringing by the PROM code in the modem.  While the modem manufacturer
provided an upgrade, we also were able to get around the problem by
turning off discriminating ringing in his PBX.


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] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Internet Access From Home
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 20:58:57 GMT


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

> I am interested in getting internet access capabilities from my home
> computer.  How do I do that? I have a Mac IIvx. What hardware/software
> will I need and who do I call to allow access and get the internet
> access phone number?

There is a newsgroup which you might not know about, called
alt.internet.access.wanted.  It is perfect for your query.  (I realize
you may not have access to that group, in which case that would be why
you did not post to it.)  Anyway, if you can I suggest you post to
that group.

If you are not able to post to that group directly, you may wish to
consider using one of the services that lets you post via email.  For
example, you could post to:

[e-mail]

and state in your posting that you would like to get responses via
email.

Best of luck.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza   New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #176
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05631;
          15 Mar 93 2:11 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08607
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 14 Mar 1993 23:41:45 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17961
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 14 Mar 1993 23:41:06 -0600
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 23:41:06 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #177

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 14 Mar 93 23:40:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 177

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Anthony J. Stieber)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Samuelson S. Rehman)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Joe George)
    Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Robert Berger)
    Re: Facsimile CNG Tone (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy (Dave Leibold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Anthony J Stieber)
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Date: 14 Mar 1993 22:26:07 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee


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

> What about using paging to get data TO remote equipment?  Are there
> any devices that are pagers with an RS-232 port, instead of a display?
> This way, you could send (short) commands to remote locations, without
> requiring a phone line be present.

Yes, Motorola sells one called the NewsStream.  SkyTel sells the same
unit under the SkyStream name.  Hewlett-Packard sells their Mobile
Data Link cradle into which a NewStream slides into one side and an
HP-95LX MS-DOS palmtop computer slides into on the other side.  The
NewsStream will also work without the cradle on MS-DOS and Macintosh
laptop computers.

Here's some contact information for these and other companies:

Last Revision 1993.03.14

Packet and cellular radio modems and network providers, email gateways.

The latest version of this file is available via anonymous ftp on the
Internet as: csd4.csd.uwm.edu:/pub/Laptop/data.radio

This information is in no particular order.  I am but a customer of
some of these companies.  This information is not guaranteed, and may
be outright wrong.  Use at your own risk.  Please send additions or
corrections.

Mobitex packet radio network and Mobidem packet radio modem:

Ericsson GE Mobile Communications Inc., a division of Telefon AB LM Ericsson
Wireless Computing
15 E. Midland Ave.  Paramus, NJ
201-265-6600  201-265-9115 fax  [phone]

Packet radio network provider:

RAM Mobile Data
10 Woodbridge Ctr. Drive, Suite 950
Woodbridge, NJ 07095
800-736-9666    [e-mail]

Ardis packet radio network and packet radio modems:

Iridium Satellite Digital Radio System
Motorola     800-247-2346

EMBARC data pager (Electronic Mail Broadcast to A Roaming Computer):

Motorola
800-EMBARC-4   800-362-2724

National paging and SkyStram:

SkyTel
800-456-3333 x764

Satellite radio system:

Ellipsat
Carincross Holdings Pty
Sydney, Australia

Internet, UUCP, CI$, ATT, etc mail gateway for pagers and packet radio
networks:

Anterior Technology
PO Box 1206    Menlo Park CA 94026-1206
415-328-5615   415-322-1753 fax
[e-mail]  [e-mail]

Cellular phone data modem, fax, etc, interfaces:

Axsys, Axcell
Spectrum Cellular Corporation
2611 Ceder Springs Road   Dallas, TX 75201
214-999-6000   214-880-0151

Axsys, Axcell dealer:

Applied Engineering
3210 Beltline Road   Dallas TX 75234
800-554-macs x401   214-241-6060   214-484-1365 fax

Wireless 9600bps modem, UHF RF, 50-200 yards:
$540, UK pounds 301

New Era Microsystems Ltd
24 Cargate Ave   Aldershot, Hamshire
GU11 3EW  UK     44-252-345426   44-252-317699 fax

Usenet to satellite uplink system:

415-424-0380     [e-mail]

GPS reciever, GPSpac:

Palmtree Products, Inc.
145 Washington Street   Norwell, MA 02061
617-871-7050   617-871-6018 fax

Integrated cellular phone/modem:

Vital Communications
1983 Marcus Ave., Suite 111
Lake Success, NY 11042
800-42-VITAL   516-437-4400

Satellite radio:

Qualcomm

Satellite radio:

Inmarsat
Mobile Telesystems

AirLink wireless digital modems, 64kpbs to fractional T1:

Cylink Corporation
310 North Mary Avenue   Sunnyvale, CA 94086
800-533-3958   408-735-5800   408-720-8294 fax


<-:(= Anthony Stieber    [e-mail]   uwm!uwmcsd4!anthony

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 19:40:10 GMT


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

> gotten.  I have service from PacTel Paging, and for $21 a month, I get
> coverage throughout WA, OR, CA, and AZ.  This is for a display pager.
> Local coverage only is $9 a month.

Our paging is from MetroMedia and runs $10/month for tone only for all
of CA, parts of NV and AZ.

> What about using paging to get data TO remote equipment?  Are there
> any devices that are pagers with an RS-232 port, instead of a display?
> This way, you could send (short) commands to remote locations, without
> requiring a phone line be present.

I got some info from Motorola on just such receivers, as I recall
(it's buried here somewhere ...).  Such receivers could be used in the
"data broadcasting" idea I mentioned before.  In our applications, we
need two way communications with the remote sites, so paging does not
seem feasible for that part of the system.  We have suggested people
get a "rack mount cellular phone" and plug our system into that when
no phone service is available at the site.  There are also the radio
link POTS "line extenders" that can be used to get POTS at a remote
site by radio.

> Also, why is there a delay in the delivery of pages?  I can understand
> when the system may get busy during the day, and pages are stacked up
> in the queue, but even in the middle of the night, it can take upwards
> of a minute for a page to be delivered.  Sometimes, they come almost
> instantly, then just a moment later, take almost a minute.  There's no
> way that the queue was empty, then suddenly built up to a big backlog,
> all of a sudden in the middle of the night.  Why are pages not just
> sent out immediately?

    I would think the only reason for any delay would be a backed
up queue somewhere in the system.  Since my pages are broadcast
throughout the state, there could be a lot of traffic somewhere else
that is causing the backlog.  I wonder if this is truly a "simulcast"
system where all sites transmit the pages simultaneously, or do they
maintain local queues and distribute pages to each site in some manner
similar to usenet news.  Is there just one queue for this system?  Or
is there one for each site.  I don't know if the paging frquency I'm
on also handles voice pages, but, if so, I'm sure that would really
slow things down.  What are the rates on voice pagers now?  I'd expect
them to be the most expensive, based on air time requirments.  Are
voice pages put on the air live, or are they stored and aired in
sequence, allowing several incoming phone calls simultaneously leaving
voice page messages.


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Samuelson S. Rehman)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 14:18:33 -0800
Subject: Re: Tell me About Your Pager


>> transmitter control systems.  On an alarm, the system would dump
>> transmitter parameters to the on call tech's pager (alphanumeric).

> What about using paging to get data TO remote equipment?  Are there
> any devices that are pagers with an RS-232 port, instead of a display?
> This way, you could send (short) commands to remote locations, without
> requiring a phone line be present.

We have developed a technology for transmiting encapsulated data in a
paging frequency, called Newspager (has been operating in four
countries for about three yours now), which has a serial port connected
to it. You can read and write to the built-in database system from
your PC. In fact, one of our licensee (HPL Hong Kong) has been using
Newspagers to driver and supply information to PCs for about a year
now. The version manufactured by Motorola is called Inflo, which has a
serial that supports up to 9600 bps, and another version by Uniden
which supports 4800 bps serial I/O. (You can call Motolora or send
email to [e-mail] for details).

> Also, why is there a delay in the delivery of pages?  I can understand
> when the system may get busy during the day, and pages are stacked up
> in the queue, but even in the middle of the night, it can take upwards
> of a minute for a page to be delivered.  Sometimes, they come almost
> instantly, then just a moment later, take almost a minute.  There's no
> way that the queue was empty, then suddenly built up to a big backlog,
> all of a sudden in the middle of the night.  Why are pages not just
> sent out immediately?

Well, there are mainly two reasons for that. First you have to
understand, to save battery, pager addresses are assigned to one of
the seven fixed frames withing a POCSAG batch.  Therefore, if you want
data to be sent immediately, you will have to generate a new batch for
each page you sent, which will obviously waste a lot of airtime.
Therefore, like in most comm. protocol, the "encoder" will wait for a
certain amount of time, hoping that the next packets can fit in the
free slots and generate a completely filled batch. So, it back to that
"Speed against Size" problem again.

Secondly, most paging terminals have to manage zones. It has to pick,
resort and decide which packets should go to which queue, which in
fact could be done by any 486 machine with a good piece of software
 ... but ... if you have seen some of the most popular paging systems,
you'll realize that they are mostly hardware based and are not very
intelligent machines. The US paging companies are notorious about their
slow response time and transmission reliability.  Look at some other
countries and you'll be surprised how efficient and reliable a POCSAG
frequency could be.


Best Regards...

Samuelson S. Rehman
{Systems Programmer - RnD.NCA, Director of NIS Systems}
Newspager Corp. of America
voice:[phone] | fax:[phone] | email:[e-mail],[e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
From: [e-mail] (Joe George)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 17:51:08 EST
Organization: The Waffle Whiffer, Atlanta, GA


In comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] writes:

> The key to the IBM PC's not working was their keyboards.  So, the
> problem is, as you said, shielding.  The capacitive mechanisms of the
> keyboard would not work in the environment at the radio station.
> Keyboards which use a different technology than IBM's would work.

This is common not just with IBM PC's but with many different kinds of
IBM terminals.  They all seem to use similar technology in the
keyboard s.  I had a problem with a customer last week where a rather
large space heater managed to grunge keyboard response on about 30 IBM
3196 (AS/400 type) terminals.


Joe

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 19:34:25 GMT


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

> Believe me, if any hair was going to be standing on end at any of my
> transmitter sites, I would be the first to notice. And I can prove it:
> my mug shot was in the 3/7 of the {San Jose Mercury}. The picture was
> taken the week before.

> [Moderator's Note: Don't let John fool you. His picture in the papers,
> like that of Ann Slanders and her twin sister Scabby Van Buren was
> taken thirty years ago. :) I've heard rumors that he is bald-headed,
> his hair having fallen out after working around that radiation all
> these years. :)   PAT]

No, Pat, John's right.  I saw him in the flesh when I was out in San
Jose late in 1992, and he really has a full head of white hair (unless
it all fell out in the last three months!).

Oh yes, and it wasn't standing on end the night I had dinner with him
and a friend in Los Gatos.


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


[Moderator's Note: Well then, maybe all that radiation caused him to
grow more hair.  :)    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Berger)
Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 02:48:18 GMT


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

> the B carriers are owned by the local 'wireline' telephone company
> in the area.

In some rural areas the B carrier is also an independent company.

My  guess is the wireline companies don't consider such areas worth
pursuing themselves and allow an independent to take the area ...


[Moderator's Note: Well you have to remember a history lesson here.
AT&T often used to accuse MCI of 'skimming the cream', but seventy
years ago, the Mother Company was the biggest cream skimmer around.
The majority of *rural* America did not yet have phone service in the
1920's. The lack of telephones and other basic utility services in
rural areas was such a scandal that President Franklin D. Roosevelt
started the Rural Electrification Agency to provide federal loans to
build and maintain Telephone Cooperative Societies in the hinterlands.
The local farmers started the telephone co-op, strung the wires to the
nearest point of contact with (preferably, if possible, out of
principle) GTE or (as a last recourse if necessary) AT&T ... that's
how much people disliked 'The Bell' even back then. Then they would
hire the wife of one of them to run the switchboard, usually out of
her home, with the Farmer's Daughter watching after the board when mom
and dad went out, etc.

AT&T claimed it was much too expensive to provide service to those
areas; they were happy to let the government front the money even if
the farmers were a sassy independent bunch who would string the wire
another five miles if they had to to reach a central office they
'approved of' (i.e. a GTE operating company). AT&T knew the profits
from the long distance traffic -- their baliwick -- would get back to
them anyway. Then comes the 1950's and the farmers finally got their
REA mortgages paid off. For the first time in a quarter-century the
telephone cooperatives started making profits with no debt service
monkeys on their back. Bingo, all of a sudden AT&T decides to start
buying them up, 'in order to modernize the system'.

The equipment was getting old and cranky, the farmer's wives were
getting tired of working and with the daughters gone, good help was
hard to find. Rather than go in debt all over again to replace the old
switchboards, the farmers sold out to their long time nemesis, "The
Bell", as they called it for whatever song and dance AT&T was willing
to give them as payment. AT&T bought out dozens of those telephone
cooperative societies once the blood, sweat and tears were out of the
way, and overnight they just became part of the Bell System company
in the region where they were located. Finally the federal government
got sore and told AT&T they were not allowed to aquire any more opera-
ing companies for any reason at all unless the operating company was
in bad financial straits and in imminent danger of ceasing operations
in which case AT&T *had* to take it!  Watch rural cellular for a few
years and see how the industry giants come in to take over once the
little independents get the mortgage paid off.  Same difference.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Facsimile CNG Tone
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 05:44:45 GMTn


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Richard W. Desaulniers) writes:

[ regarding CNG tones from originating fax machines ]

> I don't think this feature (i.e. being able to send CNG tones) is
> mandatory, but should one expect all facsimile units manufactured
> today to have that feature? What about the older facsimile units, do
> they have this feature?  Are there a lot of these older units out
> there?

Even on brand new units, the transmission of the CNG tone is under the
control of the user.

Most facsimile machines include a telephone handset, and can be used
as an ordinary voice telephone.  A user may pick up the handset, seize
an outgoing line, dial a number, and converse.  During the call, the
user may place a document in the scanner, press a button usually
labeled <START>, and switch from voice to fax mode.

When the user is manually dialing, the machine has no way to know
whether the user intends to eventually enter fax mode, or to keep on
talking.  Therefore, most machines don't send CNG tones when they are
being dialed with the handset off-hook in manual calling mode.

If the user chooses to insert a document, enter a number, and then
press <START>, causing the machine to dial and attempt a fax
conversation in automatic mode, then CNG tones are sent after dialing.

Some users like automatic mode (most useful for unattended sending).
Others like to dial and hear the call-progress tones, and only switch
to fax mode when they hear the far end fax answer tone.

Most fax machine users don't even realize that they are deciding
whether or not to send CNG tones in this process.


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

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 00:26:08 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy


Quebec language debates aside, the Toronto Bell Canada white pages has
English and French introductory sections. Nothing wrong with that,
except that there are about nine other languages that are more common
than French in Toronto, but less common than English (according to
some recent Statistics Canada numbers as charted in {The Toronto
Star}). Italian, Greek and Chinese are some of those prevalent Toronto
languages. One Toronto TV station (Channel 47) even specialises in
programmes in many languages.

Perhaps an idea should be borrowed from the white page introductory
sections of many other countries (Australia is one such country, I
believe): a brief description of the phone service (emergency numbers,
how to dial, etc) is translated into many languages.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #177
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07212;
          15 Mar 93 2:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30026
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 15 Mar 1993 00:44:08 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07996
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 15 Mar 1993 00:43:30 -0600
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 00:43:30 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #178

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 15 Mar 93 00:43:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 178

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (John Higdon)
    Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Hal Stitt)
    Re: How do I Order a Leased Voice-Grade Line? (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Summary: Mini-PBX in ISA PC (Dave Levenson)
    Re: The Future of Videophones (Martin Briscoe)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (John Higdon)
    No 900 in Louisiana? (J. Philip Miller)
    Sprint Counter-Offers (was AT&T Switch Bribe...) (Paul W. Schleck)
    FAQ Notes (Dave Leibold)
    Software For Data Download via High-Speed Lines (Nita Avalani)
    Information Wanted in CTS Datacomm Modems (William Petrisko)
    Caller ID For GTE in NC (Matthew Waugh)
    800 Number Woes (Dave Rand)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 21:21 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted


[e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> So, is GTE MobilNet here in San Luis Obispo an A carrier or a B
> carrier?  We are served by Pacific Bell, but the GTE Mobilnet system
> is based in Santa Barbara, where GTE is the local telco.

GTE Mobilnet is the B (wireline) carrier in each of its California
service areas. Whether it is indeed the LEC in any of those places is
irrelavent. It has more to do with timeliness of filed applications
and other matters. As long as GTE does actually supply local dial tone
ANYWHERE in a cellular service area, it can qualify for a B cellular
license. GTE Mobilnet is the Bay Area's B carrier and yet supplies a
very tiny number of exchanges with GTE wired dial tone.

California roaming arrangements are strange. In San Francisco, the B
carrier is GTE and the A carrier is Cellular One (partially owned by
PacTel). If you travel to Sacramento while talking on GTE, your call
will be handed off to PacTel Cellular (B carrier in Sacramento) with
whom you will be roaming. If you travel south from Santa Barbara, your
GTE Mobilnet call will hand off to PacTel Cellular in Los Angeles,
your roaming provider there. Yes, the competing companies actually
hand off calls in progress to each other if the caller travels across
the boundaries. (Billing is handled as if the caller made the entire
call within the area where the call originated.)


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Hal Stitt)
Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 05:37:18 GMT


[e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: Really, the B carriers are owned by the local
>> 'wireline' telephone company in the area. For example, in Chicago,
>> Ameritech Mobile is the B carrier; they also operate Illinois Bell,
>> our telco.  The A carriers are the 'non-wireline' carriers. They will
>> frequently be telephone companies also, but in some other part of the
>> country.  The A carriers often times use the generic name 'Cellular
>> One'. Here in Chicago, Cellular One (the A carrier) is owned by
>> Southwestern Bell, a telephone company in another part of the USA.  On
>> the other hand, the same Southwestern Bell is the B carrier operating
>> in the St.  Louis, Missouri area.  So if a telco goes to the territory
>> of some other telco to operate cellular, they do it as an A carrier.
>> The telco which 'belongs there' (or has historically always been the
>> telco in that community) is the B carrier.  Is all that clear? :) In
>> addition, the A carriers stick among themselves with things like
>> roaming agreements; the B carriers do the same.  PAT]

> So, is GTE MobilNet here in San Luis Obispo an A carrier or a
> B carrier?  We are served by Pacific Bell, but the GTE Mobilnet system
> is based in Santa Barbara, where GTE is the local telco.  The border
> between GTE and PacBell is at the county line, about 30 miles south of
> here.  As I understand the system, GTE does all their cellular
> switching in Santa Barbara and just has cell sites up here, connected
> to SB by T-1 lines.  So, a call across the room goes to SB and back.
> So, is GTE Mobilnet a B carrier here, or do they switch from B to A
> when they cross the Santa Maria River?

> [Moderator's Note: Good question. I don't know anything about that
> part of the country. Where you have two major telcos serving one metro
> area like Los Angeles (Bell and GTE) and they both are in the cellular
> business as well, then I guess some arbitrary decision was made in the
> past.  PAT]

The B carriers are generally the wireline carriers, but not always. If
the wireline carrier didn't build up a system within a specified time,
I believe within two years of being licensed, the area was available
to others via a lottery. In your case, Rt. 101 has a lot to do with
the outcome. GTE, the wireline carrier in Santa Barbara wound up with
an extension as the B carrier up 101 to north of San Ardo. According
to The Cellular Telephone Directory, you don't have an A carrier in
SLO. McCaw/Cellular One has the A license in Santa Barbara, but their
coverage only goes north to Santa Maria. Building systems along major
highways got a high priority early on when most cellular phones were
mounted in cars. It's still a priority in your area. The density of
cellular phone users probably falls off sharply within a few miles
east and west of 101.


Hal Stitt    [e-mail]    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: How do I Order a Leased Voice-Grade Line?
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 05:14:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Lars
Poulsen) writes:

> I have been asked to provide ordering specifications for a third party
> to lease a full-time voice grade circuit here in GTE-CA territory.
> The line is to be used to connect two V.32bis modems about six miles
> apart (served out of different central offices). The modems are
> designed for operation on the public switched telephone network (i.e.
> they expect a two-wire circuit with battery, dial tone and ring signal
> present).

> It seems to me that this is similar to an off-premise extension for a
> PBX; is that what I should order? If I get a two-wire "private
> circuit" will it have battery, dial tone and ring?

Not quite.  The OSNA line (used for PBX off-premise stations) has
dis-similar ends.  The PBX end is a current sink (looks to the PBX
like a station) while the station end is a current source (looks to
the station like the PBX line circuit).

The telco probably does offer a ringdown line (a service designed to
support two telephone sets -- go off-hook on either end and the other
end receives ringing).  That will support a couple of switched-service
modems if the originating modem can be programmed to go off-hook
without dialing or expecting dial tone.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Summary: Mini-PBX in ISA PC
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 05:16:37 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Simon Townsend)
writes:

> Not too many replies, but they may be useful. I enclose them all:

>  From: bears![e-mail]

> I'm not sure where to get them, but AT&T makes a voice power card,
> that has Unix driver suport.  It can handle four phone lines.

The AT&T 4-channel Voice Power card has four telephone line
interfaces.  It has no telephone station interfaces, and no capability
to make/break connections between its four ports.  Yes, it can answer
four trunks, but no, it is not a PBX.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin Briscoe)
Subject: Re: The Future of Videophones
Date: 14 Mar 93 11:26:00 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Martin Briscoe)
Organization: Almac BBS Ltd. [phone]


> I am working on a research project concerning the future of
> videophones and videoconferencing.  Is there a future at all?

ICCTIS (the UK organisation that regulates Premium Rate "chat-lines")
announced last week that they will not allow the use of premium rate
chat-line services ("adult" type) on videophones -- so thats a big
potential market lost!


Martin     * 1st 1.10b #405 * Martin Briscoe
Fort William - Highland Region - Scotland

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 21:08 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?


On Mar 14 at 20:11, TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Except of course, there are times when original
> documents are required, such as checks in payment, signatures on other
> documents, etc.   PAT]

My unfortunate experience with the Post Office is that if you REALLY
need to get a document from one location to another, you should use
another service. NEVER EVER send an original, valuable document
through the US mail -- certified, registered or otherwise. I have had
irreplacable documents lost and the extra money spent registering or
certifying was literally wasted. The USPS has no way of tracking
anything within its system (unlike Federal Express which can).

All of the fabulous technology notwithstanding, the USPS provides
miserable, not even barely-adequate service. Add to that the miserable
attitude on the part of counter personel and you have an institution
whose demise will draw no tears from me.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: No 900 in Louisiana?
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 07:14:15 -0600 (CST)


Having just seen an ad for NBC's weather line (1-900-WILLARD) it
stated it was not valid in Louisiana.  Have they passed a law that
makes all 900 service illegal or only those that give their proceeds
to charity?


  J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
     Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
      [e-mail] - [phone] [362-2694(FAX)]

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

Subject: Sprint Counter-Offers (was AT&T Switch Bribe ...)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 12:47:40 CST
From: Paul W Schleck KD3FU <[e-mail]>


You may recall my short note on this forum a while ago about AT&T
offering me $75 to switch from US Sprint and my surprise that a
long-distance company would fork over that much hard cash when it's
not clear that would get that much in gross receipts (let alone
profit) from me in a year.

I'd like the thank the general feedback I got from other readers.
Some pointed out that it was based on the assumption that once I
changed I wouldn't want to change back for a while (is the public
realy that passive?).  Others recommended that I keep my secondary
account with Sprint and use the appropriate access codes whenever I
wanted to use Sprint instead (I pretty much surmised that from reading
the Digest over the years, but the replies reminded me to call Sprint
and confirm it, including retention of my FON card).

The switch has already taken place (based on calling 1-700-555-2424),
but no check yet.  Now Sprint has upped the ante by making a
counter-offer.  They'll switch me back for free at the end of 30 days
(the minimum service committment for the AT&T switch), and give me 75
minutes of long-distance the first month (probably a minute per $1
deal).  They assure me I can still pocket the AT&T check. What the
heck?

Now, if anyone calls me to task for this calling-plan ping-pong, I'll
just simply say, "Hey, I'm not the one playing games, you are.  If you
want to offer me all kinds of marketing hype and switching bribes that
profit from the telecom-illiterate, that's your choice.  I'm an
intelligent consumer who views long-distance as a product, and through
the use of tools like 10XXX codes and calling cards (including my
soon-to-arrive Orange Card), makes ongoing and intelligent choices
about what's best for me."

Jon Higdon is right when he says this isn't going to shake out the
market and make any one company the clear winner.  These tricks and
incentives will only cause the consumer to "expect" them and further
muddy the waters about costs and profits.


Paul W. Schleck  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Bear in mind that if anyone chooses to use the long
distance 1+ plans I am selling, I won't send any rebate checks out;
but I will gratefully try to continue sending a quality telecom news-
group feed out each day. :)    PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 00:28:43 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: FAQ Notes


Thanks to those who offered tips, fixes and ideas following the FAQ
list that was released many weeks ago.

I'm aware of the news.answers group for posting of such list, and I
did make an attempt to post the Telecom FAQ there. Unfortunately, it
was rejected on some technicalities, so another attempt to post there
will have to wait until I can study through the 110 Commandments for
that group and get the whole works right.

Carl Moore did nab some spelling and other errors; I'm now aware that
Ireland switched over to 00+ for overseas dialing.


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


[Moderator's Note: We all owe Dave and Carl Moore our thanks for first
starting the telecom FAQ and keeping it up to date. A copy automatically
goes to each new subscriber to the mailing list and it can also be
found  in the Telecom Archives using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nita Avalani)
Subject: Software For Data Download via High-Speed Lines
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 20:05:01 GMT


Is there any software out there which will allow to download data
between remote mainframes and sun/unix servers at the line speed or
close to the line speed?  The data throughput for Xcom6.2 (LU6.2) was
at about 24kb/sec, and about 2-5kb/sec for IND$FILE (LU2).  What do
people use for T1/T3 lines?  Are there any user-friendly, reliable
software (with 3270 emulators and GUI) capable of downloading daily
from remote mainframes (via T1/T3 lines) at around 1mb/sec - 100mb/sec
(or more)?


Nita

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

From: [e-mail] (William Petrisko)
Subject: Information Wanted in CTS Datacomm Modems
Date: 14 Mar 1993 22:28:17 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, College of Engineering and Mines, Tucson
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I picked up a couple of CTS Datacomm model 9629 leased line modems.

I'm curious if anyone has a manual or knows anything about them (what
are the two db25's ... sync or async, etc ...)

Any info would be appreciated.


bill petrisko   current address:   [e-mail]
aka n7lwo            soon to be:       [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew Waugh)
Subject: Caller ID For GTE in NC
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 01:31:31 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.


GTE in NC included a little insert on Calling Number Identification
with my phone bill this month. I thought a fairly good explanation of
CID, and promising it for us soon. By default we will get Per-Call
Blocking on *67 (1167 for pulse dialers). You can get Per-Line
Blocking (by which they mean by default your line will not be
identified) if you ask, at no charge. When you have Per-Line Blocking,
you use, you guessed it, *67 to allow your number to be passed.

They request that you return their card to sign-up for Per-Line
Blocking by April 23rd, if that tells us anything about their schedule.

They also included information on their SmartCall package, that
provides all those goodies like Call Return. They note: "Limitation:
These services now work on most calls, but only from within your local
calling area, and between the NNXs listed on the map." The map lists
the 2 GTE service areas in Durham and Monroe. From this, I surmise,
perhaps incorrectly, that GTE and Southern Bell aren't talking SS7
yet, and so Caller ID may well have these limitations for a while when
it is rolled out.


Matthew Waugh        [e-mail]
RTP Network Services     Data General Corp.
RTP, NC. (919)-248-6034

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Rand)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 15:57:28 PST
Subject: 800 Number Woes


For those wanting to make changes to their 800 numbers, with 800
number portability just around the corner, here is a tale of woe.

A few months ago, I ordered a personal 800 number. Pacific Bell in
Northern California has an excellant plan, with nation-wide and
international (Canada) access available for only $5 per month.  The
only problem is that Sprint is the carrier for the IXC portion.  Sigh.
Well, I ordered the service. It was turned on the day promised, but
only the local area worked. Sprint will only reload their switches at
Midnight, so it was the next day before calls outside the area were
available. International calls were not available until several days
(and many telephone calls) later. Getting billing information from
Sprint was almost impossible, and (when I finally got it), wrong.  I
was quoted the rate of "$0.36 to 0.60 per minute" for daytime calls
from Canada ... but I digress.

With the service from Sprint getting more and more erratic, and with
AT&T offering its Win-Back promotion (install free, and one free month
of calls), I decided to switch to AT&T. Pacific Bell agreed to refer
my old 800 number to the new one, and Sprint indicated that they would
do the same, both at no charge. AT&T was up, with international
access, before 9am of the morning the service was due to be turned on.
The old Pacbell/Sprint number was scheduled to be shut off the next
day (a Friday). On Friday evening, Pacbell had a refer message on, but
with the wrong 800 number listed as the referal. That was fixed early
Saturday morning. Sprint, however, claimed that it was impossible to
do the referal service free, but that they would be able to do it in
3-5 days, for "only" $125 extra, per month.

What?

After a long talk, and extracting the SA number from Pac Bell (the
number that actually issues the referral message), Sprint agreed to
translate to the same SA number that Pacific Bell was using. That was
on Saturday. By Sunday, international calls were still not working,
but calls outside of California (within the US) were. Calls inside of
California, but outside of Pacific Bell's territory still aren't
working, and Sprint is claiming Pacific Bell is to blame. Pacific Bell
(and me!) are claiming Sprint is to blame. Sigh!!

The moral of the story: If you have an 800 number, and want to change
carriers, wait until portability (May 1). Or have lots of time to
waste with service reps at your long distance provider.


Dave Rand   {pyramid|mips|bct|vsi1}!daver!dlr
Internet: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I am hoping that 800 portability will be the
occassion for many Digest readers with 800 numbers to allow that
traffic to be handled through my program, at rates ranging from 17 to
23 cents per minute depending on volume. There is no monthly fee, and
this, plus the Orange Card is a way Digest readers can help with the
expense of this publication in a painless way. I can now supply 800
numbers at the above rates, but will gladly accept your existing 800
number in my program if you prefer. If my prices are too high, please
don't sacrifice anything on my behalf, but if the rates are better
than or about the same as you pay now, please consider me.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #178
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12940;
          15 Mar 93 5:31 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30852
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 15 Mar 1993 03:04:36 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16792
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 15 Mar 1993 03:04:03 -0600
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 03:04:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #179

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 15 Mar 93 03:04:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 179

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    The Digest and Commercial Messages (TELECOM Moderator)
    "Stand Back, Buenos Aires..." (Paul Robinson)
    How Do I Get Rid of Line Noise? (Richard Sherman)
    Cellular Phone Price List (3/12) (Paul Robinson)
    Public Phone 2000 (Doug Krause)
    CFB & DID/OPX to Answering Service? (Jeff Wasilko)
    Re: Ohio Bell Making Your Life Easier (Henry Mensch)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (David Lemson)
    Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (David Lemson)
    Re: Disabling *70 (Tad Cook)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 02:27:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Digest and Commercial Messages


There have been some sincere questions raised by several people in the
past couple of weeks since I announced my new venture here, selling
telecom services of various kinds. The questions generally dealt with
the ethics involved in trying to maintain an impartial stance as a
Moderator while selling telecom-related products and services. The
people who asked these things did so in good faith, and the same kind
of response is warranted.

When I assumed responsibility for TELECOM Digest in 1988 (yes, it will
soon be five years of me here), the volume of messages and range of
topics was much smaller than it is now. The mailing list was about
one-tenth the number of names it is now. In addition, there had been a
hiatus where the Digest was not being distributed to Usenet. When I
took the reigns, the 'Usenet connection' via comp.dcom.telecom was
reinstated, and over the past four years numerous other networks have
begun accepting the telecom feed for their email subscribers, sometimes
by having them on the mailing matrix here, other times through what we
term an 'exploder address'; that is, a single copy of the Digest goes
out from here to a network address where it is then redistributed. In
total, there are approximatly 50,000 people who see the Digest each
day and read some or all of it. These additional readers have caused a
major increase in the number of submissions received each day. In 1988
enough material was received to issue a Digest every two days or so.
(Do any of the oldtime readers remember the first time I put out a
second issue in one day due to the amount of mail recieved? I do ...)

Well, I guess I am a victim of my own success; now there are always in
excess of a hundred messages arriving daily to be reviewed, and not
often, but sometimes there are closer to two hundred articles. If
there is a major news story in the papers, I'll usually get five or
more copies of it from readers; I select one or two for publication.
My point is, where five years ago the Digest took perhaps an hour of
time every day or so to publish, now, even with greatly expanded
automation, autoreplies and numerous filtering programs run against
the incoming mail, the Digest needs a minimum of three or four hours
daily, and even then you see perhaps a third to half of what comes in.

I had to reach a decision what to do, and my decision back in late
January was to leave my fulltime employment of some years with the
attornies and concentrate as much as possible on making the changes
needed to bring the Digest up to its full potential: to install new
software, to give the archives the time needed to organize the files
and remove outdated stuff, etc.

Of course, I still have to eat, pay rent, feed the cats, make my car
payment each month and whatnot ... and therein lies the rub ... what I
make from the Digest plus a couple dollars would get me a snack at the
7/11 on the corner. I thought a painless way for readers to help with
the task of keeping the Digest up and running as a (I believe) very
quality newsletter on the 'net' would be through the resaale of phone
service; something we all here are intimatly familiar with and use
daily. A close friend suggested 'why not have a fund raising drive
 from time to time, ala public radio/television', but that seemed to
me to be a bit crass, and honestly, I *hate* those fund raising
periods on Channel 11. Plus, I don't honestly feel the service I
perform here is all that good -- not as good as I would like to demand
of myself -- to make such an approach. I'd feel very guilty doing
that, particularly in bandwidth entrusted to me for telecom topics.

But when you sell things, presumably you have a loyalty to what you
are selling -- either that or you are a total charlatan perhaps, and
this presented the ethical question of 'whose side are you on as
Moderator?' ... most of you know I try to print as wide a variety of
opinion as I can here, given the limitations placed on me as a human
being who needs to sleep and work to survive, and if anything, I am
sometimes guilty of printing too much on a given topic just to insure
that no one feels they or their viewpoint were ignored. Some of you
have written to complain 'for goodness sakes, please close topic X'
after seeing several days of REplies ...

There will be no changes in Digest editorial/publication policy as a
result of my new business venture. No one should feel that unless
they use the Orange Card, my 800 numbers or my 1+ service that they
will suddenly become outcasts in this forum.  Nor do I intend to
hinder discussions about 1+ carriers, etc.  *I don't really care who
you buy these services from, as long as you will at least consider my
offerings with the understanding that your support of them means a
small portion of the revenue is returned to the Digest in the form of
residuals from the carriers I represent.*  This in turn means instead
of working for someone else 8-10 hours per day, coming home and
working on the Digest for a few hours in a dead-tired, half-awake
trance I'll be able to spend more time *doing it right* -- and I shall
be the first judge of my work here; I see many things I need to do to
make the Digest what it ought to be and what I want it to be.

I tried to pick products (the Orange Card) and services (800 numbers
and a 1+ service) I thought were good deals and not rip-offs. I do
want to hear complaints -- and god forbid, praise! -- if you use them
and enocunter problems or pleasures. The Orange Card is not exempt
 from needing 'bugs cleared up', although it is working pretty well.
The first of you to order it should be getting cards in the mail
during the week ahead ... cards one day, and PINS in separate mailing
a day or two before or after. Or you may get a form asking for more
information if there was something omitted on the form you mailed in.
By the way, we now have arrangements in place for you to charge your
Orange card calls to Visa/MC if desired, along with the $10 start up
fee. If you want this option, contact their office.

I hope my products will either be a good deal for you or at least be
no more expensive than what you are paying now ... and that if all
things are otherwise equal (if not to your advantage), you'll toss
your business my way.  *If you get treated poorly by any company I
represent, please tell me.*  Write to the Digest about it. :)

 ... So, it was either put the Digest to rest for awhile and go out to
find a 'real job' with real money or do what I really want to do,
which if you haven't guessed by now is devote more time to the Digest
and develop my own business in the process. There is only so much I
can do with $227 per week in unemployment compensation. :)

If you want to accuse me of being a money changer in the Temple, I
must plead guilty, but I hope it will never reflect in what we say and
do here in TELECOM Digest. Don't expect to see an advetisement here
every day for my products ... but they may get a casual mention every
week or two ... especially if it is the day the rent comes due.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 23:31:44 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: "Stand Back, Buenos Aires..."


(It was either that title or "Don't cry for me Argentina" what can I
say.)

In a recent TEELECOM Digest a user asked about my offhand comment
about the "Brazilian Telephone system, one that deserves the moniker
'worse than GTE."  The user wondered as he thought Brazil did much
better service, and perhaps thought I was mistaken.

I should simply have said "various South American countries" rather
than name any one.

I was mistaken.  The country I was thinking of *was* Argentina.  I
have heard that in Buenos Aires it is common to hire people to sit
around all day and try to get a dial tone to make a call.

My apologies to the Brazilian Telephone company for confusing it with
Argentina.  But what can they expect from us Gringos?  :)


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Sherman)
Subject: How Do I Get Rid of Line Noise?
Date: 15 Mar 1993 05:28:50 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Richard Sherman)


I have my modem plugged into a Phonejak system from Phonex.  This
system routes your phone signal through your house's electrical
system.  You plug the transmitter into a wall outlet and plug a line
from your phone outlet into the transmitter.  Then you plug the
receiver into any other outlet in your house and you have a phone
jack.

The problem is I get quite a bit of line noise in the electrical
system from other things in the house (dishwashers, ovens, etc.).  I
was wondering if something like a phone line noise or surge supressor
could be put between the phone line and the modem to eliminate this?
I've already tried plugging in an electrical surge supressor into the
electrical outlet and plugging the receiver into that.  It takes out
the phone signal though.

Has anyone had any experience with this sort of setup?  Do they make
phone line noise supressors at all, aside from the ones included in a
regular surge supressor?

Any help would be appreciated.


R. Stacy Sherman     [e-mail] or
GEnie: R.SHERMAN2    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 05:26:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Phone Price List (3/12)


This is a list of prices for Cellular Telephones in areas as seen by
me or reported to me, for the week ending 3/12/93.  Reports of prices
in other areas of the U.S. or the world is solicited to
[e-mail].  This list was delayed due to severe weather on
the East Coast.


Washington, DC:
                    No. of   Adv.
 Brand       Model   NAMs   Price    A/R?     Comments
 Fujitsu    Stylus   Dual   399.95   Yes   Flip Phone
 Motorola   DPC550   Dual   279.95   Yes   Flip Phone
 Motorola   8000M    Dual    99.95   Yes   'Block' portable
 Motorola   TVS200   Dual    18.88   Yes   Bag Transportable
 Uniden     CP5500   Dual   199.95   Yes   Shirt Pocket model
 -No Name-  N/A      N/A     89.95   Yes   Hand Held

A 'Yes' in the column 'A/R?' indicates that activation with the
store's preferred cellular carrier and a service contract with that
carrier is required to get this price ("Activation Required").  Where
'Yes' is indicated, the price will be higher without activation.

Activation of the telephone with a cellular carrier will probably
carry additional charges and these prices will not include taxes or
local assessments.

N/A in a column means the information was not available from the
source indicated.

A 'bag' phone is one where the handset is attached to the transciever
unit which is often larger, and the transciever unit is also usually
covered with a soft material, reminiscent of a handbag.  A 'block'
portable is a handheld which looks like it was carved out of a block
of wood.  'Flip' phone is one that is "flipped open" and the bottom
part that opens covered the dial pad and is the mouthpiece.

Prices listed in this issue are based on published advertisements.
Prices may be subject to negotiation or special arrangements.

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Krause)
Subject: Public Phone 2000
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 15 Mar 93 03:08:28 GMT


Greetings.  I'm on a Public Phone 2000 right now.  I'm in Dallas/ Fort
Worth Airport, Terminal 3-E, near gate 36.  I can't use the built-in
keyboard on the phone, but I have my laptop plugged into the data
port.  It seems to be working fairly well, but I'm at 1200 baud since
the 2400 connection was just junk.  Probably something I did wrong.  I
can hardly wait to see the bill.  :-)


Douglas Krause  [e-mail]    University of California, Irvine


[Moderator's Note: Thanks very much for taking the time and going to
the expense to send us a message from that phone. I hope your trip was
pleasant and not to someplace where the airport is shut down. By the
way can anyone give us any weather related telecom updates from the
eastern states? Are they even getting through at all?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Subject: CFB & DID/OPX to Answering Service
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 22:13:53 EST
Organization: Air Age Publishing, Wilton CT USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


We want to add a second fax at our office to keep up with traffic, and
we'd like to put it behind our PBX (rather than installing an
additional line for it). Can we use the CO's call-forward-busy on the
first fax line to provide roll-over to a DID number for the second
fax?

Also, we want callers who reach our auto-attendant after hours to be
able to reach our answering service if they wish to place an order.
Our auto-attendant only supports transfers to an internal extention
(to cut the risk for toll-fraud). My best guess is that a few OPX
circuits in an hunt group between our site and the answering service
would be best.

Are there any other circuit options I should keep in mind that might
be better suited/cheaper than OPXs (which are $250 to install and
$40/mo)? Should most answering services be able to terminate an OPX on
their switchboard (most services I deal with expect you to forward to
a DID number on their system)?


Thanks,

Jeff
Jeff's Oasis at Home.  Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                                       [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 22:05:50 -0800
Subject: Re: Ohio Bell Making Your Life Easier
Reply-To: [e-mail]


mtndew![e-mail] (Stephen Friedl) wrote:

>> "These home office specialists can answer questions about
>> installing a business line in your home or setting up a computer modem
>> or fax machine."

> Aha, now we see it.  Not only do these trained specialists try to get
> people to sign up for business rates, but this insert starts *every*
> customer thinking that you need a business line for these above
> things.

Well, when Pacific Bell started to send similar sorts of notices, I
was similarly suspicious ... I learned that (at least for Pacific
Bell) they were not especially interested in pushing business-
tariffed services on me; they were interested in selling ordinary
home-tariffed services which would make doing occasional business at
home easier.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (David Lemson)
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 06:23:51 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> What about using paging to get data TO remote equipment?  Are there
> any devices that are pagers with an RS-232 port, instead of a display?
> This way, you could send (short) commands to remote locations, without
> requiring a phone line be present.

That's a damn good idea.  If no one is doing it, someone should be.

> Also, why is there a delay in the delivery of pages?  I can understand

It all depends on the software that your paging service uses.  Our
campus service usually waits about 20-30 seconds before it sends out
the page (even with no queue waiting). I think that even up to a
minute is no big deal.  Chances are that there isn't enough of an
emergency that another minute will matter.  (Well, I suppose in a
hospital that may not be true but speaking as a computer support
person, it's hard to relate to that :-)


David Lemson                                                [phone]
University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin
Internet : [e-mail]                UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson
NeXTMail & MIME accepted                           BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD

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

From: [e-mail] (David Lemson)
Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 06:35:17 GMT


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> telephone company in the area. For example, in Chicago, Ameritech
> Mobile is the B carrier; they also operate Illinois Bell, our telco.
> The A carriers often times use the generic name 'Cellular One'. Here
> in Chicago, Cellular One (the A carrier) is owned by Southwestern
> Bell, a telephone company in another part of the USA.  On the other
> hand, the same Southwestern Bell is the B carrier operating in the St.
> Louis, Missouri area.  So if a telco goes to the territory of some

By sheer coincidence, the non-wireline carrier in St. Louis is called
CyberTel and, unless I am mistaken, is owned by Ameritech.  :-)  Of
course, the wireline carrier in STL is called Southwestern Bell Mobile
Systems.

(Funny to see the same ads from Cellular One in Champaign/Urbana and
CyberTel in St. Louis such as for the 'family pack' around Christmas,
etc.)  In case some people are confused by this, 'Cellular One' and
'CyberTel' are just trade names that various companies pay to use in
certain markets.


David Lemson                                                [phone]
University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin
Internet : [e-mail]                UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson
NeXTMail & MIME accepted                           BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD

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

From: hpubvwa![e-mail] (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: Disabling *70
Organization: very little
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 06:29:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Francis J Park) writes:

> I am dealing with a highly annoying roommate who is fond of turning on
> *70 to disable call waiting when he calls out voice.

> Is there any way to call the C&P business office, or perhaps TSPS
> Engineering, to disable the feature, specific to my line?

Gee, I would LOVE to have a roommate who uses this feature!  Far
better than ones who don't disable Call-Waiting, and then just ignore
the beep.


Tad Cook     |  Phone:  [phone]  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544
Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   [e-mail]
             |  Internet: [e-mail]           or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #179
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29590;
          16 Mar 93 2:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31599
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 15 Mar 1993 23:50:09 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18581
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 15 Mar 1993 23:49:32 -0600
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 23:49:32 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #180

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 15 Mar 93 23:49:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 180

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Will Martin)
    Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network (Dave Leibold)
    Bell South Cordless Phone (Ray Normandeau)
    SDH, Concatenation of 2 Mbit/s Signals? (Kees Hol)
    Email to Telecom Gold (was What is Telecom Gold?) (Drew Radtke)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Fred Roeber)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Jon Mellott)
    Re: 18kf Limit Measurement (William H. Sohl)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Charles Mattair)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 8:05:15 CST
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


This past weekend's storm news included at least one Telecom-related
item: At a computer center in New Jersey somewhere, the weight of snow
on the roof was great enough to collapse it, thus putting the facility
out of service. This was operated by EDS and was some sort of central
networking point for Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) on at least one
inter-bank network, not just in the East, but nationwide. Many ATMs,
including some here in St. Louis, MO, were down because of this.

So this leads into several questions, which I hope people closer to
the incident can comment upon:

1: Are any of the details in the lead paragraph wrong? If so, please
post corrections. Enhancements and more detail are welcome.

2: Local TV news items on this said that people could use "Bankmate"
networked ATMs instead. However, I just checked the ATM here in this
building at the credit union, and it was displaying an "out of
service" message, though it has both Cirrus and Bankmate logos on it.
Of course, this one machine may be down for some totally unrelated
reason. So just what named networks did this outage affect?

3: It certainly seems odd that a site in NJ would be central to the
entire nation's ATM functions. One would guess that some huge
percentage of all ATM transactions would be performed by local people
accessing their funds from local banks. Why would these transactions
be routed onto a national net? Aren't there local distributed-processing
nets which only access the national net when it is really necessary,
or are my transactions from an ATM in downtown St. Louis, against an
account in a bank in South St. Louis, routed halfway across the
country and back again?

4: One would expect this processing center had what they felt was
sufficient redundancy and backup safeguards. But were at least some of
the redundant elemants co-located at the same building where the
incident occured? Or is the delay in restoring service due to the need
to reroute or recable connections, and access is limited due to the
weather at the site? Any other comments about the "lessons learned"?

And a side comment -- anybody else out there getting irritated by the
sloppy re-use and multiple use of acronyms? "ATM" has meant "Automatic
Teller Machine" for decades now, yet in recent years I've been running
across other computer-related uses of the exact same acronym.
"Asynchronous Transfer Mode" is the worst, because it makes the phrase
"ATM Network" ambiguous and mean at least two different things. The
use of the same acronym by distinctly separate industries would not be
as bad -- for it to mean "All-Terrain Motorbike" or "Amino-Toluo-Methanol"
(to make up some possibilities out of my imagination) could be easily
distinguished by context, when the use of "ATM" for multiple meanings
within the computer culture is not ...


Regards,

Will

If header address doesn't work, try:
[e-mail] OR [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 13:29:16 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network


[from Bell News, Bell Canada/Bell Ontario division, 8th March 1993;
content is that of Bell News, numbered footnotes are my comments]

World's first fully-digital network is just months away.

TORONTO - Picture the scene. In the wee small hours of a Saturday
morning, more people than usual are at the Eglinton Avenue switching
centre. Row upon row of metal frames hold miles of cable and wire.
Next to them are hundreds of equipment bays filled with electronic
switching equipment (#1 ESS) that has served north Toronto's
telecommunications needs for 23 years.

In just eight minutes, the technicians and managers cut the
connections to those bay, connecting in their place 30 DMS-100 digital
switch cabinets. The rest of the night is spent testing circuits to
ensure all lines are fully operational.

This DMS-100 equipment is faster, more efficient. In fact, it's the
power behind some of the world's most sophisticated telecommunications.

Over the next four months, the scene will be replayed a half-dozen
times as Network Services counts down to its goal.

The final such SEM (switching equipment modernization) will happen on
June 26. It will give the greater Toronto Area (soon to be the
restructured 416 area code) the world's first fully-digital
telecommunications network. [1]

For Bell, it will mean greater revenue potential and efficiency gains.
Every customer in the area will be able to order any of Bell's
network-based service offerings: Custom Calling Features, Call
Management Service, Telemessaging ... the works.

Business and Consumer Sales campaigns will be simplified, geared to a
homogeneous technology base.

The easier maintenance of DMS will mean some employees will be freed
up for jobs more directly involved in customer sales and service.

The digital network will make it easier for Bell to introduce new
services like the proposed Community Calling Plan [2] or to handle
network changes like the upcoming 416/905 area code split. [3]

SEMs such as the one at the Eglinton Avenue switching centre take
about four months lead time.

"As recently as four years ago, this 35,000 line cutover would have
taken two years to complete," says Bill Hollett, operations manager -
Network Maintenance. "But, with mechanization of some stages, with
faster delivery and installation of the DMS by Northern Telecom, and
through our own willingness to take a few risks plus great
interdepartmental teamwork, we've cut that time to just months."

With just a few more of those months to go, Bell Ontario continues
its countdown to the day it will have the world's first all-digital
telecommunications network, a model for the world.

[end of article]

                     -------------
Footnotes:

[1] - The SEM throughout Bell Canada territory is scheduled to be
      completed in 1994; this completion date probably refers to
      Metro Toronto, or at least the Greater Toronto area.

[2] - This is the proposal to expand Toronto local calling areas,
      combined with various local rate increase applications.

[3] - Area code split starts 4th October 1993 - a good incentive
      to upgrade switching equipment.

Thus endeth John Higdon's visions of step-by-steps and even x-bars
strewn throughout the Great White North (see thread on NAFTA effects
on Canadian telecommuncations industry).


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

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

Subject: Bell South Cordless Phone
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 15 Mar 93 21:43:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


I just got a Damark catalog with a cover of:

        DAMARK
       Customer
        Returns
        Issue!

In it are several cordless phones.

On the back cover is:

Model #7703 Bell South Products 10 channel for $59.99.

Of great interest to me is its:

"two-way page/intercom for conversation between handset and base"
AND
"automatic security code scanning to prevent signal cross from other
sources."

I now have a cordless I bought in 1981 (it uses c. 1.7mhz & 49.89mhz)
which has the intercom feature. This freq combination no longer made.

I live in an apartment building and the intercom is nice when my wife
or I want to talk to the other while one is at a neighbor.

As far as the "automatic security code" I know that it will not stop
people from listening in. I myself get such great pleasure from
listening to others talk about the intimate details of their lives on
my scanner, that I would not want to deprive others so inclined from
listening in. BUT will Bell South "automatic security code" system
prevent others from using my lines to originate calls?

For you irresistibly nosey folks, here are the cordless phone freqs
as I have them programmed in my scanner.

CORD IN  is from hand held to the base.
CORD OUT is from base to hand held.

         } 49.6700 | 49.8450 | 49.8600 | 49.7700 | 49.8750
CORD IN  } CHAN #1 | CHAN #2 | CHAN #3 | CHAN #4 | CHAN #5
         } 46.6100 | 46.6300 | 46.6700 | 46.7100 | 46.7300
CORDOUT  } CHAN #1 | CHAN #2 | CHAN #3 | CHAN #4 | CHAN #5

| 49.8300 | 49.8900 | 49.9300 | 49.9900 | 49.9700 {
| CHAN #6 | CHAN #7 | CHAN #8 | CHAN #9 |CHAN #10 { CORD IN
| 46.7700 | 46.8300 | 46.8700 | 46.9300 | 46.9700 {
| CHAN #6 | CHAN #7 | CHAN #8 | CHAN #9 |CHAN #10 { CORDOUT

Please send experience regarding Model #7703 Bell South Products 10
channel cordless phone to:

[e-mail] <Raymond B. Normandeau> and post here as I am
sure others would be interested.


Thank you,

Ray Normandeau

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

Date: 15 Mar 1993 09:37:59 +0000 (GMT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: SDH, Concatenation of 2 Mbit/s signals?
Organization: PTT Research, The Netherlands


Hi,

In the CCITT Recommendations G.709 explanation is given on
concatenation of TU-2's. In an article I read that there are also
proposals for concatenating 2 Mbit/s (TU-12's) signals. Is there more
info on this topic, if so, please e-mail me.


Regards,

Kees Hol    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Drew Radtke)
Subject: Email to Telecom Gold (was What is Telecom Gold?)
Organization: University of Bradford, UK
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 20:06:10 GMT


[e-mail] (Nigel Allen) writes:

> Ted Koppel ([e-mail]) writes in article <telecom13.
> [e-mail]>:

>> I have in front of me a business card from a gentleman in Great
>> Britain.  It has all of the normal stuff:
>> and then a line that says:

>> Telecom Gold   followed by an alphanumeric string in the format:
>> NN:aaannn   (where a=alpha and n=numeric)

I don't like Telecom Gold. However you can mail to it. Below is a
message I sent to a UK group user who wanted to know how to use it.
I'll try and trim down the critical stuff ... see the summary at the
end if you can't be bothered to read all of this. Campus 2000 is just
an education bit of Telecom Gold, by the way.

 Newsgroups: uk.net
 From: [e-mail] (Drew Radtke)
 Subject: Re: Help needed!!!
 Keywords: Campus2000, e-mail
 Organization: University of Bradford, UK
 Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:00:35 GMT

[e-mail] (Andy Ingle) writes:

> [e-mail] writes:

>> Does anyone out there know anything about Campus2000?
>> I'm trying to send e-mail to someone I know, but they
>> can only receive through this Campus2000, whatever it
>> is. I have their mailbox number, but can anyone tell
>> me *how* to send to them via Campus2000.....?

> It can't be done.  Campus2000 has no connection to JANET or UKnet
> though this may change later in the year.

First of all can I say if you ever meet anyone who uses Campus 2000
give them a slap in the face (metaphorically) and get them to redirect
themselves to a Internet-connected service (like Spuddy or even
Compuserve) and tell them to stop wasting their cash on this appalling
service. BT ought to be ashamed of themselves. This is unless it's
improved by infinity % in the last two months since I looked at it.

However, you can mail to it from Janet/Internet. It's messy, ridiculous
and unreliable and the Campus 2000 people will not be able to mail
back but. A colleague wanted to be able to mail to his C2000 mailbox
and this is how I did it:

> Subject: Report
> Date: Sun, 17 May 92 19:08:06 BST

> I forgot to tell you I've managed to figure out how to mail from janet
> to Campus 2000. Due to the crappyness of Campus 2000 you have to get
> permission of someone to be able to mail back; I've not figued out how
> to do this yet. It's practically impossible to do actually; to get to
> your space, xxxyyy, you have to email from bradford to the address
> [e-mail] which is so
> cumbersome you may as well just fax whoever you are trying to contact.
> But it does work; I've tried it.

So, just convert whoever's C2000 mailbox account in the way I did
above and you'll be laughing. And they'll be crying because they use
Campus 2000. What this relay does is set up a temporary mailbox on
C2000 which it looks like they'll be able to reply to. However, they
will not be able to as Campus 2000 does not by default give people the
correct priveleges. When your Internet mail gets through I'd recommend
your C2000 person moaning to BT people over the phone to try and get
the permissions set up.

Trouble is (unlike the rather knowledgeable BT Research people), the
Campus 2000, Campus Gold and Telecom Gold people don't seem to know
anything. One of them didn't even know what Kermit was, in spite of it
being installed in the Campus Gold system which they were running!
Great.

BT ought to scrap all it's Commercial Email systems and offer full
Internet email and news right now.

Phew!

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

So,  if your friends email address is NN:aaannn the address you should
use is [e-mail]. Ugh!


Drew Radtke   Fax: [phone] * Voice: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CERN -- European Organization for Nuclear Research
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 18:34:40 GMT


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

> What amazes me is that the US Post Office can get away with charging
> $0.29 for a one-ounce letter.  A one- to two-page fax costs less than
> that between almost any two places in the US, and gets there faster.

> [Moderator's Note: Except of course, there are times when original
> documents are required, such as checks in payment, signatures on other
> documents, etc.   PAT]

My father is a commercial real estate broker in the States.  He and
the companies with which he works all send their contracts and other
documents by FAX, with the understanding that the originals will soon
be r-mailed.  When the originals are received, they are filed as
needed, but the real work begins when the FAX is received.  They are
eagerly awaiting a digital signature system, both to avoid the r-mail
burden and to tighten up that several-day window.


Frederick G. M. Roeber | CERN -- European Center for Nuclear Research
e-mail: [e-mail] or [e-mail] | work: [phone]
r-mail: CERN/PPE, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland | home: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Mellott)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?
Date: 15 Mar 1993 19:31:21 GMT
Organization: EE Dept at UF


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

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

>> What amazes me is that the US Post Office can get away with charging
>> $0.29 for a one-ounce letter.  A one- to two-page fax costs less than
>> that between almost any two places in the US, and gets there faster.

What amazes me is how naive some people are. That USPS can charge
$0.29 for a one ounce letter is amazing. Almost anywhere else in the
world the cost is at least twice what we pay here. Now, figure in the
additional overhead that the massive volume costs, increased delivery
costs due to the size of this country, ...

Now, add on the fact that the USPS is not (any longer) subsidized by
the taxpayer. I'm impressed that the whole thing doesn't collapse.


Jon Mellott    High Speed Digital Architecture Laboratory
University of Florida    ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: 18kf Limit Measurement
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 16:14:19 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Fred R. Goldstein) writes:

>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>> (Govindan Raghavan, XT-DL) writes:

>> The ANSI Standard BRI (2B1Q code) goes 18,000 feet.

> Does this 18,000 ft measurement start at the CO or the neighborhood
> mux (SLC-96, etc.)?

The 18,000 feet is the maximum distance for the two wire loop portion
of the circuit, therefore, the 18,000 feet is a maximum from the
Remote SLC-96 Mux to the subscriber's Network Terminating equipment
(NT-1).  Having said that, it should be noted that providing ISDN over
SLC arrangements is very expensive because a separate DS-0 channel
is needed for each B channel and the D channel.  Therefore, it
takes three DS-0 channels to provide ISDB basic rate service over a
SLC.  Another consideration of that cost is that when ISDN is provide
in that manner, the channels are dedicated to the ISDN customer
100% of the time as opposed to SLC systems that provide a "shared"
use of the channels on the basis that there's never a situation where
100% of the POTS (Plain old telephone service) subscribers would be
using their phones at the same exact time.

> If the neighborhood mux is within the 18kf limit, are you considered
> within the limit?

Short answer is YES, but see above.

> The reason I ask is I can see situations where the telco could
> interpret the tariff to their advantage even if you are technically
> within the limit.  The tariffs are usually vague about things like
> this and telcos usually will do what they think they can get away with
> and b.s. the customer with jargon when challenged.

In the information above, I've only described the technical situation.
Tariff considerations as well as the costs of providing service using
SLC etc, may result in different availability on a company by company
basis.


Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.

Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 09:48:51 CST
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


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

> Washington, DC, and its suburbs, now have white pages organized in
> this way.  I think it increases the density of the white pages
> listings, and so may save a few trees.

                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Houston does it too.

Actually, it just barely balances out against the wasted paper due to
the oversized business listings they are now selling.

I can deal with the surname once but the visual clutter in the
business pages is a real pain.  Fourteen point type, the listing an
inch tall, in red for cripes sake -- what are the Yellow Pages for?


Charles Mattair        (work)    [e-mail]
<standard.disclaimer>    (home)    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #180
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04864;
          16 Mar 93 4:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23903
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 16 Mar 1993 02:19:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17628
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 16 Mar 1993 02:18:30 -0600
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 02:18:30 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #181

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 16 Mar 93 02:18:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 181

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    New Deadline For ISAC: Intl. Symp. on Applied Computing (Jose Acereto)
    Troubles With WWIV and USR Modem -- Please Assist! (Tim Clinkenpeel)
    California SS7 Announcement in Newsbytes ([e-mail])
    Telecom in East Tennessee During Blizzard (Steve Moulton)
    Common Carrier Research (Arinc, TAT) (Charles Gross)
    Steve Jackson Wins Court Case! (Steve Jackson via Rich Greenberg)
    Did the Blizzard Affect AT&T? (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (John R. Grout)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology (David H. Close)
    Re: Disabling *70 (Steve Forrette)
    Housemates and Telephones (was Disabling *70) (Nigel Allen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jose Ignacio Icaza Acereto)
Subject: New Deadline For ISAC: Intl. Symp. on Applied Computing
Date: 16 Mar 93 00:44:43 GMT
Organization: ITESM, Campus Monterrey


                             CALL FOR PAPERS

International Symposium on Applied Computing:
Research and Applications in Software Engineering,
Databases and Distributed Systems
October 13-15, 1993
ITESM, Campus Monterrey - Monterrey, Mexico

(* Please note:
   1. Deadline moved to April 30
   2. This event (ISAC) is different from SAC (Symposium on Applied
      Computing) oreganized yearly by ACM's SIGAPP
   3. A printred copy of the old call for papers appears in
      IEEE Computer, Nov. 1992, pp. 21
*)

This Symposium is being organized by the Informatics Research Center
and it is sponsored by the ITESM (Instituto Tecnologico y de Estudios
Superiores de Monterrey) in conjunction with Texas A & M University.

                             Objective

The goal of this event is to promote the use of new computing technologies
through:

 *   The presentation of original research with an applied focus.
 *   The exchange of experiences in technology transfer and use (both
     successful and unsuccessful).
 *   The presentation of new ideas and technology that could impact
     industry in the near future.

                             Scope

The program committee is issuing a call for papers in the following principal
areas: software engineering, databases and distributed systems. Some of the
topics of interest include, but are not limited to:

Software Engineering
    *       Methodologies for Software Engineering
    *       Total Quality Management in Software Engineering
    *       Object-Oriented Techniques Applied to Information Systems
    *       Software Factory Implementation Issues
    *       Management and Control of: Software Projects, Risk and
            Configuration.
    *       Software Engineering Development Environments
    *       User Interfaces

Databases

    *       Object-Oriented Database Systems
    *       Data and Object Modeling for Information Systems
    *       Data, Object and Repository Administration
    *       Heterogeneus Distributed Database Interoperability

Distributed Systems
    *       Complex Network Management
    *       High Speed Network Management
    *       Network Security
    *       Distributed Systems Modeling and Design
    *       Local Area Networks as Distributed Systems
    *       Distributed Application Design
    *       Real-Time Distributed Systems Design and Development
    *       Client/Server Architecture Implementation Issues

                            Tutorial

In addition to papers, proposals for full- or half-day tutorials are
welcome.  Proposals should include: tutorial title, outline, brief
description of topics to be covered, intended audience, assumed
attendee background, and resume of the speaker.

                    Submission of Papers & Proposals

The paper should identify the area to which it belongs, and also
include an abstract. It should have a cover page containing the
following information: title, authors names, affiliation, and the
e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers of a contact author. Use a
serif font, size 10, single spaced with a maximum of 10 pages.

No papers nor tutorial proposals sent by electronic means will be
accepted.  Please submit 5 copies of a paper or tutorial proposal,
written in English, to the Program Chair or the Tutorial Chair.

                             Location

The International Symposium on Applied Computing (ISAC) will be held in
Monterrey, Mexico from October 13-15, 1993.


                           Important Dates

April 30, 1993: Deadline for submission of papers and tutorial
                proposals.
July 8, 1993: Notification of acceptance or rejection to authors.
August 5, 1993: Deadline for submission of camera-ready papers

Program Chair
Jose I. Icaza
e-mail: [e-mail]

Tutorial Chair
J.Raul Perez-Cazares
e-mail: [e-mail]

Instituto Tecnologico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey
Centro de Investigacion en Informatica, CETEC 6o. Nivel Torre Norte
Av. Eugenio Garza Sada 2501, Monterrey, N.L. Mexico C.P. 64849
Tel. [phone] ext.5082,5076 Fax [phone] ext. 5081
Tel. [phone] ext. 5082, 5076  Fax [phone] ext. 5081

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

From: [e-mail] (tim clinkenpeel)
Subject: Troubles With WWIV and USR Modem -- Please Assist!
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp.
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 02:21:29 GMT


I'm having real woes with getting my USR Courier HST Dual Standard
v.32 to work with WWIV BBS (latest version). I'm hoping that someone
out there has the same hardware and has already solved this problem.

I am unable to do all of the following under one configuration (I've
tried factory, custom and WWIV):

 o  call out and get a good connect to 2400 and below modems;
 o  have 2400 and below callers make good connects to WWIV (sans garbage);
 o  have high speed modems make good connects to WWIV (").

Quoted below are two setups: the custom one suggest to me by a
supposedly knowledgable person (unavailable for further comment) and
the setup WWIV 'recommends' via auto modem detect. Note: WWIV
recognizes my modem as 'USRC2'.  One thing I find particularly
troubling is the presence of &B2 in the setup, which is not a
legitimate parameter.

Any insights greatly appreciated.

                   --begin quoted--

(----"custom"----)
B0 C1 E0 F1 M0 Q0 V0 X7 &A2 &B1 &C1 &D2 &G0 &H1 &I0 &J0 &K2 &L0 &M4 &N0 &P0
&R2 &S0 &X1 &Y3  (how relevant are the status registers?  i'll quote them if
need be)

(----wwiv; quoted directly from modems.mdm file, should be self-explanatory)
FILE: "USRC2"
NAME: "USR Courier (No V.42 - &A2 mode)"
CONF: "ATZ{~~~~~~~AT{~~AT&W{"
SETU: "ATC1E0F1H0M0Q0V1X6&A2&B2&C1&D2S38=1{~~AT&H1&I0&K1&N0&R2&S0S0=0S2=1{"
INIT: "ATB0H0M0{"
ANSR: "ATA{"
PICK: "ATH1{"
HANG: "ATH0{"
DIAL: "ATB1DT"
SEPR: "/"
DEFL: MS=38400 CS=38400 EC=N DC=N AS=N FC=Y
RESL: "OK"              "Normal"        NORM
RESL: "RING"            "Ring"          RING
RESL: "NO CARRIER"      "No Carrier"    DIS
RESL: "ERROR"           "Error"         ERR
RESL: "NO DIAL TONE"    "No Dial Tone"  NDT
RESL: "BUSY"            "Busy"          DIS
RESL: "NO ANSWER"       "No Answer"     DIS
RESL: "RINGING"         "Ringing"       RINGING
RESL: "VOICE"           "Voice"         DIS
RESL: "CONNECT"         "300"           MS=300   CS=300   CON
RESL: "CONNECT 1200"    "1200"          MS=1200  CS=1200  CON
RESL: "CONNECT 2400"    "2400"          MS=2400  CS=2400  CON
RESL: "CONNECT 4800"    "4800"          MS=4800  CS=4800  CON
RESL: "CONNECT 9600"    "9600"          MS=9600  CS=9600  CON
RESL: "ARQ"                             EC=Y     CS=38400
RESL: "HST"             "14400/HST"     AS=Y MS=14400
RESL: "V32"             '/V.32'         AS=N
RESL: "NONE"                            EC=N
RESL: "SYNC"

                            ---end quoted------

Again, thank you to anyone who is willing to take the time to help me
sort out this mess. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to figure out
how to do it myself.


tim clinkenpeel: aberrant analytical skeptical agnostic idealist.

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 11:12:01 -0500
From: Hierophant <[e-mail]>
Subject: California SS7 Announcement in Newsbytes


An article appeared in the 12 March Newsbytes (clari.nb.telecom)
announcing the arrival of some CLASS end-user services in California.
It briefly outlines the functionality of Call { Trace | Return |
Screen }, Select Call Forwarding, Repeat Dialing, and Priority
Ringing. The article points out that the SS7 technology would have
allowed PacBell to offer the "controversial Caller ID services", but

 "While the company cannot offer Caller ID in California because
 of regulations set by the California Public Utilities
 Commission, it is allowing California residents to make use of
 the SS7 technology ..."

This is in contrast to the discussion here in the Digest, in which it
is indicated that PacBell wasn't prohibited from offering Caller ID,
it merely decided that the requirements placed on this service by the
PUC would keep Bell from making the outrageous profit it desired, and
they decided not to offer it for that reason. However, PacBell now has
"reliable" sources which claim that "the Bad Old PUC won't let you
have Caller ID".  Once again, I have yet to see ANY RBOC own up to its
motives.

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 12:55:49 EST
From: Steve Moulton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecom in East Tennessee During Blizzard


> By the way can anyone give us any weather related telecom updates
> from the eastern states? Are they even getting through at all?  PAT]

In Knoxville, telephone and water were about the only services that
could be depended on.  Power failed at 5:30 am Saturday morning, and
there were periods when it took up to a couple of minutes to get dial
tone, but telephone service was dependable until about 8 pm Saturday.
At that time, battery went away, but would return for a few minutes
each time the electricity flickered on (which it did several times
from 10 pm to 2 am).  Presumably, since I am something like eight
miles from the CO (615-69x, 615-53x) there was a battery in a vault
somewhere that ran down).

ATT long distance service had all circuits busy whenever I tried
Saturday (one or two rings, then an ATT intercept message); finally I
had the inspiration to try another carrier (10333 - US Sprint) and got
through for the one LD call I had to make.  Call completion was
immediate and clear.  Sunday, I spent most of the day logged in and
connected to Florida State, so WRT telecom things seem to be in pretty
good shape.

Hundred of homes in the Knoxville are still without power (Monday
noon), after our 15 inches of snow (I measured 18 inches in an area
not susceptible to drifts; had four foot drifts on our deck) and nine
degree temperature at 8 am this morning.  I just talked to a four
wheel drive owner who has only catnapped in the past 48 hours; as of
last night city government and the Red Cross were still calling for
four wheel drive owners to help with medical emergencies.

We are digging our way out.  My back hasn't ached like this since
I left Cincinnati years ago.


Steve Moulton  Grad Student  Ayres 111  [phone]   [e-mail]
         University of Tennessee Department of Computer Science


[Moderator's Note: We've seen nothing like that here in Chicago for 25
years. We gpt a 27 inch snow storm January 30 - February 1, 1967. I
was at UC at the time and had worked all night in the phone room, no
busier than usual even though the snow was piling up outside all
night. Trouble is, 7 AM comes around, and not one single person from
the day shift showed up! There was only one operator all night, but
usually 10-12 operators on the day shift. I thought I was going to go
crazy by 8 AM when all the campus offices had (in theory) opened up.
Very few people showed up for work in those offices either. The day
supervisor made it in about that time and flipped out when she saw me
and something like a hundred lights on the switchboards all blinking
for attention.  She went right on the 'Telepage' (a paging system
with loudspeakers in offices all over campus, hallways, cafeterias,
etc broken down by 'zones' for where you wanted to voice page someone)
and using the switch position marked 'All Call' she announced "if
there are students or employees who know how to run a switchboard,
please report to the phone room at once. Help is desparately needed in
the phone room, 5801 Ellis, 6th floor." And I think she sat there and
repeated that announcement over and over a dozen times in the next
fifteen minutes or so, stressing " ... do NOT attempt to call the
switchboard, just COME to the phone room ...". Volunteer operators
came straggling in over the next several minutes, and by that point
some of the full time regulars had started making it in also. For the
evening shift starting about 4 PM, she had found out who would make it
in and who would not, and had things organized.  PAT]

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

From: A. Charles Gross <[e-mail]>
Subject: Common Carrier Research (Arinc, TAT)
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 20:35:04 GMT


I am doing research on limited spectrum sharing/common carrier
arangements and how they are structured and regulated.  Specifically,
I am seeking information on how the 1) transatlantic cables are
regulated and 2) how ARINC shares its spectrum among a variety of
users.  Any information or comments would be greatly appricated.


Thanks,

Adam   [e-mail]    I speak for myself

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Steve Jackson Wins Court Case!
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 22:00:00 CST


[Moderator's Note: News of interest about Steve Jackson, passed along
to the Digest by Rich Greenberg. Thanks, Rich!    PAT]

 Newsgroups: austin.eff
 From: Steve Jackson <[e-mail]>
 Subject: We have a verdict.
 Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 21:24:46 GMT

We won.

Pete Kennedy, our attorney at George, Donaldson & Ford, called me with
the news about 3:30 today. Apparently the decision came in late Friday
while Pete was at the CFP.

The judge ruled for us on both the PPA and ECPA, though he says that
taking the computer out the door was not an "interception." (I have
not read the decision yet, so no quotes here.)

He awarded damages of $1,000 per plaintiff under the ECPA.

Under the PPA, he awarded SJ Games $42,259 for lost profits in 1990,
and out of pocket costs of $8,781.

Our attorneys are also entitled to submit a request for their costs.

No word on appeal yet.

Look for a more complete and coherent account after we all read the
decision.

Please copy this announcement to all electronic and other media.

Thanks for your support through all this!

           ------- End of forwarded message -------

* Christopher Davis * <[e-mail]> * <[e-mail]> * [CKD1] * MIME * RIPEM *
226 Transfer complete. 17512509 bytes received in 5.2e+02 seconds (33 Kbytes/s)

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

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Did the Blizzard Affect AT&T?
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 17:50:21 GMT


Over the past week, I have been calling my parents in Reno, NV (702
829), to tell them the results at the World Figure Skating
Championships which took place in Prague.  (This is necessary because
they live to far south to deserve same-day coverage in the eyes of our
all-knowing network TV programmers.)  Now my PIC is AT&T, since nobody
has given me enough on an incentive to change.  Starting Friday
evening, before the blizzard had even gotten as far north as New
Jersey, the sound quality on my AT&T calls began to deteriorate
dramatically (this is from 802 864), and stayed noticeably degraded at
least until Sunday.  During this period, I used Sprint for my calls,
and noticed no degradation.  Does anybody have ideas on why this
should be?

(TELECOM Digest readers may remember some months ago I reported on the
battle of the Montreal radio stations taking place on our local NBC
affiliate.  They have now taken this to new heights of oddness:
sandwiched in between the advertisements for CHOM and "Mix 96",
during popular syndicated programs like "Wheel of Fortune", they are
now running ads for CBC *Television*.  (Big surprise to me ... not
that I nmormally *watch* "Wheel", you understand.))


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 17:50:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> At the destination sorting station (Goleta for us),
> the mail is sorted into route order based on the 9 digit zip.  All
> this for 29 cents.

When I was in Finland a while back, they used electronic sorting as
well.  However (and here's the catch), for a meager FIM 1,80 (about 50
cents or so), first-class letters which arrived at the post office
before 5PM on any postal day would be delivered the next day.

Even with all the automation, the USPS still wants $8.95 for this.

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Grout)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 21:29:04 GMT


[e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> Even if the writer did not use the nine digit zip, the system looks
> up the nine digit zip for that address and codes the envelope with it.
> For hand-written addresses, a person reads the address, keys it in,
> then the machine codes the envelope.  I'm not sure of what the
> operator has to key in.  I'd expect it to be something like number,
> street, city, state, zip so the envelope does get coded with a full
> nine digit zip.  At the destination sorting station (Goleta for us),
> the mail is sorted into route order based on the nine digit zip.  All
> this for 29 cents.

It is city, state, street number, street and apartment number (often
forgotten) ... there are various automated ways to get nine-digit zip
information, including a CD-ROM version of the nine-digit zip code
manuals.

Two years ago, before I moved here, I found out my new nine-digit zip
code at a museum exhibit which used this CD-ROM, and so I put it
trustingly on my change of address notices.  To my surprise, _most_ of
the businesses and magazines that use nine-digit zip codes copied my
apartment number (from the separate field for it on the notice) into
my address while managing to both ignore the _correct_ nine-digit zip
I gave them _and_ to automagically generate an _incorrect_ nine-digit
zip which did _not_ use my apartment number.


John R. Grout    [e-mail]   University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Center for Supercomputing Research and Development

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

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?
Date: 16 Mar 1993 05:11:09 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


Marvin Sirbu <[e-mail]> writes:

> If the U.S. Postal Service began offering fax service there would be
> an incredible hew and cry from companies like Mailboxes Etc. and
> others that a Fedral Government agency that does not have to pay taxes
> was competing unfairly with a private sector business.

Maybe its time to propose a divestiture for the USPS?  You know, break
them into multiple competing organizations like Ma.  Then the above
would not be a valid complaint.  (Yeah, I've heard the objections.
Perhaps the change in terminology would help: divestiture instead of
privatization.)  This seems to me the kind of proposal only a Democrat
in the Presidency could get away with ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Disabling *70
Date: 15 Mar 1993 21:56:34 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> hpubvwa![e-mail] (Tad
Cook) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Francis J Park) writes:

>> I am dealing with a highly annoying roommate who is fond of turning on
>> *70 to disable call waiting when he calls out voice.

> Gee, I would LOVE to have a roommate who uses this feature!  Far
> better than ones who don't disable Call-Waiting, and then just ignore
> the beep.

You mean there are still people out there that share phone lines?  :-)
Seriously, I can't imagine not having my own service.  When I had
roommates, I've always gotten my own line installed.  In addition to
modem traffic, one big issue with me is being able to get messages in
a reliable manner.  I understand that some telco voicemail offerings
address this issue by providing the caller with a menu selection as to
which person at the called number they would like to leave a message
for.  This way, each person sharing the line can have their own
voicemail box.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: Housemates and Telephones (was Disabling *70)
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Francis J Park) writes:

> I am dealing with a highly annoying roommate who is fond of turning on
> *70 to disable call waiting when he calls out voice.

There is a great deal to be said for roommates getting their own phone
lines. When I moved into a shared house ten years ago, I made a point
of getting my own phone line (with one phone in my bedroom and an
extension in the kitchen). This turned out to be particularly useful
later on when the housemate in whose name the house phone line was in
had problems paying his phone bill. (And when I started getting
harassing phone calls on my line, they upset me but they didn't affect
my housemates -- and I was able to put an end to the harassing calls
by having my phone number changed.)

I lived at the house at 16 Major Street in Toronto for four years, and
I liked my housemates, but I'm glad that I had my own phone line
there.

I know one couple with four phone lines: one for her, one for him, one
for the computer, and one for the community group they help run.

 So my advice to [e-mail] (Francis J Park) and his
"highly annoying roommate" is to seriously consider getting another
phone line.


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada     [e-mail]
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario  416-629-7000/629-7044

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #181
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05691;
          16 Mar 93 5:32 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11354
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 16 Mar 1993 03:01:38 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32250
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 16 Mar 1993 03:01:04 -0600
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 03:01:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #182

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 16 Mar 93 03:01:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 182

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: How Do I Get Rid of Line Noise? (Bill Blum)
    Blizzard Causes AT&T Network Congestion (Richard Pauls)
    Re: No 900 in Louisiana? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Ohio Bell Making Your Life Easier (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Telecom in Brazil, BAD? (Jarom Hagen)
    Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing (Dick Rawson)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Robert L. Ullmann)
    Re: "457 Channels and Nothin' on..."  (Robert L. Ullmann)
    Info on Data Superhighway (or Whatever) (William Eldridge)
    Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy ([e-mail])
    My Case Against CLID - Rebuttal to John Higdon (Gordon Zaft)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 12:32:01 EDT
From: Bill Blum <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How Do I Get Rid of Line Noise?


Richard Sherman asks:

> The problem is I get quite a bit of line noise in the electrical
> system from other things in the house (dishwashers, ovens, etc.).  I
> was wondering if something like a phone line noise or surge supressor
> could be put between the phone line and the modem to eliminate this?
> Any help would be appreciated.

I hope the following helps ... snarfed from a local BBS, this filter
does work (even tho it's rather dated) ... Pat ... text is long,
don't know if this is worth archiving or not.

      ----------------  Noise Filter Instructions  ----------------

Modem Noise Killer (alpha version)

With this circuit diagram, some basic tools including a soldering
iron, and four or five components from Radio Shack, you should be able
to cut the noise/garbage that appears on your computer's screen.

I started this project out of frustration at using a US Robotics 2400
baud modem and getting a fair amount of junk when connecting at that
speed. Knowing that capacitors make good noise filters, I threw this
together.

This is very easy to build, however conditions may be different due to
modem type, amount of line noise, old or new switching equipment
(Bell's equipment), and on and on. So it may not work as well for you
in every case. If it does work, or if you've managed to tweek it to
your computer/modem setup I' d like to hear from you.

I'd also appreciate any of you electronic wizards out there wanting to
offer any improvements. Let's make this work for everyone!

Please read this entire message and see if you understand it before
you begin.

OK, what you' ll need from Radio Shack:

1 #279-374 Modular line cord if you don't already have one. You won't need one
if your phone has a modular plug in its base. $4.95

1 #279-420 Modular surface mount jack (4 or 6 conductor) $4.49

1 #271-1720 Potentiometer. This is a 5k audio taper variable resistor. $1.09

1 #272-1055 Capacitor. Any non-polarized 1.0 to 1.5 uf cap should do. Paper,
Mylar, or metal film caps should be used, although #272-996 may work as well.
(272-996 is a non-polarized electrolytic cap) $.79

1 100 ohm resistor - quarter or half watt. $.19

1 #279-357 Y-type or duplex modular connector. Don't buy this until you've read
the section on connecting the Noise Killer below. (A, B,or C) $4.95

First off, open the modular block. You normally just pry them open
with a screwdriver. Inside you'll find up to six wires. Very carefully
cut out all but the green and red wires. The ones you'll be removing
should be black, yellow, white, and blue. These wires won't be needed
and may be in the way. So cut them as close to where they enter the
plug as possible. The other end of these wires have a spade lug
connector that is screwed into the plastic. Unscrew and remove that
end of the wires as well. Now, you should have two wires left. Green
and red. Solder one end of the capacitor to the green wire. Solder the
other end of the capacitor to the center lug of the potentiometer
(there are three lugs on this critter). Solder one end of the resistor
to the red wire. You may want to shorten the leads of the resistor
first. Solder the other end of the resistor to either one of the
remaining outside lugs of the potentiometer. Doesn't matter which.

Now to wrap it up, make a hole in the lid of the mod block to stick
the shaft of the potentiometer through. Don't make this hole dead
center as the other parts may not fit into the body of the mod block
if you do. See how things will fit in order to find where the hole
will go.  Well, now that you've got it built you'll need to test it.
First twist the shaft on the potentiometer until it stops. You won't
know which way to turn it until later.  It doesn't matter which way
now. You also need to determine where to plug the Noise Killer onto
the telephone line. It can be done by one of several ways:

A. If your modem has two modular plugs in back, connect the Noise
Killer into one of them using a line cord. (a line cord is a straight
cord that connects a phone to the wall outlet. Usually silver in
color)

B. If your phone is modular, you can unplug the cord from the back of
it after you're on-line and plug the cord into the Noise Killer.

C. You may have to buy a Y-type modular adaptor. Plug the adaptor into
a wall outlet, plug the modem into one side and the Noise Killer into
the other. Call a BBS that has known noise problems. After you've
connected and garbage begins to appear, plug the Noise Killer into the
phone line as described above. If you have turned the shaft on the
potentiometer the wrong way you'll find out now.  You may get a lot of
garbage or even disconnected. If this happens, turn the shaft the
other way until it stops and try again. If you don't notice much
difference when you plug the Noise Killer in, that may be a good sign.
Type in a few commands and look for garbage characters on the screen.
If there still is, turn the shaft slowly until most of it is gone. If
nothing seems to happen at all, turn the shaft slowly from one side to
the other. You should get plenty of garbage or disconnected at some
point. If you don't, reread this message to make sure you've connected
it right.


***END OF ORIGNAL FILE***

ADDITION TO ORIGNAL FILE - 2/29/88 - Mike McCauley - CIS 71505,1173

First, a personal recomendation. _THIS WORKS!!!_  I have been plagued with
noise at 2400 for some time.  A few pointers:

1) The pot need not be either 5K or audio taper. I used a 10K 15 turn trim pot.
   Suggest you use what is handy.
2) I used 2MFD's of capacitance (two 1MFD's in parallel) Two R.S. p/n 272-1055
   work fine. Remember that about 90 Volts will appear across red & green at
   ring, so the caps should be rated at 100VDC+.
3) I ended up with a final series resistance value (100 ohm + pot) of 2.75K.
   I speculate that one could probably use 2MFD and a fixed 2.7K resistor and
   do the job 90% of the time. The adjustment of the pot is not very critical.
   Changes of +/- 1K made little difference in the performance of the circuit.

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

From: Richard Pauls <[e-mail]>
Subject: Blizzard Causes AT&T Network Congestion
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 13:46:26 -0500


> [Moderator's Note: Thanks very much for taking the time and going to
> the expense to send us a message from that phone. I hope your trip was
> pleasant and not to someplace where the airport is shut down. By the
> way can anyone give us any weather related telecom updates from the
> eastern states? Are they even getting through at all?   PAT]

Well on Saturday I tried for about 15 minutes to place a call from MA
(508) to PA (215) using AT&T but I kept getting the "we're sorry all
circuits are busy" recording.  I hung up and redialed using the MCI
prefix and got a ring, but then I hung up (just wanted to see if it
really worked). I tried AT&T several more times -- same message.  Then
I dialed the AT&T operator and told her I couldn't get through (I was
wondering if she would give me a prefix code for another carrier if
she couldn't connect me now).  She tried twice and on the second
attempt my call was connected via AT&T.  Does she have some kind of
controlled access to different long distance circuits that allowed her
to avoid the "all circuits bussy" message that I kept getting?  Will I
have to pay for an operator assisted call this way?


Thanks,

Rich


[Moderator's Note: Usually it is the operator's discretion in cases
like this, but generally no you won't. You'll get direct dial rates
since you explained the problem to the operator.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 13:40:49 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: No 900 in Louisiana?


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

> Having just seen an ad for NBC's weather line (1-900-WILLARD) it
> stated it was not valid in Louisiana.  Have they passed a law that
> makes all 900 service illegal or only those that give their proceeds
> to charity?

1.  The service is run OUT OF Louisiana and the service is not tariffed
    for intrastate use.
2.  There would be taxes imposed upon the service provider (not likely,
    but possible).
3.  Louisiana does not allow value-added telephone call services, or has
    banned them, or there is a collectability problem.

Louisiana has had a long history of problems with relations with other
states because of its history of French Civil Law as opposed to the
British Common Law which the other 49 states use.  It's only been
about a couple of years that the Louisana Legislature has approved the
Uniform Commercial Code, which until it did made contracts hard to
execute.

If you're in Louisana, ask the local telephone company.

Telephone services over 900 area code calls from outside that state
are interstate in nature; if the state is hindering their operation,
it is acting unconstitutionally.  Probably nobody wants the trouble
and expense of bothering with a court trial to force collection, so
they just refuse to accept calls from there (or they plan to sue but
until the telephone companies there will provide billing via a court
decision authorizing it, they won't carry calls.)  Or it could be that
telcos there won't provide billing, the information provider must bill
directly (which is too much trouble.)

Did you try asking NBC?


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Ohio Bell Making Your Life Easier
Date: 15 Mar 1993 21:50:43 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> mtndew![e-mail] (Stephen Friedl) wrote:

>> "These home office specialists can answer questions about
>> installing a business line in your home or setting up a computer modem
>> or fax machine."

> Well, when Pacific Bell started to send similar sorts of notices, I
> was similarly suspicious ... I learned that (at least for Pacific
> Bell) they were not especially interested in pushing business-
> tariffed services on me; they were interested in selling ordinary
> home-tariffed services which would make doing occasional business at
> home easier.

I can put in a good word for the Pacific Bell office that handles the
'home office' orders.  They never tried to push business
class-of-service on me.  I had had really poor luck with the regular
residential office with any order more complicated than a single line
with standard custom calling features.  Any time I had a requirement
for multiple lines, especially in combination with unusual custom
calling features (no answer transfer, hunting, etc.), the order would
never be set up properly the first time.  The 'home office' people
seemed to have an extra amount of training in all of these things, and
were able to actually understand the order correctly the first time.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jarom Hagen)
Subject: Re: Telecom in Brazil, BAD?
Date: 15 Mar 93 18:00:23 GMT
Organization: NPRI, Alexandria VA


[e-mail] (Cris Pedregal-Martin) writes:

> The technology might not have been dazzling (e.g., pulse instead of
> tone), but it worked (high call completion rates, good intercepts,
> very few wrong numbers).  And, also, rates were very cheap (compared
> with other state-owned, third-world rates such as neighboring
> Argentina's. Problems associated with wider-ranging (political,
> economical) issues, of course, existed: sometimes bad customer service
> (labor conflict), use of tokens instead of coins (inflation).  And
> there were some pearls too, like automated collect calls (even within
> a city); I think one dialled 9+number and two synchronized recordings
> would come on, opening a short window to say one's name (or whatever);
> hanging up meaning non-acceptance of charges. There were also calling
> cards (charge, like in the US); all these things at least since the
> late 70s.

It has been a few years since I was in Brazil.  I remember a couple of
things that weren't mentioned.  One is the "Big-Ear" payphones that
were not high quality in that sometimes shouting was needed to
communicate and the second is that, at least in the northeast, you
have to *buy* your telephone *line*.  So, not only do you pay for the
service, you have to buy the line (and number) that gets connected to
your house.  This tends to discourage telephones in homes.  There also
seems to be a problem in capacity in the northeast as people selling
telephone numbers charged a lot for them.  I also remember the cost of
calling the U.S. from Brazil to be much higher that calling Brazil
from the U.S.

> My "comment" (more bordering on an essay, sorry) is not very current,
> but I just felt I had to challenge a stereotype ...

Yes, I don't know if service is worse than GTE, I never had to call
the local phone company while I lived there.

> com saudades do Brasil,

    Eu tambem.


Jarom
*Not paid for and/or endorsed by NPRI.  602 Cameron St, Alexandria VA 22314
(UUCP: ...uunet!uupsi!npri6!jhagen)       (Internet: [e-mail])

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 15:19:48 PST
From: [e-mail] (Dick Rawson)
Subject: Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing


Now that you mention distinctive ringing, I remember a similar problem
with our fax machine.  When we moved from Centrex service to a PBX, we
started getting a "distinctive ring" for all calls from outside.
Outside calls rang as short-long, while extension calls rang normally.
The fax wouldn't answer until the PBX was made to give normal rings.


Dick

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert L Ullmann)
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!
Organization: The World in Boston
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 01:54:46 GMT


An observation I made while looking at the 93 NYNEX white pages (which
I hadn't had any reason to crack open until reading this): people with
combined business/residence listings, under the business name with a
secondary entry starting with /res/, appear in both the residence and
business parts of the directory.

BTW, I like this directory format.


Robert Ullmann    [e-mail]    [phone] x226

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert L Ullmann)
Subject: Re: "457 Channels and Nothin' on..."
Organization: The World in Boston
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 02:15:12 GMT


Paul Robinson writes a very interesting article on cable TV and the
future of video distribution. (BTW: I subscribe to a system with 89
active channels, out of a possible 104.)

I and others in the data network protocol business are working very
hard on building an internet technology that will allow any user to
watch any "station" (video source) whenever desired. Ready for maybe
50,000 channels?

Of course, just like best-selling books, some will be *very* popular.
And few will carry advertising. (Yay!)

The flip side is even more interesting: with a *very* small
investment, anyone can be a video source ...


Robert Ullmann     [e-mail]    [phone] x226

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

From: [e-mail] (William Eldridge)
Subject: Info on Data Superhighway (or Whatever)
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 03:48:19 GMT


I'm trying to research various pertinent questions and alternatives to
the proposed data superhighway, and was hoping someone could refer me
to or send me either interesting viewpoints on this or general
overviews.


Thanks,

Bill Eldridge     [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 23:44:35 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy


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

> Perhaps an idea should be borrowed from the white page introductory
> sections of many other countries (Australia is one such country, I
> believe): a brief description of the phone service (emergency numbers,
> how to dial, etc) is translated into many languages.

I don't remember the phone books, but from when I was there last year,
I recall that some public phones in Melbourne have instructions in
English, Italian, Greek, and possibly Vietnamese; further north on the
Gold Coast, it's English and Japanese (for tourists of the predominant
nationality, no doubt).

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

From: suned1![e-mail] (Gordon C Zaft)
Subject: My Case Against CLID - A Rebuttal to John Higdon
Date: 16 Mar 93 06:02:59 GMT
Organization: NSWSES, Port Hueneme, CA


I finally figured out the response to John Higdon's persistent claims
that Caller-ID should be enabled by default.  It's this --

    Do you walk around with a nametag?  Probably not.  Similarly,
if I walk up to your door and knock, it would be reasonable of you to
ask who I am.  I might give you my name, or I might not.  In either
case you might or might not wish to speak to me.  You may have a
policy saying "I don't open the door to anyway who won't identify
themselves", and that's fine.

    The point being, just as I don't broadcast my identity when I
go around town, I shouldn't have to broadcast my identity when I call,
either.  On the other hand, you should be able to ask my identity by
means of a block, or a anonymous-call-rejection.  In which case I can
either identify myself, or not talk to you.  It seems quite clear to
me that the default should be no identification unless it's explicitly
done (just like you looking through your peephole and making me hold
up my ID so you can see it before opening the door).


Gordon Zaft                   [e-mail]
PHD NWSC, Code 4Y33           suned1![e-mail]
Port Hueneme, CA 93043-5007   Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: This message was published specifically to provide
a rebuttal to recent messages by John Higdon. However, to avoid the
sort of email floods these things cause me and the slow, agonizing
death from boredom it causes many readers, perhaps continued dis-
cussion between interested parties can be moved to the privacy forum.
Thanks.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #182
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07744;
          16 Mar 93 19:32 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01577
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 16 Mar 1993 16:47:07 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17007
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 16 Mar 1993 16:46:31 -0600
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 16:46:31 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #183

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 16 Mar 93 16:46:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 183

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Will Martin)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Dale Farmer)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Andrew M. Boardman)
    Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Greg Abbott)
    Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network (John Higdon)
    Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network (Bohdan Tashchuk)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Jeff Kenton)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Dale Farmer)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Mark Steiger)
    Re: Public Phone 2000 (Doug Krause)
    Re: 18kf Limit Measurement (Craig Myers)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 09:59:36 +0000
Organization: Imperial College, London, UK.
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


Will Martin <[e-mail]> wrote:

> And a side comment -- anybody else out there getting irritated by the
> sloppy re-use and multiple use of acronyms? "ATM" has meant "Automatic
> Teller Machine" for decades now, yet in recent years I've been running
> across other computer-related uses of the exact same acronym.
> "Asynchronous Transfer Mode" is the worst, because it makes the phrase
> "ATM Network" ambiguous and mean at least two different things.

Indeed, one does get irritated by the sloppy re-use of acronyms.
However as far as ATM goes, I think that it is only in USA (and
countries linked to the USA) that ATM is used as "Automatic Teller
Machine". In UK, the use of "Cash machine", or "Cashpoint" is much
more common.

Furthermore, the ATM acronym for "Asynchronous Transfer Mode" has been
agreed-on by the CCITT; it is hence a standard. Has ATM for "Automatic
Teller Machine" ever been standardised by any official body ? :-)


Olivier M.J. Crepin-Leblond, Digital Comms. Section, Elec. Eng. Department
 Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London SW7 2BT, UK
       Internet/Bitnet: <[e-mail]> - Janet: <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 93 7:38:53 CST
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


I can add a couple points to my original posting, after seeing news
reports on the evening of 15 March:

1) It appears that, at least here, credit union ATM networks are still
down and will be for at least another day. Bank ATM networks may be
working; I was able to use a bank ATM for remotely accessing my
account during the day yesterday, though our building credit union ATM
was down all day.

2) The backup site for the New Jersey EDS computer center was in the
World Trade Center!!!!! I wonder how many other financial and East
coast sites are operating right now without backups due to the WTC
closing!?! Also, I'm sure WTC companies are now using other sites as
their backups, which leaves much less capacity for backup operations
for anybody. The ripple effect is spreading ...


Regards,


Will

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93
Date: 16 Mar 1993 10:07:58 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


Will Martin ([e-mail]) wrote:

> This past weekend's storm news included at least one Telecom-related
> item: At a computer center in New Jersey somewhere, the weight of snow
> on the roof was great enough to collapse it, thus putting the facility
> out of service. This was operated by EDS and was some sort of central
> networking point for Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) on at least one
> inter-bank network, not just in the East, but nationwide. Many ATMs,
> including some here in St. Louis, MO, were down because of this.

    The same service center services the money machines here at
the Department of Labor Credit Union in DC.  The notice pasted to the
machine also noted that they did have a backup site.  Unfortunatly it
was located in the World Trade Center ...

    Talk about having a really bad month ...


Dale Farmer

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 93 10:48:11 EST
From: andrew m. boardman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


> 4: One would expect this processing center had what they felt was
> sufficient redundancy and backup safeguards. But were at least some of
> the redundant elemants co-located at the same building where the
> incident occured?

Some area ATMs hereabouts are posted with a notice summarizing Will
Martin's post.  Additionally, they do, indeed, say that there was a
backup facility -- in the World Trade Center ...


andrew m. boardman     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Thanks to Will, Dale, Andy and the nine other
readers who sent articles pointing out the back up site location.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 18:47:13 GMT


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

> I have read many messages on this bulletin board in which people
> mention Cellular System A and System B settings on their phones.  Can
> anyone explain to me, in plain English, the difference between system
> A and system B?

> [Moderator's Note: [stuff omitted]]

Another difference that obtains here in New York, and I expect in most
other places too, is that the B carriers (due to the MFJ restrictions
imposed after the Bell breakup) are obligated to let you pick which
long-distance carrier you use, while the A's are not.

This has practical consequences.  Suppose I want to use Sprint long
distance, either because I find it to have clearer line quality or
because I can get it consolidated-billed with my other Sprint calls.
Then I cannot use the A carrier, as they are in bed with AT&T.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza   New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Here in Chicago, 'our' Cellular One allows a choice
of any of the big three carriers.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 93 12:48:55 CST
From: Greg Abbott <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted


[e-mail] (David Lemson) wrote:

> By sheer coincidence, the non-wireline carrier in St. Louis is called
> CyberTel and, unless I am mistaken, is owned by Ameritech.  :-)  Of
> course, the wireline carrier in STL is called Southwestern Bell Mobile
> Systems.

> (Funny to see the same ads from Cellular One in Champaign/Urbana and
> CyberTel in St. Louis such as for the 'family pack' around Christmas,
> etc.)  In case some people are confused by this, 'Cellular One' and
> 'CyberTel' are just trade names that various companies pay to use in
> certain markets.

Just as a point of clarification; 'CyberTel' was a private company
providing paging services throughout IL and MO.  Cybertel provided
cellular service in the St. Louis Market.  Last year, Ameritech
purchased CyberTel because they wanted to get into the cellular
business in St. Louis.  The only way they could do it was to buy
CyberTel's cellular *and* paging markets.

Ameritech has carried the 'CyberTel' name and it is now listed as an
Ameritech company.  Most of the CyberTel offices in the central
Illinois area have been consilidated with the Ameritech Mobile
offices.



GREG ABBOTT     E-MAIL: [e-mail]
9-1-1 COORDINATOR       COMPUSERVE MAIL: 76046,3107
METCAD   VOICE: 217/333-4348   FAX:   [phone]
1905 E. MAIN ST.      PAGER: 800/222-6651
URBANA, IL  61801     PIN # 9541

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 93 01:17 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network


[e-mail] (Dave Leibold) quotes great
puffery from:

> [Bell News, Bell Canada/Bell Ontario division, 8th March 1993;
> content is that of Bell News, numbered footnotes are my comments]

> World's first fully-digital network is just months away.

Then snorts:

> Thus endeth John Higdon's visions of step-by-steps and even x-bars
> strewn throughout the Great White North (see thread on NAFTA effects
> on Canadian telecommuncations industry).

So just what is the population of Greater Toronto? I should hope that
a city of that size and stature could boast an "all digital" network.
I see nothing in your press release that indicates all the Xbar and
SXS is being removed from the rural areas of Canada, which if you will
re-read my comments is what I was talking about. Modern communications
in major cities is no big deal. So with that in mind let me point out:

The high desert area of California (about as rural as you can get) is
ALREADY "all-digital" -- and has been for some time. The divestiture
nay-sayers claim that "cream skimming" will prevent rural customers
from enjoying "big time" telephone service. Nonsense! The 5ESS and DMS
switches in and around Barstow, Victorville, Hesperia, Adelanto, yes
and even Kramer Junction were all installed SINCE that "dark day" in
1984.

Frankly, I never thought for an instant that there has been a single
SXS or even a Xbar switch anywhere near Toronto for many years. Never
would I suggest that Canadian telecommunication (or anything else
there) is inferior in any way. But there is a faction in Canada (just
as there was in the US nearly a decade ago) that is predicting doom,
gloom, and the collapse of the telephone system if Bell Canada is
relieved of its monopolistic hold.

But from things that I have read from the anti-competition zealots,
there is a considerable amount of liberty-taking with the truth. The
US telephone system has not collapsed, nor is it in any way inferior
to any system anywhere. I have been carrying on e-mail correspondence
with a Canadian who has been genuinely concerned with the impending
competition. He was surprised to learn that local telephone service
did NOT cost an arm and a leg in the US. The fact that the party line
had all but disappeared was news to him. That I can call anywhere in
the country by dialing only ten digits and that the call is completed
instantly was contrary to the impression he had been given by some of
the propaganda up there. He had visions of dialing twenty digits (or
even having to place calls manually giving VISA card numbers, etc.)
and waiting long periods of time to get through the "long distance
nightmare".

Of course Bell Canada is going to demonstrate how "modern" it is. And
it will imply that it would be detrimental to tamper in any way with
its current gravy train. But we can now see the "all digital" light at
the end of the tunnel for the entire state of California -- something
that is a result of competition and divestiture, not in spite of it. I
dare say that had it not been for market forces, California would
still sport mechanical offices even to this day.


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


[Moderator's Note: Whether or not 'local service in the USA now costs
an arm and a leg' is a very subjective decision. I know my phone bill
has skyrocketed since ten years ago, far out of line with what
inflation would have taken it to. I know I am paying $5-6 per
line/month for 'network access' because the carriers to join the
industry in recent years refused to go along with the traditional
separations and settlements process which served AT&T and the local
telcos very well for many years.

I am paying 60-70 cents for each directory assistance call because the
carriers to join the industry in recent years refused to either
establish their own directory assistance bureaus or share the common
costs involved in the maintainence of the 555-1212 services used for
years by AT&T and GTE customers. The newcomers told their customers to
use xxx-555-1212 to get the information free from AT&T, then dial via
the alternate carrier to place the call. International directory
assistance is now $3 per *number* looked up for the same reason. I pay
more for operator assistance surcharges because the carriers to join
the industry in recent years saw no reason to pay the expense of
maintaining actual operator services; for all intents and purposes,
when you dial 10<some carrier other than ATT> plus zero, they might as
well put a recording on the line saying to dial 10288-0 for assistance.

I am paying $1 per line/month for a '911 surcharge' that I have no
use for; and while this can hardly be blamed on the new carriers in
the industry, it just adds frosting to the whole thing. It is not
because of divestiture that the USA phone network has held together as
well as it has, it is *despite* the architecture of our divestiture.
If you have plenty of money and telephone costs are only a small part
of your budget, these costs may be only a small annoyance. To some of
us, they are financial killers.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bohdan Tashchuk)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network
Organization: Fast Technology --- Beaverton, OR
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 19:18:58 GMT


> The final such SEM (switching equipment modernization) will happen on
> June 26. It will give the greater Toronto Area (soon to be the
> restructured 416 area code) the world's first fully-digital
> telecommunications network. [1]

Does this mean that every subscriber is going to be given an ISDN
telephone?  Will they also be given ISDN peripheral cards to replace
their modems?

Or are the millions of "fully-analog" telephones in Toronto not
actually a part of a "telecommunications network"?

I guess that Marketing Slime feel that words mean only what they want
them to mean, nothing more, nothing less. Hmmm. Where have I heard
that before?


Bohdan

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Kenton)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Organization: Kenton Systems Corporation, Weston MA
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 13:29:34 GMT


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

> It is city, state, street number, street and apartment number (often
> forgotten) ... there are various automated ways to get nine-digit zip
> information, including a CD-ROM version of the nine-digit zip code
> manuals.

Unfortunately, some of these automated wonders are broken.  There is
at least one of these pieces of software which takes my home address
and changes the zip code to that of a neighboring town, and then
changes the town name to match.  It turns out to be a valid address.

Once a year several companies, in the name of zip code purity, run
through their mailing lists and "fix" their records relating to me.
This has caused the loss of one magazine subscription (Forbes -- it
took them five months to straighten it out) and several credit cards
whose companies got incensed that I wasn't paying bills even though
they admitted they were addressed to the wrong town.


Jeff Kenton    [phone]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Date: 16 Mar 1993 10:03:16 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


The USPS uses a system -- the name escapes me at the moment -- that
takes all incoming flats (flats are exactly that, envelopes and cards
that are no larger that 9x12 inches and do not exceed a given
thickness.  The actual specs are much more detailed.) and runs them
thru a reader.  The reeader has several stages. First it checks for
the presence of the zip code bar code (in the lower right area of the
envelope) and a prepaid bar code (just to the left of the postage
imprint) and for the presence of the correct postage.  If it has a
zip+4 code and correct postage already it is diverted direct to
sorting.  Then it goes thru an OCR reader that scans the address for
name, street, apt/box#, city, state and printed zip.  It runs a
compare to see if the printed zip matches the rest of the info, looks
up and adds the +4 if needed and prints the bar code on the envelope
and sends it to sorting.  If the printed zip does not match the
printed address it performs a lookup on the printed address.  It then
prints the bar code on the envelope. go directly to sorting.  If it
cannot resolve the correct zip+4 it then goes to an operator for
semi-manual operation.

    The operator gets a picture on the monitor of the graphic
image the OCR scanner saw.  He/She can then type in corrected info
based on that or send it to another station where the operator is
looking at the actual envelope and deals with it accordingly.

    The USPS is also in the midst of installing upgrades to these
machines, that will greatly speed processing by putting the scan lines
in the OCR portion closer together. (causing the OCR to have a better
shot at detecting verticals such as H,L,I, etc ...)  recognizing a
much larger number of typefaces, and being able to recognize hand
printed addresses with a much higher success rate.

    The USPS gives a variety of price breaks for mass mailers.
The exact prices change every few months, so I am not current on them.
but they are for: presorting by state; presorting by zipcode; using an
OCRable typeface with full zip+4; preprinting the zip+4 barcode.
These also apply for other than first class also, but that gets much
more complex.  You also have to be sending a fairly large number of
pieces to qualify for discounts.  (c. 500-1000 or more per deposit
into the system.)

    These are as I recollect from about 12/91 when I put together
a proposal for my employer.  I have not kept track of the issues, and
my memory is an unreliable transport mechanism.


Dale Farmer

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

From: [e-mail] (MARK STEIGER)
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 18:34:48 -0600
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Organization: The Dark Knight's Table BBS:  Minnetonka, MN (Free!)


> As far as I know, UPS and Fed Ex are still hand sorting everything.
> Both services are barcoding packages, but the barcodes are with a
> package serial number to allow tracking.  They are not coding with a
> zip code to allow sorting.

Actually, what Fed Ex and UPS do is keep records like package serial
numbers going to zip code xxxxx.  Zip code is a trademark of the Post
Office.  I'm not sure on this, but couldn't they get in trouble for
bar coding it on the package? Anyway, they electronically sort all of
the packages based on what zip code belongs to that serial number.
It's pretty cool to see in action.  Fed Ex gave us a tour at work
since we ship so much.


Mark Steiger, Sysop, The Igloo BBS [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]   Fido: 1:282/4018  Simnet: 16:612/24


[Moderator's Note: Did you know that 'Zip Code' started as an
abbreviation which finally became a word-phrase in its own right? Just
like 'Care' (as in Care Packages) is what we call it now, (it began as
The Committee on American Relief in Europe in the 1945-50 era), and
'Naytoe' (NATO) is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization even though
we never say it that way any longer, 'Zip Code' has a formal name also.

The Postal Service, back in the days when it was the 'US Post Office'
devised the <Z>one <I>mprovement <P>lan Codes as a way to speed mail
delivery. The Zone Improvement Plan got shortened to 'ZIP' as time
went on ...   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Krause)
Subject: Re: Public Phone 2000
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 16 Mar 93 09:29:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator responded
to [e-mail] (Doug Krause):

> [Moderator's Note: Thanks very much for taking the time and going to
> the expense to send us a message from that phone. I hope your trip was
> pleasant and not to someplace where the airport is shut down. By the
> way can anyone give us any weather related telecom updates from the
> eastern states? Are they even getting through at all?   PAT]

No problem, and it was fun anyway.  DFW did not get much of the storm.
The temperature dropped from about 80 to the 30s from Wednesday to
Saturday, but that was about it.  It also rained a lot in Houston, but
when doesn't it?


Douglas Krause  [e-mail]   University of California, Irvine

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig Myers)
Subject: Re: 18kf Limit Measurement
Organization: JHU/Applied Physics Laboratory
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 17:18:59 GMT


[e-mail] (sohl,william h) writes:

>> Does this 18,000 ft measurement start at the CO or the neighborhood
>> mux (SLC-96, etc.)?

> The 18,000 feet is the maximum distance for the two wire loop portion
> of the circuit, therefore, the 18,000 feet is a maximum from the
> Remote SLC-96 Mux to the subscriber's Network Terminating equipment

According to a map provided by our local telco, C&P, the limit for
ISDN from a SLC-96 is about 5000 feet.  The cost of the BRITE card is
an extra $20.00 per month with a three year termination liability of
$565 to cover the cost of the card.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #183
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28429;
          17 Mar 93 5:30 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14687
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 17 Mar 1993 02:57:31 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08893
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 17 Mar 1993 02:57:04 -0600
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 02:57:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #184

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 17 Mar 93 02:57:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 184

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    What Makes Communications So Exciting Using Computers? (Michael Hauben)
    Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps (Steve Chafe)
    1.2 Watt Handheld Cellphone (Phydeaux)
    X-10 Phone Interface TR551 (Fred Ennis)
    AT&T Acquisitions (was Cellular System A and B Info Wanted) (F. Goldstein)
    Country Codes and Area Codes Within Countries (Ted Koppel)
    10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (Doug Krause)
    Motorola's Iridium Project Information Needed (Brian Strasshiem)
    Mobile Computing Day at Rutgers (David Goodman -and- Tomasz Imielinski)
    ATM Information/White Paper/Newsgroup Wanted (Eric Berggren)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Hauben)
Subject: What Makes Communications So Exciting Using Computers?
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 08:05:20 GMT


Communication and computers. What does it mean, what could it mean? To
many it has meant a technological frontier that is exciting. The
advances in communication via computers have been evident over the
last ten, twenty years or so.

Because of the technology there is a need for more thought of the
connection to beyond the technical. The technical has been fairly well
covered compared to exploring the non-technical implications.

I need to figure out how to think about communications in a more
abstract way or in a broader way. The link between the actual
hardware/software combination and the ensuing results needs to be more
concentrated on. I would like to spend time doing some of this
thinking and studying.

I am interested (for example) in *what* has been the attraction of the
growth of the readership and reach of Usenet News. (In addition to the
Internet, and other various computer networks.)

I find it really hard to describe what I am asking right now -- but
there is a spark that has made Usenet the explosive grassroots effort
that it has been. People have *WANTED* to communicate somehow using it
and this is the only way it has grown and developed. I am interested
in trying to figure out what the charm or spark is that has developed
the various different computer communications mediums -- email, news,
irc, etc.

So far, there is one person that has some very interesting ideas about
the role of computers in communication. This is Ithiel de Sola Pool.
He seems to have some thoughts about what I am thinking of, and the
role computers play with that. However he doesn't particularly
followup on it. Below are some interesting quotes from his book
"Technologies Without Boundaries". They seem to provide a link between
the technical and what I am thinking about. I would appreciate any
leads on similar works. If anyone has any ideas, suggestions,
comments, possible resources, or general thoughts about my questions
or train of thought, please either followup to this message or email
to me.


Thank you,

Michael Hauben

The quotes:

Pool 32 - "There was a time when electronic communication and
computation were thought of as quite separate and distinct activities.
Today they are intertwined to the point where no meainingful
borderline between then can be drawn. Both a computer and a digital
telecommunication system can be described as devices that switch bits
of information around under the control of a stored program. Each has
a memory in which signals are stored. Each accepts input signals from
terminals and also sends output signals to other terminals."

33 - "...But by the 1970s many computer systems had become widespread
networks of dispersed processors and memories...
    A particularly significant kind of data trasmission system is
one called a packet network(italics). The name comes from the fact..."

56 - "We have described this fourth of the great technological trends
of our times not so much as an increase in computer usage (which of
course it also is) but as an increase in the interactive capability of
the communications system. Logical reaction becomes part of its
capability. The machines react with intelligence, and so give their
users some of the interaction that was previously available only in
conversation.

    What has made it possible for a physical network of equiptment
to interact with its human user is the marriage of telecommunication
with computer logic. This coupling is acheived in part by attaching
what could also be stand-alone computers to the network and in part by
incorperating digital logic into the telecommunications system
itself."

57 - "    A second factor in the marriage of telecommunications with
computation is the use of 'distribution logic.' In the 1960s it was
not clear the way of the future lay in this direction....[Idea of big
computers] What followed ...

58 - "The predicition that the growth of minis would reduce
communication was incorrect because it looked on computers as
calculating machines. It focused too exclusivly on the internal
economics of computation, on how much a particular set of calculations
cost, adding together both computing bills and communications bills to
do it. *It did not take account of what people would be using their
computers for and the total costs involved in those activities.*
*Specificly, it did not consider that a large part of what people use
their computers for is communication.*

    For example, when the ARPANET (A R P A N) was developed, the
expectation was that people would use it to take advanatge of
especially good software that might be running on a computer
elsewhere; people were expected to use it to do computations that they
could not do at home. (7) There is little use of that kind because
once users learn their own programs and machines, they rarely find it
worthwhile to take the time to become familiar with another set that
has its own special idiosycracies. But the ARPANET has been used a
great deal. *It has been used for communication.* *It has created a
community of scholars who work together and exchange experiences and
information.*"

59 - "INERACTIVE AND INDIVIDUALIZED COMMUNICATION"
    "*In one way or another, the programmed logic that can be
built into modern electronic communication is reducing in part the
passive uniformity of masscommunication.* Just as computer-controlled
assembly lines can vary the product in a way that would be
prohibitivly expensive otherwise, so too computer-controlled media
production can bring into the realm of economic feasibility kinds of
communication that take some account of the individuals to whom they
are addressed."

89 - "'...It would constitute the material beginning of a real World
Brain.' (27) Wells foresaw that the encyclopedia might be a network;
in 1936 he could not see how, and could not be sure.  Fifty years
later we can be.
    The first few ganglia of Wells' world brain already exist.
Information retrieval has become a big business. The industry is also
called electronic publishing, which probably describes it better, for
it is the dissemination of information in electronic form..."

Conclusions from page 260-262 that I have not typed in yet.


Michael Hauben    CC '95      |Write ME for the Fall'92 Amateur Computerist
[e-mail] | Special Supplement on Usenet News called
[e-mail]   |   "The Wonderful World of Usenet News"

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Chafe)
Subject: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps
Organization: Computing Services, UC Davis
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 17:29:08 GMT


Hello,

Has anyone tried to find the cause of bursts of four or five garbage
characters that appear randomly (ever few minutes to every few hours)
on a 9600 bps data call that does not have error correction in effect?

We are seeing similar characters each time the noise happens -- often
a question mark ? or a hat ^ .  The fact that the same characters come
up often suggests that it is not from random electromagnetic noise.
It may be phase noise from the central office switching equipment.  If
anyone has experience troubleshooting this type of noise, I would love
to hear your opinions!

Also -- does anyone know if there exist minimum requirements for phase
hits on a switched voice telephone call?


Thanks,

Steve Chafe   Communications Resources   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 93 10:22:00 PST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: 1.2 Watt Handheld Cellphone


I've seen advertisements for a 1.2 watt Blaupunkt handheld cellphone.
I thought the limit was .6watts.  What's going on here?


reb

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

Subject: X-10 Phone Interface TR551
From: [e-mail] (Fred Ennis)
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 20:11:41 -0500
Organization: Page 6, Ottawa, Ontario [phone]


I have the X-10 telephone interface, and I need to modify it.

I have a 1A2 key system at home, and I want to take my intercom line
which has battery on it for a talk path, and use the DTMF tones to
trigger the interface, allowing me to control X-10 modules from any of
the keysets simply by depressing the intercom line and dialing the
activating digits.

The TR551 as it comes "out of the box" answers the phone, waits for a
minute or two, and then hangs up.  I need to know if someone has been
able to modify the TR551 to always monitor the phone line, and respond
if there is a DTMF signal that needs to be processed.

Failing that, does anyone know of a reasonably priced DTMF decoder
that will happily sit on a line with battery, and wait for the tones,
and then send them out decoded to 1 thru 0 (as opposed to outputs that
go high for each of the two tones).

I will gratefully accept email from kind comp.dcom.telecom readers on
this one.

Cheers!


Fred Ennis, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: AT&T Acquisitions (was Cellular System A and B Info Wanted)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 03:47:54 GMT


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

> [Moderator's Note: Well you have to remember a history lesson here.
> AT&T often used to accuse MCI of 'skimming the cream', but seventy
> years ago, the Mother Company was the biggest cream skimmer around....

 (much text omitted)

> Then comes the 1950's and the farmers finally got their
> REA mortgages paid off. For the first time in a quarter-century the
> telephone cooperatives started making profits with no debt service
> monkeys on their back. Bingo, all of a sudden AT&T decides to start
> buying them up, 'in order to modernize the system'.

Nice story, Pat.  But I'm not so sure of its preciseness.  Back in
1912, AT&T entered into the "Kingsbury" agreement, in which they were
granted the right to monopoly local service in exchange for which a)
independents had access to AT&T toll, and b) they could acquire no
more territory.  Prior to 1912, AT&T had skimmed the cream, but that
left several thousand independents, and of course the REA helped grow
more in the '30s.

So due to Kingsbury, when the farmers sold out, they couldn't sell out
to Mother.  They sold out to GTE, they sold out to Contel, they sold
out to TDS, they sold out to United (now Sprint), they sold out to
their neighbors, but AT&T was not allowed to buy them.  Indeed the
first new "Bell" territory in over seven decades was the section of El
Paso County, Colorado just east of Colorado Springs that US West
bought in 1984.  US West was no longer bound by its predecessor's
limitations (but had more of its own!), and NASA was contemplating a
big complex in eastern El Paso.  Since then, Bells have done a bit
more acquisition, but GTE has done the most.

Or at least that's the way I remember it.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Koppel)
Subject: Country Codes and Area Codes Within Countries
Organization: CARL Systems Inc, Denver, Colo.
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 93 04:02:15 GMT


I am hoping that the creature that I desire exists in the archives, in
machine readable form, but I'll be thrilled to accept pointers in the
direction of printed sources for the information I require.

For one of our applications in which we make a large number overseas
long distance calls, it will be useful to be able to identify all the
country codes (this part is easy) and to the extent possible the
city/area/region codes within each country code.  I don't care about
prefixes within a city, just the fact that within France (for
instance) the city code for Lyon is 7 and the city code for Nice is
93.  Does such a creaature exist?  Would AT&T, or Sprint, or someone
else have collected this (even if it were a marketing tool, the
information is what's important!)?


Thanks,

Ted Koppel  --  [e-mail]  or   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You bet we have it! Check out the Telecom Archives
using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu (login anonymous, use name@site as
your password, then 'cd telecom-archives' and 'cd country.codes'. You
will find the results of much effort by Dave Leibold and Carl Moore in
exactly the form you desire. Hundreds of countries, thousands of cities
in the country lists. Then from the main archives directory, you should
also go to the sub-directory of Canadian area codes and prefixes, also
detailed by the same gentlemen. Finally, from the main archives direc-
tory, get a copy of 'areacode.guide', the 'npa.809' files and whatever
else you see with reference tables, etc. Then send a note to Dave and
Carl thanking them for their hard and continuing work on this.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Krause)
Subject: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 16 Mar 93 09:32:39 GMT


I found a pay phone in Texas that would not accept 10-ATT-0 to get me
on the AT&T network.  Isn't that illegal?  If so, where should I
report this?

Douglas Krause  [e-mail]   University of California, Irvine


[Moderator's Note: Yes it is illegal to block 10xxx codes from any
phones in a 'transient environment', meaning hotels, university dorms,
pay phones and a few other cases. It is not illegal to block 10xxx in
non-transient environments like employer PBX's.  Where should you
report it?  You can try muttering to yourself, that might be the best
bottom line. You can report it to the FCC, and you can report it to
Mother; she in particular wants to hear about it, but I've reported a
few and nothing ever seems to change.   PAT]

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

From: Brian Strasshiem <[e-mail]>
Subject: Motorola's Iridium Project Information Wanted
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 21:33:50 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois


Hello there, I am desperately seeking information regarding Motorola's
Iridium Project.  I have mostly been scourging through magazines and
electronic bulletins regarding this subject.  I would really
appreciate detailed information or suggestions on where I may find
information.  Also of interest are potential competitors to Iridium,
frequency allocations, collaboration with PCN's, and security issues
surrounding satellite transmissions.


Many thanks in advance.

Brian Strassheim

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

From: [e-mail] (Br Badrinath)
Subject: Mobile Computing Day at Rutgers
Date: 16 Mar 93 23:30:07 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


MOBILE COMPUTING DAY

9:30 - 4:00, April 12, 1993, CoRE Building, Busch Campus, Rutgers
University, Piscataway, New Jersey

WINLAB and the Computer Science Department at Rutgers invite you to
attend Mobile Computing Day, the first event in a series of informal
gatherings of researchers. Mobile computing research attracts people
with a variety of backgrounds including computer science, telecomm-
unications, and microelectronics. On April 12, we will learn about
work in progress and hear a variety of expert opinions on future
directions. Attendance will be limited and there will be a nominal $50
registration fee to cover lunch and other expenses. The theme on April
12 will be:

What is Mobile Computing?  Is it a New Field?

Here is the tentative agenda. Titles of talks will be announced soon:

9:30 Opening Remarks and Introductions
 (say a few words about your background and current work)

10:15 D.Goodman   (Rutgers WINLAB)

10:45 Coffee Break

11:00 R. Woolf    (Bellcore)

11:45 Lunch

1:00  T.Imielinski (Rutgers WINLAB)

1:45  D. Duchamp  (Columbia)

2:30  Panel "Is Mobile Computing a New Research Area?"

4:00  Adjourn


To register for Mobile Computing Day (or to be notified of future
events) please contact:

E-mail: Tomasz Imielinski  [e-mail]
Fax:    WINLAB  908-932-3693
Mail:   Melissa Gelfman, WINLAB, Box 909, Piscataway, NJ, 08855-0909.
Phone:  WINLAB 908-932-0283

If you send us $50 now (payable to WINLAB), things will go smoother on
April 12.

Looking forward to seeing you on Mobile Computing Day.


David Goodman -and- Tomasz Imielinski

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Berggren)
Subject: ATM Information/White Paper/Newsgroup Wanted
Date: 17 Mar 1993 02:29:20 GMT


  I am seeking the definative guide to ATM networking. "What is it
precisely and how it works" type information. Pointers to the relavent
groups/guides welcome.


  Thanks,

Eric Berggren   Computer Action Team   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #184
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26474;
          17 Mar 93 19:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29030
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 17 Mar 1993 16:58:37 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18772
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 17 Mar 1993 16:58:01 -0600
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 16:58:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #185

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 17 Mar 93 16:58:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 185

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    LCI International:  A New Long Distance Choice (Brent Whitlock)
    Consolidating Cellular Sprint Account With Other Phones (Brent Whitlock)
    My LD Carrier Changed Again! (Timothy E. Buchanan)
    Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted (Doug Barr)
    George Gilder Strikes Again (Robert L. McMillin)
    Odd Crossed Connection Story (Michael J. Saletnik)
    MCI 800 Problem (RISKS via Monty Solomon)
    Need Auto-Dialer (Wayne Jones)
    IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager (Andy Rubin)
    Need Phone Fraud Help (Doug Smith)
    Book Review: Toll Fraud and Telabuse (TELECOM Moderator)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: LCI International: A New Long Distance Choice
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 17:31:25 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


Recently, LCI International has been advertising in the
Champaign-Urbana, Illinois area for long distance service.  Their main
marketing point is that they have easy to understand pricing plans.
They advertise that their "Simple, Fair, and Inexpensive" residential
plan (their only residential plan) costs $0.17 per minute 6 am to 6
pm, and $0.12 per minute 6 pm to 6 am.

They are based in the Columbus, Ohio area and have been marketing in
Rockford and Peoria, Illinois recently.  According to an article in
the Tuesday, March 9 edition of {The Champaign-Urbana News Gazette},
their goal is 2% of the long distance market. (AT&T has 60.3%, MCI has
17%, and Sprint has 10%, according to the same source.)

Does anyone know more details on whether or not they have good
connections, how long does it take to complete a call through them, if
their customer service is any good, what they use to carry their
telephone traffic (do they just resell AT&T connections?), or any
other information to compare them with the big three carriers?

For those interested, the number listed in the article for more
information on their residential service was 1-800-860-1217.


    * * * * * * --> 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

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: Consolidating Cellular Sprint Account With Other Phones
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 17:23:09 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


[e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl) writes:

> Another difference that obtains here in New York, and I expect in most
> other places too, is that the B carriers (due to the MFJ restrictions
> imposed after the Bell breakup) are obligated to let you pick which
> long-distance carrier you use, while the A's are not.

> This has practical consequences.  Suppose I want to use Sprint long
> distance, either because I find it to have clearer line quality or
> because I can get it consolidated-billed with my other Sprint calls.
> Then I cannot use the A carrier, as they are in bed with AT&T.

Concerning the hypothetical reference to having Sprint long distance
on a mobile phone consolidated-billed with other Sprint calls, I am
afraid that this cannot be done.  I tried to have my Sprint LD for my
cellular phone consolidated on the same account as the Sprint LD for
my home phone (and my calling cards,) but the Sprint Customer Service
Rep. said they could not do that. :-( I hope they change that soon.


    * * * * * * --> 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

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

From: [e-mail] (BUCHANAN TIMOTHY E)
Subject: My LD Carrier Changed Again!
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 15:54:44 GMT


About 15 months ago I moved back to Colorado from Puerto Rico, where I
had worked on contract for three years. I chose ATT as my carrier.
Soon after, I received a notice from Sprint, with whom I had a
FONE-card, saying my card had been cancelled but I could call to
receive a new one.  I did and regret it.

A few weeks later I got a card from ATT, saying my dialing plan was
being cancelled, as I had _changed_ carriers and had no use for it. I
did not authorize any such change. It took some time to get things
back where I wanted them, and I returned the card to Sprint with a
note saying that I wanted nothing further to do with their company. This
was about a year ago.

Last week, from out of the blue I got another letter from Sprint,
thanking me, etc, and enclosing new card! Sprint claims that they did
not request the change, but that US West sent them a "tape update"
which they processed. US West says that it is Sprint who sends them
the tape. Who is right here?

US West now says they will put me on "Supreme Protect", which will
prevent a LD provider from changing my carrier w/o my authorization. I
thought I had that anyway, but I guess not. Maybe we should _all_ call
our local RB and ask for the "Supreme Protect"?


Timothy

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

From: [e-mail] (BARR DOUG)
Subject: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 16:31:17 GMT


We have some dial in modems that "hang". They require power cycling to
reset them. I am interested in testing our setup and see if I can find
the problem (they are NEC modems). Is there any book on modem and
telephone line testing? Any good test equipment? Could it be the
analog phone lines and/or the way the users are disconnecting?  Could
it be anything other than the modems?


[Moderator's Note: If you are using the traditional three plusses +++
as your modem attention getter, the problem may be that most of your
users are using the same thing. When the user issues the three
plusses, they go to your computer which echoes them back to the user,
but they are seen by your modem as well. As they are passed through
back to the user, your modem acts on them also and sits there
patiently, waiting for someone on *your end* to give it ATO or
whatever. The user uses the three plusses to get his modem's attention
and give an ATH or ATZ, disconnecting him while leaving your modem in
limbo, refusing to answer further incoming calls. Your users complain
'the modem is not answering', you find it apparently 'hung', and
recycle power. You might try giving it ATZ instead to see if it simply
disconnects and resets at that point ... it could have been waiting
all afternoon for you to arrive!  Try setting your attention sequence
to something unusual such as three tildes ~ or three carots ^, etc.
ASCII CHR$(127) is my choice for my modem. Even if the user does not
disconnect but merely 'three-plusses' to check something out, he won't
get control of *your modem* back with his ATO ... your modem won't be
listening to him at that point.  Just a suggestion; I've seen this
many times.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 93 08:53:12 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: George Gilder Strikes Again


Ok, TELECOMer's, run off to your favorite newsstand and get a copy of
{Forbes}.  The cover story in {Forbes: ASAP} is an article about
telephony and wireless communication by George Gilder.  You'll like
it, I promise.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]
                         After April 2 : [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael J. Saletnik)
Subject: Odd Crossed Connection Story
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 14:14:12 GMT


This situation happened to me a few weeks ago, and I was wondering if
anyone could explain to me just what happened.

I was at home when my phone rang.  I was standing near it and
immediately picked it up.  I heard my friend talking, but not to me.
It sounded as if he had dialed the phone, then turned his head to talk
to the people in his house.  So I said hello.  I shouted hello.  He
didn't hear me.  After a moment I realized that I was hearing just
*his* side of a conversation with his mother.

After a few moments, I hung up and called him.  He has call waiting,
so he picked up and I told him that he'd rung my phone and so on.  He
didn't believe me, but I repeated part of his conversation, and he was
shocked.  Apparently, he had been about to call me when his mother
called him.

I don't know the exact sequence of his dialing my number and his phone
ringing and my phone ringing, unfortunately, but I was hoping someone
could explain just what the heck happened that tapped me into half of
his conversation.

This is with New England Telephone in the Greater Boston area; he has
call waiting, I do not.


Thanks,

Michael J. Saletnik, Tufts University E'91 G'93
[e-mail] [e-mail]
TA & Manager of Computer Resources, Dept. of Civil Engineering

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 15:12:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI 800 Problem


   Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 14.40

   Date: 10 Mar 93 13:28:00 EST
   From: "MARCHANT-SHAPIRO, ANDREW" <[e-mail]>
   Subject: MCI 800 problem

Some time ago, my parents (who live in another state) decided that, if
they were going to hear their grandchildrens' voices, they needed to
get a personal 800 number from MCI.  The personal 800 scheme works
like this: each household is assigned a unique 800 number (I'm told),
and an access code (4 digits).  As a precaution against abuse, when
you dial the 800 number you get a message telling you to enter your
code.  Only callers who enter the correct code get connected, so no
massive dialing scheme advertising holiday resorts (etc) can exploit
the users' willingness to pay for incoming calls.

I promptly programmed my parents' number and the code on adjacent
buttons of my phone and left it at that.  I would just hit the first
button, wait for the announcement (voice-mail style) and hit the
second button.  This worked, until a little over a month ago.  At that
point, after I hit the second button I was asked to wait, and an
operator came on the line and asked for my code.  The first time this
happened, I refused to give the code (since I had forgotten it (!)).
A moment later, it apparently showed on the operator's console, and I
was put through.

I thought this was an aberration, but at no time after the first event
was I able to get directly through, without talking to an operator.  I
thought their equipment might not be able to handle the high speed
dialer, so I relearned the code and punched it in myself.  Still no
go.  I tried from my office.  Same thing.

Finally, last week, I managed to get the operator to switch me to a
technical representative.  This individual and I discussed what was
happening, and the rep told me that he knew of another case where much
the same thing had happened.  I then asked if they had changed or
upgraded their system software lately.  Long pause.  "Why yes, we did,
just about a month ago."

I suggested they check things out, and was promised a report.  Well, a
couple of days later the system WORKED!  And it has not failed again
since.  I have not received a report (nor a consulting fee from MCI),
but I suspect that MCI's upgrade of their personal 800 system included
some, uh, 'features' of which they weren't aware.  They may have gone
back to the old software, or they may have just fixed MY problem.  I
don't know which.  But I am certain that the origin of the problem had
to do with a programming error in MCI's hardware/software, and this
raises the issue of other errors that might be out there.

Should MCI employ beta testers?  That would be my suggestion.  They
could pay people like me to make trial calls at, say, 3:00 AM CST,
just to make sure the system worked as advertised.  Hey, in a world
where most people can't program an MS-DOS .BAT file, you need to
check!


Andrew Marchant-Shapiro, Sociology and Political Science Depts., Union College
Schenectady NY 12308 518-370-6225 [e-mail] [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 93 14:41:49 MST
From: [e-mail] (Wayne Jones)
Subject: Need Auto-Dialer


I am looking for an auto-dialer with >10 number list, answer detection
before playback and programmable number of repeats.  Prefer digital
message storage.  Where would I find something like this?  Any info
appreciated.

    Wayne Jones           National Solar Observatory
[e-mail]        Sunspot, NM  88349

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

From: [e-mail] (Android Rubin)
Subject: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager
Date: 16 Mar 93 22:10:25 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA


I'm looking for the control-character spec for the motorola Advisor
pager.  I would like to know what special characters must be sent to
enable silent pages, and to have pages from an information service
show up in the proper bin.  (ie, second display line).

If anyone has the details, or knows where I can get them, could you
please drop me an e-mail?  Thanks.


Andy    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Smith - SGA)
Subject: Need Phone Fraud Help
Organization: Wheaton College
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 15:02:08 GMT


My company was a recent target of PBX fraud.  Someone figured out how
to exploit a bug to allow dial out after calling in on our 800 number.
I patched the hole but we are left with about $4000 in phone bills.

I realize that most of the calls came from payphones in New York.
However, between our 800 number bill detail and our call accounting
logs we might have the original hacker's call detail.  The problem is
I can't get any assistance from the phone company (AT&T).  I have
talked with their security division but the majority of people I talk
to don't have a clue what is going on.  They try to categorize it with
harrassment calls from individuals who have no technical knowledge.

Has anyone been through this that might have suggestions on where to
go next?  I'd like to find out if any of the numbers in our log are
not pay phones so I know if there is anything to pursue.  I haven't
found anyone at AT&T willing to look up the numbers and tell me what
they are.

Thanks in advance for your help.


Doug Smith  [e-mail]  or  ...wheaton.wheaton.edu!sga!dougs


[Moderator's Note: Something I received recently touches on this very
topic. See the final message in this issue.   PAT]

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

From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: Toll Fraud and Telabuse
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993  12:00:00 CST


Recently I was introduced through the mail to John J. Haugh, a very
knowledgeable person where toll fraud is concerned.  With three
associates, Robert E. Burney, Gregory L. Dean and Lawrence H. Tisch,
Mr. Haugh last year published a monumental work, "Toll Fraud and
Telabuse", a two-volume publication covering toll fraud in great
detail and how to spot it and/or prevent it. The book discusses not
only the technical aspects of toll fraud, but the legal aspects as
well such as who is responsible, and the type of stance victims might
take with their carrier to resolve the problem. The 'telabuse' side of
the report discusses the huge amount of unauthorized long distance
calling done by employees authorized to use their employer's phone for
business purposes and how employers can deal with it and the unauthor-
ized use of other employer resources such as fax machines, etc.

Over 400 pages of precise technical details on how hackerphreaks
penetrate your PBX, voicemail, DISA and other remote access lines to
rip you off ... detailed discussions of cellular fraud, fraud against
COCOT operators, telephone fraud by prisoners in correctional centers,
and credit card fraud.  Volume 2 includes several case histories, the
contacts to make in law enforcement agencies investigating toll fraud,
a complete list of federal and state statutes dealing with toll fraud,
and much more. Haugh's book received rave reviews from several telecom
industry publications, and I don't mind adding my own voice to the
many praising his work.

Haugh also talks about the 'politics' of toll fraud; why companies are
reluctant to make changes required to prevent it and how telephone
companies cover up the problem when it occurred as a result of a telco
employee's dishonesty.  The book is frank, and the authors do not
mince words when they discuss telco policies regards toll fraud.

The price is $270, and while that is not inexpensive, all you need is
one good raid by some phreaks accompanied with a phone bill that
arrives via UPS in a box one month to pay the cost. It is soft cover,
8.5" x 11".

Mr. Haugh's firm, Telecommunications Advisors, Inc. also publishes a
bi-monthly journal entitled "Telecommunications and Network Security
Review" which continues the discussion started in the book published
last year. The subscription price is $170 per year.

Haugh, his firm and his associates seem like good people to get to
know. No doubt they can assist with toll fraud investigations and
prosecutions, and their printed material is among the best 'self help'
material I have seen.

Telecommunications Advisors, Inc.
One S.W. Columbia Street  #500
Portland, OR  97258
Phone: [phone]  or 800-435-7878
Fax:   [phone]

Include a VISA/MC/AMEX number if you wish to charge your purchase. If
you want more detailed information, ask for the brochure and a sample
copy of the first issue of their Review.


Patrick Townson

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #185
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14656;
          18 Mar 93 5:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17258
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 18 Mar 1993 02:37:36 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29962
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 18 Mar 1993 02:37:01 -0600
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 02:37:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #186

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 18 Mar 93 02:37:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 186

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    New Information on 2600 Case (Dave Banisar)
    Network Culture (Daniel Drucker)
    Fraud Prevention Seminar (Hector O. Myerston)
    Bell Canada Payphone Charges (J.Harrison)
    Yet Another White House Address (Paul Robinson)
    1-800-TADPOLE Wanted! Help Find 'Touch America' (Jim Thompson)
    Data and Voice on Same Fibre (Tim Guay)
    TDDs and Modem Standards (Ken Thompson)
    Industrial Strength Caller-ID Boxes (Brian Hall)
    People, Not Profits (Alan T. Furman)
    Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Scott D. Fybush)
    National Geographic Note on Hurricane Andrew (Carl Moore)
    CHILL Information Wanted (Harald Vogt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Organization: CPSR Civil Liberties and Computing Project
From: Dave Banisar <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 20:59:03 EST
Subject: New Info on 2600 Case


     One month after being sued under the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA), the Secret Service has officially acknowledged that it
possesses "information relating to the breakup of a meeting of
individuals at the Pentagon City Mall in Arlington, Virginia."  The
admission, contained in a letter to Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility (CPSR), confirms widespread suspicions that the agency
played a role in the detention and search of individuals affiliated
with "2600" Magazine at the suburban Washington mall on November 6,
1992.

     CPSR filed suit against the Secret Service on February 4 after
the agency failed to respond to the organization's FOIA request within
the statutory time limit.  In its recent response, the Secret Service
released copies of three news clippings concerning the Pentagon City
incident but withheld other information "because the documents in the
requested file contain information compiled for law enforcement
purposes."  While the agency asserts that it possesses no "documentation
created by the Secret Service chronicling, reporting, or describing
the breakup of the meeting," it does admit to possessing "information
provided to the Secret Service by a confidential source which is
information relating to the breakup of [the] meeting."  Federal
agencies classify other law enforcement agencies and corporate
entities, as well as individuals, as "confidential sources."

     The propriety of the Secret Service's decision to withhold the
material will be determined in CPSR's pending federal lawsuit.  A copy
of the agency's letter is reprinted below.


David L. Sobel           [e-mail]
Legal Counsel             [phone] (voice)
CPSR Washington Office      [phone] (fax)

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

                    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
                   UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE

                            MAR 5 1993

                              920508


David L. Sobel
Legal Counsel
Computer Professionals for
Social Responsibility
666 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E.
Suite 303
Washington, D.C.  20003

Dear Mr. Sobel:

This is in response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request
for access to "copies of all records related to the breakup of a
meeting of individuals affiliated with "2600 Magazine" at the Pentagon
City Mall in Arlington, Virginia on November 6, 1992."

Enclosed, please find copies of materials which are responsive to your
request and are being released to you in their entirety.

Other information has been withheld because the documents in the
requested file contain information compiled for law enforcement
purposes.  Pursuant to Title 5, United States Code, Section
552(b)(7)(A); (C); and (D), the information has been exempted since
disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement
proceedings; could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy to other persons; and could reasonably be
expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source and/or
information furnished by a confidential source.  The citations of the
above exemptions are not to be construed as the only exemptions that
are available under the Freedom of Information Act.

In regard to this matter it is, however, noted that your FOIA request
is somewhat vague and very broadly written.  Please be advised, that
the information being withheld consists of information provided to the
Secret Service by a confidential source which is information relating
to the breakup of a meeting of individuals at the Pentagon City Mall
in Arlington, Virginia, and, therefore, appears to be responsive to
your request as it was written. If, however, the information you are
seeking is information concerning the Secret Service's involvement in
the breakup of this meeting, such as any type of documentation created
by the Secret service chronicling, reporting, or describing the
breakup of the meeting, please be advised that no such information
exists.

If you disagree with our determination, you have the right of
administrative appeal within 35 days by writing to Freedom of
Information Appeal, Deputy Director, U. S. Secret Service, 1800 G
Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20223.  If you choose to file an
administrative appeal, please explain the basis of your appeal.

                                    Sincerely,

                                    /Sig/
                                    Melvin E. Laska
                                    ATSAIC
                                    Freedom of Information &
                                    Privacy Acts Officer

Enclosure

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Drucker)
Subject: Network Culture
Date: 17 Mar 1993 20:09:17 -0500
Organization: dis


If anyone has anything to contribute to the following, it would be
greatly appreciated. I'm a high school student who's trying to educate
people about the network's culture.

The following is being posted in various places, muds, newsgroups.

I am creating a professional video about the Network's culture,
highlighting, among other things, Usenet. I'd like to make
alt.folklore.computers a part of it, considering how we are really a
group about network/computer culture.  If you would like to appear in
it, send a VHS tape of yourself, talking about why you enjoy the
network; be specific, talk about your involvement. It would be
appreciated if you could first have someone videotape you talking,
sitting still, and THEN videotape you, say, in front of the computer
for a few minutes.  We will put the audio on top of the best video.
Tip: remember to start the tape rolling at least five seconds before
you start talking.

Send your videotape, labeled with name, address, email to:

Schreiber High School
TV STUDIO -- Daniel Drucker.
101 Campus Drive
Port Washington, NY 11050.

Include return postage, and we will place the final production on your
tape and send it to you. The production will be aired on Channel 25 on
Long Island.

The production will be edited in the Schreiber Studio, a $200,000
studio including 4 SVHS, 3 3/4 in, and one videodisk recorder, full
SEG system, and the NewTEK video Toaster running on an Amiga 4000.
The production will be mastered on 3/4 inch tape and duped on standard
or super VHS.

If you don't have access to a video camera, send an audio tape and
photograph or three. We will use ANYTHING and (almost) EVERYTHING we
get.


Thanks,

Daniel Drucker   N2SXX    [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hector O Myerston)
Subject: Fraud Prevention Seminar
Date: 17 Mar 93 21:19:31 GMT
Organization: SRI International


Golden Gate University, in association with the San Francisco Bay Area
of the Tele-Communications Association (TCA), is sponsoring a one day
seminar on TOLL FRAUD. (They are against it! :-))

Date/Time:  March 31 9:00AM to 4:00PM
Location:   Golden Gate University, Southbay Campus
            5050 El Camino Los Altos, CA
Cost:       $100 ($75 for TCA members)
        Information/Registration:  [phone] or [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 18:58:55 +0000
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Bell Canada Payphone Charges


I'm mad with Bell Canada. I wanted to use a payphone one night
recently to make a call from Smith's Falls, Ontario, to Utica, NY (a
distance of about 300 miles at the most).

I'm mad because:

 - You can't direct dial the number! (I dialed the right number but
the operator pops up out of nowhere and starts handling the call). I
didn't realise who she was at first (thought I had reached a wrong
number), and she treated me like complete dirt.  It's a while since I
used a North American payphone and I forgot this happens, but I was
amazed it still does. How much intelligence does a phone need anyway
just to take your money?

 - It's cash or nothing. If you're not a US or Canadian resident
you're unlikely to have an acceptable phone company credit card.  OK
it's not that unreasonable that Bell would/could not charge my British
Telecom card, but what else is a tourist supposed to do?  No pre-paid
cards available in newsstands like in many countries, and there aren't
too many of the Visa-accepting payphones that I saw later in larger
cities.

 - Cost. The operator wanted $2.35 (Canadian) per minute. I was
thinking of maybe a 10-minute call, and the largest piece of money
that would go in this Bell Canada ugly tin box was 25 cents. So I
would have needed a bucketful of quarters, plus it is really expensive
 -- I could call NY cheaper from London! From a UK (Mercury) payphone
the cheapest rate is #1.17 (roughly $1.95) per minute, and _that_ is
for 3600 miles of call.

I guess I'm telling readers nothing they don't already know. I just
wanted to let off steam and Bell Canada if you're reading this I think
you could take a good look at fixing your phone system.


Joe Harrison     Phone: [phone]     | ICL Ltd. Bracknell
S=Harrison/I=J/O=icl/P=icl/A=gold 400/C=GB | Berkshire RG12 1BD
[e-mail]          | United Kingdom


[Moderator's Note: I'm sorry to hear about your experience. While some
(maybe most?) pay phones in the United States do connect with a robot
to collect cash if you dial 1+ or get billing information if you dial
0+, some places still require an operator to come on the line for
either purpose. Maybe that is the case in Canada. It is too bad you
got one who was rude, but that is not all that uncommon either it
seems. I think the operator should have accepted your British Telecom
calling card; this is an acceptable card in the USA at least, although
perhaps to use it the call has to go back to the UK; I am not sure of
the technicalities. By definition, pay phone calls cannot be 'direct
dialed' at the lower rates since an operator's intervention -- even a
robot operator -- is required to prompt for payment or billing infor-
mation. Calls between the USA and Canada are expensive.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 12:17:50 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Yet Another White House Address


MCI Mail announced yet another E-Mail address for messages to be sent
to the White House.  It stated in the note that messages sent to the
address would be sent as paper mail to the White House via the USPS,
rather than as E-Mail.

The implication, since the usual charge for individual messages is 50c
for the first 500 characters, that this could conceivably be something
that the White House is paying for, since MCI Mail permits "autoforward-
ing" of a message sent to a mailbox to be sent to a fax number, another
E-Mail address or a Paper Mail address.

If MCI is doing this to encourage MCI Mail subscribers to send messages,
then messages from users on Internet will almost certainly either bounce
or not be sent.

I encourage people on Internet to try sending a message to the address
supplied by MCI Mail for messages to the White House to see what happens.

I guess that's all I need to say.

OH YES!  You need the E-Mail address, don't you?  :)

     [e-mail]


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: If payment is required from the sender, then indeed
the mail will bounce back. Remember how in the early days of the gate-
ways between the Internet and the commercial email services people on
Internet were writing to !telex![e-mail] and !fax!number@
mcimail.com and the messages were going through?  The services finally
wised up to that and closed those loopholes.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 93 11:20:35 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jim Thompson)
Subject: 1-800-TADPOLE Wanted! Help Locate 'Touch America'


As you can see from the headers, I work for Tadpole Technology, Inc.
Tadpole would really like to have '800 TADPOLE', (800 823 7653).

Perusing the Telecom Archives, the 823 NXX is 'owned' (?) by a company
called 'Touch America'.  Has anyone heard of them?  Any contact
information for 'Touch America'?

Also with 800 portability just around the corner, what will the
situation be after May 1?  Will I be able to call my favorite 800
vendor and say, "I'd like to have 800 823 7653." (If it is unassigned,
of course.), or will I still need to call Touch America, and then
'move' the 800 service?


Jim


[Moderator's Note: Good question. I'd assume that with portability,
the carrier which 'originally' owned the number (of course, originally
everything was owned by Mother, but I mean post-divestiture) would
have to be told the number was no longer available in their inventory
(of unassigned numbers) so they would not sell it later on to one of
their customers. Does anyone know the routine for portability yet; how
one carrier will go about obtaining a number from another carrier on
behalf of their customer?  If you find out, let me know! I'm trying to
sell the darn things! :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Guay)
Subject: Data and Voice on the Same Fibre
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 00:09:40 GMT


Hi,

What options are available for running data and voice over the same
fibre optic backbone? Is it worth doing, or is it best to pull two
seperate fibre optic backbones?


Thanks...

Tim Guay, CMNS/REM  SFU

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

From: Ken Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: TDDs and Modem Standards
Date: 17 Mar 93 17:43:52 GMT
Organization: NCR Corporation Wichita, KS


Are TDD's compatable with any modem standard?


Ken Thompson    N0ITL
NCR Corp.  Peripheral Products Division   Disk Array Development
3718 N. Rock Road  Wichita KS 67226   [phone]
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Hall)
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 18:01:46 -0600
Subject: Industrial Strength Caller-ID Boxes


   I'm looking for some "industrial strength" caller-ID (which will
hopefully be available in Texas soon) boxes ... what I'd really like
would be one box that can monitor several lines (at least three, maybe
six) and preferably dump the output to a printer (once a day, maybe?).
I'd need to record at least the last 100 calls (name, number, time and
date), preferably 200.  Worst case, I'd settle for a single box that
can save the last 100 names/numbers/times/dates, but I'd prefer a
paper copy.  I don't really want to dedicate a PC to each line to do
this.

   Is there anything like this on the market?


Thanks,

Brian
Origin: MacEndeavour [phone] Houston, TX NRA Life Member (1:106/6268)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: People, Not Profits
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 93 21:28:36 PST


According to a posting on misc.news.southasia, the following item
appeared in the March 16 edition of the Deccan Herald (Bangalore,
India):

WAITING PERIOD FOR PHONES TO BE CUT

NEW DELHI - The Govt plans to bring down the waiting period for
telephones in metropolitan cities from about 15 years to two years
during the eighth plan period (1992-97), the Lok Sabha was informed
today.


Alan T. Furman   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott D Fybush)
Subject: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 05:28:03 GMT


That's just what one Massachusetts legislator wants to legislate.
According to a radio report on WBZ Boston on 17 March [disclaimer:
Yes, I work there; no, it wasn't my report; yes, I wish it had been],
one Beacon Hill lawmaker says he's gotten fed up with drivers who miss
the light turning green ... or weave all over the road ... because
they have the phone to their ear!  So he's proposing a bill that would
make people pull over to use the cellphone.

I suspect this one will get eaten alive by the cell companies' lobby-
ists.


Scott Fybush -- [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 93 10:22:33 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: National Geographic Note on Hurricane Andrew


(Sorry, I don't have much to say about last weekend's blizzard; I am
aware of phone calls to my parents from scattered brothers and
sisters.)

This past weekend, I did see a National Geographic magazine article
(latest issue?) about Hurricane Andrew.  It pointed out that officials
have to re-think reliance on radio and telephone, because of towers
being knocked down and phone lines being jammed.

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

From: [e-mail] (Harald Vogt)
Subject: CHILL Information Wanted
Organization: Utrecht University, Dept. of Computer Science


Hello,

I am looking for information about the programming language CHILL.
CHILL is used for programming phone switches.

I am interested in the following items:

   o a formal specification of the language CHILL
     (is there a grammar for CHILL?),

   o tools available for manipulating CHILL,

   o programming environments for CHILL,

   o pointers to articles about CHILL, and

   o hints to get more info about CHILL.

Any help is appreciated,


Harald Vogt    E-mail: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #186
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27182;
          19 Mar 93 2:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04747
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 18 Mar 1993 23:29:36 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19431
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 18 Mar 1993 23:28:30 -0600
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 23:28:30 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #188

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 18 Mar 93 23:28:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 187

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Getting Information To And From the White House (Mark Boolootian)
    Call Waiting Options (Jack Decker)
    Cellular Battery Packs (Joe Harrison)
    Bell South Cordless Phone (Mark Steiger)
    Help With Choosing Cellular Phone (Yilmaz Cengeloglu)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: Getting Information To And From the White House
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 08:08:53 -0800 (PST)


GETTING INFORMATION TO AND FROM THE WHITE HOUSE
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Updated March 12, 1993

A.  HOW TO SIGN UP FOR ELECTRONIC RELEASES FROM THE WHITE HOUSE:

The White House Communications office is distributing press releases
over an experimental system developed during the campaign.

You can sign up to receive press releases on this experimental system
by using the automated computer server.  You will be carried forward
onto the system that replaces it.  However, it would be appreciated if
you used this service sparingly at this time.  The present system was
not designed to handle high levels of message traffic.  In due course,
a more powerful system will be available.

You can also find copies of the press releases in certain on-line
bulletin board groups devoted to discussions of either national
politics in general or President Clinton in particular.

1.  On USENET/NETNEWS, electronic publications are found on a variety of
    groups:

        Direct Distribution

                alt.politics.clinton
                alt.politics.org.misc
                alt.politics.reform
                alt.politics.usa.misc
                alt.news-media
                alt.activism
                talk.politics.misc

        Indirect Distribution

                misc.activism.progressive
                cmu.soc.politics
                assocs.clinton-gore-92

2.  On CompuServe: GO WHITEHOUSE

3.  On America Online: keyword WHITEHOUSE or THE WHITEHOUSE or CLINTON

4.  On The WELL: type whitehouse

5.  On MCI: type VIEW WHITE HOUSE

If you don't have access to the these accounts or if you would prefer
to receive the releases via e-mail, then the next section details how
to sign up for this service.  The server is not set up to answer
e-mail letters, comments or requests for specific information. To
reach this server, send e-mail:

                to: [e-mail]
                subject: Help

The server works by reading the subject line of the incoming message
and taking whatever action that line calls for. If you want to sign up
to automatically receive press releases, then your subject line would
begin with the word RECEIVE.  You can then specify what kind of
information you are interested in receiving. The categories of
information are:

ECONOMIC POLICY
         Get releases related to the economy such as budget
         news, technology policy review, etc.


FOREIGN POLICY
         Get releases related to foreign policy such as
         statements on Bosnian airdrop, Haitian refugee status,
         etc.


SOCIAL POLICY
         Get releases related to social issues like National
         Service (Student Loan) program, abortion, welfare
         reform, etc.

SPEECHES
         All speeches made by the President and important
         speeches made by other Administration officials.

NEWS
         Transcripts of press conferences released by the White
         House Communications office, as well as the
         President's remarks in photo ops and other Q&A
         sessions.

ALL      All of the above

So, if you wanted to sign up to get releases related to the economy
your e-mail message would look like this:

        To: [e-mail]
        Subject: RECEIVE ECONOMY

When you send a signup message to the clinton-info server, it sends
you back a status message letting you know what distribution streams
you are signed up for. If you ever want to check on what groups you
are signed up for send the following message:

        To: [e-mail]
        Subject: STATUS

You can stop receiving e-mail releases by sending a REMOVE message to
the clinton-info server. The word REMOVE would be followed by whatever
distribution stream you wanted to drop. If you wanted to stop
receiving message about the ECONOMY then your mail would look like
this:

         To: [e-mail]
         Subject: REMOVE ECONOMY

You could substitute SOCIAL, FOREIGN, SPEECHES, NEWS or ALL for
ECONOMY in the above message and you would be dropped from that
distribution list. If you send the subject line REMOVE ALL, then you
will be taken off the e-mail distribution system all together and will
not receive further releases of any kind.

You can also ask for help from the automated server.  Send an e-mail
query as follows:

         To: [e-mail]
         Subject: HELP

The server will respond by sending you a detailed form that will guide
you through the process of signing up for the various distribution
streams.

B.  ARE THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS RELEASES BEING ARCHIVED?

Yes.  Various sites are archiving the press releases.  What follows is
an incomplete list of some of the sites containing the documents that
have been released to date.  This FAQ will be updated to reflect new
sites as they become known.

         SITE                           DIRECTORY

1. SUNSITE.UNC.EDU              /HOME3/WAIS/WHITE-HOUSE-PAPERS
2. FTP.CCO.CALTECH.EDU          /PUB/BJMCCALL
3. FTP MARISTB.MARIST.EDU
4. CPSR.ORG                     /CPSR/CLINTON
5. FedWorld BBS                 703-321-8020  8-N-1


Notes:  The following are notes on how to log in and get
        information from the above sites.

1.      Office FOR Information Technology at University of
        North Carolina Maintains the full collection of White
        House electronic release available for search with WAIS.
        (:source
        :version 3
        :database-name "/home3/wais/White-House-Papers" :ip-
                address "152.2.22.81"
        :ip-name "sunsite.unc.edu"
        :tcp-port 210
        :cost 0.00
        :cost-unit :free
        :maintainer "[e-mail]"
        :description "Server created with WAIS release 8 b5 on
                Feb 27 15:16:16 1993 by [e-mail]

 These are the White House Press Briefings and other
 postings dealing with William Jefferson Clinton and
 Abert Gore as well as members of the President's
 Cabinet and the first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton,
 Chelsea, Socks and others in Washington DC. Dee Dee
 Meyers and George Stephanopoulos.  Other good words:
 United States of America, Bill Al Tipper Democrats USA
 US These files are also available via anonymous ftp
 from sunsite.unc.edu The files of type filename used in
 the index were:
 /home3/ftp/pub/academic/political-science/whitehouse-
 papers/1993 ")
 Folks without WAIS clients or gophers that act as WAIS
 clients may telnet to sunsite.unc.edu and login as swais
 to access this information via WAIS.

2.      No special instructions.

3.      The CLINTON@MARIST log files which contain all the official
administration releases distributed through the MIT servers
are available via anonymous FTP. These logs contain in
addition to the official releases, the posts that comprise the
ongoing discussion conducted by the list subscribers.

        To obtain the logs:

FTP MARISTB.MARIST.EDU - the logs are in the CLINTON directory
and are named CLINTON LOG9208 thru CLINTON LOGyymm where yymm
stands for the current year and month. Problems should be
directed to my attention: [e-mail] or
[e-mail].
Posted by Lee Sakkas - owner, CLINTON@MARIST

4.      Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility is
providing all Clinton documents on technology and privacy
at the CPSR Internet Library, available via
FTP/WAIS/Gopher at cpsr.org /cpsr/clinton (and in other
folders as relevant). For email access, send a message
with the word "help" at the 1st line of text to
[e-mail].

5.  The White House Forum (GO WHITEHOUSE) on CompuServe is devoted to
discussion of the Clinton administration's policies and activities.
The forum's library consists of news releases and twice daily media
briefings from the White House Office of Media Affairs.  CompuServe
members can exchange information and opinions with each other in the
17 sections in the forum's message area.  The message board spans a
broad range of topics, including international and United Nations
activities, defense, health care, the economy and the deficit, housing
and urban development, the environment, and education and national
service.

6.      On America Online the posts are sent to the White House Forum, located
        in the News & Finance department of the service and accessible via
        keywords "white house" and "clinton."  The White House Forum on America
        Online contains the press releases from the White House, divided into
        the categories "Press Briefings," "Meetings & Speeches," "Foreign
        Policy," "The Economy," "Technology," "Health Care," and
        "Appointments." The area features a message board so you can discuss
        the releases with other AOL members, and a searchable database for
        easy retrieval of releases in the topic that interests you.

7.      MCI Mail users can access daily information on the administration's
        programs provided by the White House through MCI Mail bulletin
        boards.

        The available boards are: WHITE HOUSE ECONOMIC, WHITE HOUSE
        FOREIGN, WHITE HOUSE SOCIAL, WHITE HOUSE SPEECHES and WHITE
        HOUSE NEWS.  A listing of these boards can also be obtained
        by simply typing VIEW WHITE HOUSE at the COMMAND prompt.


C.  SENDING E-MAIL TO THE WHITE HOUSE

The White House e-mail system is under construction.  This is a new
project and suffers from all of the problems common to a startup
operation.  The Communications office is currently working on defining
what this system will do, as well as trying to come up with equipment
and staffing to make sure that it works.  E-mail messages are
currently being printed out and responses are being sent out via US
Mail.

Nobody wants this new venture to work more than the staff that has
devoted so many hours to getting it up and running.  But much time and
effort will be required before the system is truly interactive.  In
the mean time, they will need a little patience from the electronic
community.  If you send a message to the White House, please include a
US Post office address for replies.

        You can send e-mail to the following accounts:

Compuserve:             75300,3115
                        GO: WHITE HOUSE         finds White House forum

America OnLine:         clinton pz
                        KEYWORD: WHITEHOUSE     finds White House area

MCI                     TO: WHITE HOUSE
                        VIEW WHITE HOUSE        views bulletin boards

Internet:               [e-mail]
                        [e-mail]
                        [e-mail]


Please send corrections, deletion and additions to this faq to:

                [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 01:05:02 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
Subject: Call Waiting Options


It seems that folks either love or hate the Call Waiting feature.  One
problem is that in some areas, Call Waiting is "bundled" in a package
of Custom Calling features, and if you refuse to have Call Waiting on
your line you wind up paying a much higher rate for other custom
calling features that you DO want.

The big problem with Call Waiting is that it's obtrusive ... in simple
terms, it interrupts your calls even when you don't want it to.  Fix
that problem, and you make Call Waiting a desirable feature for many
more customers.

In my opinion, Call Waiting in its present form is too "dumb".  It
ought to be enhanced a bit, in order to give customers some options as
to how Call Waiting is implemented.  With that in mind, here's options
I'd like to see in the next generation of Call Waiting:

1) Standard Call Waiting - essentially the same as what we have now, but
with THREE different options activated by three different codes:

   a)  Cancel Call Waiting -- one call (what *70 or 1170 does now)

   b)  Cancel Call Waiting Absolute - turns off CW completely for all
       calls (incoming and outgoing) for an indefinite period.

   c)  Call Waiting on - reverses effects of a) or b), or e) or h)
       below.

2) Optional features - These features would most likely be preset at the
   telephone company's switch (especially those where times must be set),
   though I suppose they could be made customer-selectable:

   d)  Call Waiting Automatic Restore - if CW has been turned off using b)
       above or e) below, turn it back on at a (customer selected) preset
       time (one or more times in a 24 hour period).  Avoids the situation
       where you turn CW off and never remember to turn it back on.

   e)  Call Waiting Automatic Disable - turn CW off (in effect do an
       automatic Cancel Call Waiting Absolute) at a specific
       customer-specified time.  Can be reversed by use of c) or d).

   f)  Call Waiting disables line hunting - When call waiting is enabled
       on the first line of a hunt group, hunting is disabled.  Good for a
       company with multiple lines that has only the main line extended to
       a night answer location.  (Note that customer switchable line
       hunting might be a worthwhile feature in its own right).

   g)  Call waiting screened - When a caller dials a busy number that has
       this feature activated, they will be presented with a telco
       recording that says something like:  "You have dialed a number that
       is busy.  If you wish to activate Call Waiting and interrupt the
       call in progress, please dial 1 now, or wait ten seconds.  If you do
       not wish to interrupt the call in progress, please hang up now."  In
       effect, this lets the caller know that he'll be interrupting an
       in-progress call, and gives him the option to hang up and call back
       later.

    h) Call Waiting Long Call - With this option, Call Waiting would be
       turned OFF for a customer-specified number of minutes at the start
       of each new (incoming or outgoing) call, unless the "Call Waiting
       On" code were dialed just prior to placing the call (or after
       receiving a call if you can flash to a second dialtone).  Once the
       time limit is up, call waiting would be automatically activated.
       Thus, normal length calls would not be interrupted, but calls could
       get through if the line has been tied up for an extended period.  I
       suspect this would be a popular option both for people in business
       and for people who have teenagers using their phone!

    i) Call Waiting Priority - for use with the distinctive ringing
       feature.  When calls come in on one of the secondary distinctive
       ringing numbers (customer specifies which one), they will ALWAYS
       activate Call Waiting if the line is in use, regardless of whether
       CW has been turned off by the user.  In addition, if the waiting
       call is not answered in the normal manner within thirty seconds,
       the call in progress will be disconnected, and as soon as the line
       releases, the new call will be put through (using the appropriate
       distinctive ring, of course).  This can be used in conjunction
       with feature g) if desired, to give the caller the option to
       disconnect without activating the Priority Call Waiting.  The idea
       here is to allow emergency calls to get through, even on a line that
       might be "shared" with a modem, fax machine, or some other equipment
       that may not be "smart" enough to respond to the Call Waiting beep
       (or, for that matter, on a line that is sometimes used by people who
       tend to ignore the Call Waiting beep).  This feature would be useful
       for ANYONE who is on call for emergencies!

Okay, you switch feature designers, there's my list.  Feel free to use
what you like and leave the rest, though I think all these features
would be truly useful to a certain segment of customers, and my
licensing fees for these ideas are really cheap!  :-) :-)


Jack Decker | Internet: [e-mail]
Fidonet: 1:154/8 or [e-mail]
Note: Mail to the Fidonet address has been known to bounce. :-(

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 08:25:23 +0000
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular Battery Packs


The battery packs for my NEC P3 handportable cellular seem to last for
about one year then suddenly fade away. This is a fairly well- known
problem with Nickel-Cadmium rechargeable batteries and I always
thought that there wasn't much you could do about it. Last year I
threw them away and bought new ones on the recommendation of my
dealer.

Now they've started to fail again. My dealer wants me to spend some
more money with her but I'm less keen to do it this time. The dealer
eventually admitted to having what she calls a "recycler" which is
apparently some device that rapid-charges the battery pack then
somehow rapid-discharges it. However she says (guess what) this only
gives a short-term improvement and I should buy new.

Does anyone know if it is worth trying to recover an old NiCad and if
so how to? Can I do it myself with my trickle-charger and a 6v load of
some kind?


Joe Harrison     Phone: [phone]     | ICL Ltd. Bracknell
S=Harrison/I=J/O=icl/P=icl/A=gold 400/C=GB | Berkshire RG12 1BD
[e-mail]          | United Kingdom

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

From: [e-mail] (MARK STEIGER)
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 11:24:08 -0600
Subject: Bell South Cordless Phone
Organization: The Dark Knight's Table BBS:  Minnetonka, MN (Free!)


> I just got a Damark catalog with a cover of:

>         DAMARK
>        Customer
>         Returns
>         Issue!

Keep buying that stuff.  Keep my check coming... :)

> Model #7703 Bell South Products 10 channel for $59.99.

> As far as the "automatic security code" I know that it will not stop
> people from listening in. I myself get such great pleasure from
> listening to others talk about the intimate details of their lives on
> my scanner, that I would not want to deprive others so inclined from
> listening in. BUT will Bell South "automatic security code" system
> prevent others from using my lines to originate calls?

That is what the security code does.  If someone with the same phone
on the same frequency makes a call, it won't go out through your phone
line, unless they have the same sec code (odds of that are low..).  I,
myself, went to the 900 Mhz model.  Digitally encoded voice and out of
reach of most peoples scanners..


Mark Steiger, Sysop, The Igloo BBS [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]   Fido: 1:282/4018  Simnet: 16:612/24

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

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 11:39:35 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Yilmaz Cengeloglu)
Subject: Help Needed Choosing Cellular Phone
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1993 16:39:15 GMT
Organization: GE Simulation & Control Systems


Hi,

I am about to buy a cellular phone. The main reason is to make calls
when I am driving between two cities.

I have seen several kinds ( bag, flip, handheld, etc.)

Since I would like to use it when I am on the road. Which one would be
more suitable and powerful.


Thanks in advance.

[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #187
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27532;
          19 Mar 93 2:07 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12836
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 18 Mar 1993 23:33:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24034
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 18 Mar 1993 23:32:35 -0600
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 23:32:35 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #188

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 18 Mar 93 23:32:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 188

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Alec Isaacson)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Richard Nash)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Richard Budd)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (John Schmidt)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Elana Beach)
    Storm Effect on 9-1-1 Service (Tad Cook)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Bob Morley)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Paul Barnett)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Brad Hicks)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 18 Mar 1993 19:01:50 EST
From: Alec Isaacson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


In a recent TELECOM Digest, Will Martin <[e-mail]>
said:

> This past weekend's storm news included at least one Telecom-related
> item: At a computer center in New Jersey somewhere, the weight of snow
> on the roof was great enough to collapse it, thus putting the facility
> out of service. This was operated by EDS and was some sort of central
> networking point for Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) on at least one
> inter-bank network, not just in the East, but nationwide. Many ATMs,
> including some here in St. Louis, MO, were down because of this.

Well, I do know that not every bank runs it's "own" ATM system.  In
fact, it seems as though there are only a few service providers for
ATM networks.  For example, there is a company based here in
Cincinnati called Midwest Payment Systems which, if I'm not mistaken,
provides computer time, clearinghouse services, and infrastructure for
the Plus and Money Station network machines.  MPS runs ATM systems as
far away as the "Money Exchange" network, which belongs to First
American Bank of Washington D.C. (or at least did when my father
worked for 1st American in the 80s). MPS is either a unit or
subsidiary of the same company that runs 5/3 Bank of Cincinnati.

> 2: Local TV news items on this said that people could use "Bankmate"
> networked ATMs instead. However, I just checked the ATM here in this
> building at the credit union, and it was displaying an "out of
> service" message, though it has both Cirrus and Bankmate logos on it.
> Of course, this one machine may be down for some totally unrelated
> reason. So just what named networks did this outage affect?

As far as saw and heard, there were no problems here in Cinci.  Of
course, in the east it looks as though people couldn't get out, let
alone get money.

> 3: It certainly seems odd that a site in NJ would be central to the
> entire nation's ATM functions. One would guess that some huge
> percentage of all ATM transactions would be performed by local people
> accessing their funds from local banks. Why would these transactions
> be routed onto a national net? Aren't there local distributed-processing
> nets which only access the national net when it is really necessary,
> or are my transactions from an ATM in downtown St. Louis, against an
> account in a bank in South St. Louis, routed halfway across the
> country and back again?

I would think that the infrastructure investment would only be
feasable for a few large banks, while the vast majority of customers
would expect ATM service as a constitutional right :) from even the
smallest bank.  Thus the need for some sort of service provider (like
MPS above) because small banks (with small bank computers) can't keep
up with all the traffic _and_ their own other housekeeping needs.

Got comments, let me know.  BTW: I don't have any affiliation with
Midwest Payment Systems except for the fact that their machines do
give me money on occasion.  And, I defintely have NO affilliation with
1st American Bank, a former unit of the BCCI (yes, _that_ BCCI :).


Alec D. Isaacson   AI4CPHYW @ miamiu.acs.muohio.edu
isaacson @ rogue.acs.muohio.edu (NeXt Mail)
Miami University, Oxford, OH

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 04:16:17 GMT


In a article to comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] had the
following to say about Telecom and the Blizzard:

> This past weekend's storm news included at least one Telecom-related
> item: At a computer center in New Jersey somewhere, the weight of snow
> on the roof was great enough to collapse it, thus putting the facility
> out of service. This was operated by EDS and was some sort of central
> networking point for Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) on at least one
> inter-bank network, not just in the East, but nationwide. Many ATMs,
> including some here in St. Louis, MO, were down because of this.

I can only report my own experience. I bank with a credit union in the
SF Bay Area. They have two or three of their own ATM's and then are
accessible via the PLUS network. Over the last weekend I could not get
any money from any ATM machine (contact your branch, you have exceeded
your withdrawals for the period, etc.)  On Monday I called the CU. It
turned out that because of the abovementioned problem (well they said
a building had collapsed on the East Coast somewhere, disrupting a
data centre's operations) the network had been down. The backup was in
the WTC and was also down!  Very annoying.


Laurence Chiu   [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 12:23:36 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


Will Martin <[e-mail]>

He said a bunch of stuff but this statement really stuck out:

> And a side comment -- anybody else out there getting irritated by the
> sloppy re-use and multiple use of acronyms? "ATM" has meant "Automatic
> Teller Machine" for decades now, yet in recent years I've been running
> across other computer-related uses of the exact same acronym.
> "Asynchronous Transfer Mode" is the worst, because it makes the phrase
> "ATM Network" ambiguous and mean at least two different things. The
> use of the same acronym by distinctly separate industries would not be
> as bad -- for it to mean "All-Terrain Motorbike" or "Amino-Toluo-Methanol"
> (to make up some possibilities out of my imagination) could be easily
> distinguished by context, when the use of "ATM" for multiple meanings
> within the computer culture is not ...

Yes, multi use of three lettered acronymns have lead to all sorts of
inital confusion by those who have understood the three letters to
mean something totally different and unrelated.  So what?  Everybody
understands AIDS to mean a medical symptom/syndrome yet this three
letter acronymn was used for a diagnostic suite for Data General up
into the mid 1980's.  So if you weren't Data General conversant, you
never heard this buzz word, and immediately associated AIDS to the
medical association.  To react responsibly, DG changed their
diagnostiocs to be ADES. Thus bypassing the conotation and any
negative attachements.  My advice is to get used to multi uses of
three letter acronymns when it is most convenient to baffle the
unsuspecting public :) :) :) :) :)


Richard Nash              Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:                     [e-mail]
Amateur Radio Packet:     [e-mail]
VE6BON @ VE6MC.AB.CAN.NA  ve6bon.ampr.ab.ca [192.75.200.15]


[Moderator's Note: Well you know there was the AIDS Insurance Company
over in Nebraska somewhere for many years. It may still be there; I
have heard nothing about them in a long time. They had all kinds of
misunderstandings with people who contacted them for the first time.
They were in the automobile liability insurance business, and (at
least) used to receive many calls daily from people seeking coverage
against the medical condition using the same acronym.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 18:31:34 EDT
From: Richard Budd <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93
Organization: CSAV UTIA


The trend in the informations systems industry is for one or two mega-
centers to serve the entire system.  Operating an IS for the nation
out of a center in a single location saves money because such a setup
would require less support staff and hardware.  In addition,
communications lines used to coordinate multiple service centers can
be either ripped out or dedicated to customer service.

In the language of ISSC, IBM's attempt to enter the information
systems support industry (or, as some wags say, attempt to make the
money it would have made if they had hung on to Ross Perot), having a
single large information center for all services is customer-driven.

My guess is the back-up center would be in the vicinity of the main
site.  Again, it's less expensive because you can run the backup
location with a skeleton staff and deploy most of your main center's
personnel there quickly in the event of an emergency with minimum
transportation expense because of the backup location's proximity.
Neither a redundant support staff at the backup nor air transportation
to the backup site is required.

And besides, you don't have to worry about the Soviets anymore :-)

Will then provided an update in TELECOM Digest V13 #183:

> The backup site for the New Jersey EDS computer center was in the
> World Trade Center!!!!! I wonder how many other financial and East
> coast sites are operating right now without backups due to the WTC
> closing!?! Also, I'm sure WTC companies are now using other sites as
> their backups, which leaves much less capacity for backup operations
> for anybody. The ripple effect is spreading ...

What would be the probability of disasters occuring for different
reasons at both the main and backup facilites in such a short period
of time?


Richard Budd  | USA  [e-mail]    | CR    [e-mail]
              |      139 S. Hamilton St.    |       Kolackova 8
              |      Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 |       18200 Praha 8


[Moderator's Note: You'd have thought people would have learned about
this penny-wise and pound-foolishness after the 'Illinois Bell
Experience'. (A major center of Illinois Bell activity caught fire and
burned down in May, 1988, disrupting much of northern Illinois'
telephone service for a month.  See TELECOM Digest, May 10 thru May
20, 1988 issues.). Even Amoco/Diners Club learned not to put all their
processing and back-office functions in one place following numerous
bomb threats (unfilfilled) and labor disputes, etc during the early
1970's. They split the office in two parts.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 11:11:20 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


In article <[e-mail]> Will Martin <wmartin@STL-
06SIMA.ARMY.MIL> writes:

> 2: Local TV news items on this said that people could use "Bankmate"
> networked ATMs instead. However, I just checked the ATM here in this
> building at the credit union, and it was displaying an "out of
> service" message, though it has both Cirrus and Bankmate logos on it.
> Of course, this one machine may be down for some totally unrelated
> reason. So just what named networks did this outage affect?

There is another plausible explanation for why your ATM was out of
service: it ran out of cash as people rushed to do a lot of pre-storm
panic buying.  My wife and I had a similar experience Saturday: we
went to do our usual weekly grocery shopping, only to discover that
the first three (!) ATMs we visited were all closed.  It didn't look
like a network problem though, since we finally found an open one and
got our cash.  Only the first machine we tried belonged to our bank;
the others were all members of "Honor" (a regional ATM network to
which almost all banks in NC and several other states belong) as well
as one or the other of "Cirrus" and "Plus" (the international ATM
networks run by Mastercard and Visa, respectively, which now have an
interoperating agreement).


Bob Goudreau        Data General Corporation
[e-mail]    62 Alexander Drive
[phone]        Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA


[Moderators' Note: None of the young'uns here would remember when
there were NO 'cash machines' and banks were open 9 AM to 2 PM Monday
through Friday only, but it is true ... as late as the early 1970's,
such devices were unheard of. You went to the bank to cash a check and
you got there during the morning or early afternoon hours.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 12:32:29 EST
From: JOHN SCHMIDT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


When I tried to call my mother (413-256) from home (516-483) Saturday
about 10am, twice I got an intercept "The number you have called has
been disconnected or is out of service" The third try (within a minute
or so), the call went through.

It would be nice if they could use the correct intercepts.  I wonder
if this is a strategy to keep their completion statistics up, as a
"out of service" try is presumably not a completable call, so doesn't
reduce their percentage of calls completed, where a "all circuits
busy" reduces their batting average.

BTW, this was AT&T.

Here on Long Island, there was about ten inches of snow Saturday AM,
then three inches of sleet or snow early Saturday PM, then a lot of
wind driven rain later Saturday afternoon, which compressed the snow
and sleet into about four inches of slush Saturday evening.  Those who
didn't shovel/plow it before it froze Saturday night had to chop it
away with a pick axe on sunday or whenever!  It started to melt today.

The biggest problem here was the wind, which caused a lot of downed
power lines, and washed the tides inland on the barrier beaches and
did a lot of damage to the shoreline.  This storm didn't do as much as
the ones this fall, though.

In western Mass., my mother says she doesn't ever recall seeing as
much snow piled up where it is plowed; they are running out of space
to plow it, and that's in snow country.


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]


[Moderator's Note: After our 1967 blizzard, snow was piled *everywhere*
in huge piles which took a month or better to finally melt down. They
dumped a great deal of it in Lake Michigan, but two or three times as
much just sat in big piles at street corners and in vacant lots.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Elana Beach)
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93
Organization: Open Communications Forum
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 06:42:31 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: We've seen nothing like that here in Chicago for 25
> years. We gpt a 27 inch snow storm January 30 - February 1, 1967. I

(blizzard nightmare deleted)

Hmmmm ... I was a six year old kid living near Oak Lawn then, and I
thought that blizzard was FUN!!!  =8)

Of course, I had all these stick-in-the-mud grownups around me who
never could see my point, but that's life in the kid lane for ya.

Just something to make our Moderator smile ...


Elana


[Moderator's Note: Well I have to say that secretly, I *loved* that
1967 blizzard also. After working all night Thursday, to have to hang
around half of Friday morning in the office was not fun, but the rest
of that first weekend was neat. As a child, I used to get very angry
if people shoveled off their sidewalks after a heavy snow ... now I
get very angry if they don't! The first day of the storm here, every
grocery store had mobs of people in it and almost barren shelves. In
those days, I had the home phone number 'PATRICK' (actually it was
RAVenswood (8) 7425). A X-bar exchange, we had one to three minute
waits for dial tone all that weekend.   PAT]

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

From: hpubvwa!%ssc.com
Subject: Storm Effect on 9-1-1 Service
Organization: very little
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 19:16:33 GMT


I have read a bit about effects on telephone service in general, and
interstate service in particular, from the recent storm on the east
coast, but what about 9-1-1 service?  Any comments on disruption to
9-1-1 service from the big storm?


Tad Cook     |  Phone:  [phone]  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544
Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   [e-mail]
             |  Internet: [e-mail]           or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad


[Moderator's Sad Note: In the '67 blizzard here, police, fire and
paramedics were virtually paralyzed. A large (20 apartment) building
burned to the ground that Friday night while firemen two blocks away
tried to get their equipment through the snow, dig out the hydrants
and find ways to secure their footing as they strung their hoses
nearly a block through the drifts to get to the inferno.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Morley)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Unipalm Ltd., 216 Cambridge Science Park, Cambridge CB4 4WA, UK
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 14:08:45 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Scott D Fybush) writes:

> one Beacon Hill lawmaker says he's gotten fed up with drivers who miss
> the light turning green ... or weave all over the road ... because
> they have the phone to their ear!  So he's proposing a bill that would
> make people pull over to use the cellphone.

Its already law in the UK.


Bob Morley        PIPEX (Public IP EXchange)
PIPEX Sales        216 Cambridge Science Park
Tel: [phone]    Milton Road
Fax: [phone]    Cambridge, CB4 4WA
Email: [e-mail]    England

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 10:53:40 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Paul Barnett)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


Some percentage of the population apparently can't walk and chew gum
at the same time, or drive and talk on the phone at the same time.  So
what else is new?  If you think somone is driving hazardously, take
down their license number and report them to the police.

Meanwhile, the rest of us don't have any problem.  Get off my case!

(For the humor-impaired, I'm not flaming Scott.  However, I would like
to give that paternalistic legistator an ear-full).


Paul Barnett
MPP OS Development     (214)-497-4846
Convex Computer Corp.  Richardson, TX

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 18 Mar 93 16:27:20 GMT
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


I'm not from Massachusetts, but count me in as in favor of this
proposal; I've nearly been run off the road by too d--ned many people
who couldn't spare any attention to their lane usage because all of
their attention was focused on their cellular phone conversation.

I suspect that this proposal will fail, because the lobbyists will ask
one question that even I can't answer: why is it that talking on the
phone consumes more attention than talking to someone in the passenger
seat(s)?  I don't know why it is, but it seems to be true.  Is this
some kind of psychological thing?  Are people talking on the phone
spending extra mental effort on imagining the facial expressions of
the people they're talking to, or what?

(And of course, if it ever becomes a national issue, the Californicators
will scream bloody murder.  If it's true that average commute times in
the LA basin are over an hour each way, then a ban on car phone conver-
sation in a moving vehicle would shut that town down.)


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #188
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01156;
          19 Mar 93 3:53 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01856
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 19 Mar 1993 01:15:46 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15717
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 19 Mar 1993 01:14:56 -0600
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 01:14:56 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #189

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 19 Mar 93 01:14:45 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 189

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Dave Levenson)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Richard Nash)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Marc Unangst)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Bill Campbell)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Bob Frankston)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (H. Hallikainen)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology (Andy Oakland)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Joseph Malloy)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Jon P. Knight)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Woody M. Collins)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Rich Greenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 02:01:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> So, realizing it's popular to bash the usps, I was quite impressed
> with what they're doing.

I, too, am impressed with some of the technology at the Postal
Service.

BUT ...

There was a time when neither snow nor hail ... would stop the mail.
Today (as much of the Northeast continues to dig out from under an
unusually heavy snowfall) the local post office informed us that they
were unable to deliver our mail, and that we could call for it at the
post office, after the truck returned, at 4:00 pm.  The reason for
this?  The township plowed the street, and didn't plough it full-width.
The mail carrier couldn't get his truck close enough to our roadside
rural mailbox to reach it without leaning out of his window.  This
happened to about half the residents of our town.

Maybe I'm being overly critical, but this seems a bit severe.
Everybody else within hundreds of miles was inconvenienced by the
recent weather, many of us a whole lot more than having to lean out a
window to reach a mailbox.

Sometimes, I think the postal service employees need to be gently
reminded who it is that pays their salaries.


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

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

Date: Fri, 19 Mar 93 14:48:13 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology?


Jon Mellot wrote:

> What amazes me is how naive some people are.  That USPS can charge
> $0.29 for a one ounce letter is amazing. Almost anywhere else in the
> world the cost is at least twice what we pay here.

There are only *two* profitable postal agencies in the world. They are
in Hong Kong and Singapore. Both are small and densely populated
cities.

It probably would not be fair to compare local postage rates (US 12
cents) with that in the US. But how about aerograms? An aerogram to
anywhere in the world is S 35 cents or US 22 cents.

In other words, it is cheaper for someone in the US to send me an
email, transfer it onto an aerogram and then mail it to the US, than
to mail it in the US direct.

Don't ask me how this thing works but when I was applying for grad
school in 1986, I sent a package by courier to Florida (halfway round
the world) for US$10. Then I got billed for a package from California
(1/3) round the world for US$25.

I boil it down to labour costs.

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 21:51:42 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?


John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

> My unfortunate experience with the Post Office is that if you REALLY
> need to get a document from one location to another, you should use
> another service. NEVER EVER send an original, valuable document
> through the US mail -- certified, registered or otherwise. I have had
> irreplacable documents lost and the extra money spent registering or
> certifying was literally wasted. The USPS has no way of tracking
> anything within its system (unlike Federal Express which can).

> All of the fabulous technology notwithstanding, the USPS provides
> miserable, not even barely-adequate service. Add to that the miserable
> attitude on the part of counter personel and you have an institution
> whose demise will draw no tears from me.

Is the US Postal System really *that* bad?  I trust then that John
Higdon would never ever use the US postal service?  From what I can
gather, the choice to use the postal system is entirely up to you, the
user.  Does the USPS have a monopoly on mail delivery?  One would
expect that there are no arcane laws as we have in Canada that
prohibit the hand delivery of utility bills by a contracted courier?

Our gas company used to just have their bill dropped in the mail-box,
but for several years now, has to pay 43 cents postage plus the
envelope.  Somehow I doubt that Fedex or UPI would or could handle the
volumes of mail that the USPS does at the amazingly low price of less
than 30 cents, complete with instant tracking of every envelope
through its entire voyage.  And do I really care if it takes longer to
mail across town than clean across the continent?  Or that
historically we all know that postal clerks will treat you as rudely
as possible?

Yes indeed, USPS may have a multitude of blemishes, but who wouldn't
after more than (200 years?) as a service provider?  Until Star-Trek
beaming becomes a reality, the necessary physical delivery of items
for the lowly John Q. Public, will probably be performed by our public
servants the post office.  Remember though, you don't have to use them
if you don't want to.  There definitely is a freedom of choice, but
just that your alternative options require more out of the pocket
book.  From my perspective up in Canada, when I want to have something
shipped from the other side of the 49th parallel (US), I would prefer
the mail service over ever relying upon Federal Express or any other
####qKinter-national courier to deliver it without a lot of Customs
Canada/brokerage hassles.  I have found that this view is shared by
others also.


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


[Moderator's Note: In fact, the US Postal Service does have a legal
monopoly on the delivery of First Class Mail.  Also, the mailbox in
front of your house *belongs* to the Postal Service for their
exclusive use from the day you mounted the box in your yard, on your
front porch or wherever. From that point on, even you are not
permitted under the law to leave a note for your neighbor in that box
unless the proper postage has been affixed and then cancelled or some
other postal indicia appears on the front of the envelope.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Date: 18 Mar 1993 23:22:31 -0500
Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(MARK STEIGER) writes:

> I'm not sure on this, but couldn't they get in trouble for bar coding
> it on the package?

I doubt it.  UPS uses USPS ZIP codes to determine for which rate zone
a package is destined.  I'd be more willing to bet that it just isn't
very efficient to sort based on ZIP code when your delivery scheme
doesn't use ZIP codes.  UPS/FedEx would be more likely to barcode
based on destination office or something similar, I would think.


Marc Unangst, N8VRH    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Campbell)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 16:46:13 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jon Mellott)
writes:

> What amazes me is how naive some people are. That USPS can charge
> $0.29 for a one ounce letter is amazing. Almost anywhere else in the

Actually the Postal (dis)Service hasn't raised the price of postage in
years!

Postage is still $0.03, the rest is for storage.


Bill

INTERNET:  [e-mail]   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!bill   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!bill   Mercer Island, WA 98040; [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?
Date: Thu 18 Mar 1993 11:29 -0400


One minor correction, page printers were available since the mid-70's
and were common at IBM mainframe shops. The fact that ECom didn't use
them was symptomatic of their technology problems.

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 22:08:41 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(MARK STEIGER) writes:

> Actually, what Fed Ex and UPS do is keep records like package serial
> numbers going to zip code xxxxx.  Zip code is a trademark of the Post
> Office.  I'm not sure on this, but couldn't they get in trouble for
> bar coding it on the package? Anyway, they electronically sort all of
> the packages based on what zip code belongs to that serial number.
> It's pretty cool to see in action.  Fed Ex gave us a tour at work
> since we ship so much.

    Sorting based on a package serial number seems like it would
be tremendously complex.  Someone has to key all those ZIP codes into
the system along with scanning the package serial number, then each
sorting station has to reference that database.  As I recall (subject
to error), both UPS and Fed Ex do all their air freight packaging in
one city (each has their own national air freight sorting center).  By
doing this, they can offer overnight service, but it can be costly (I
can mail a first class letter to Santa Barbara for $0.29, UPS of Fed
Ex letter would be about $10.00, both would arrive about the same
time).  Seems to me that UPS and Fed Ex should start putting Zip Codes
on packages in machine readable form, allowing machine sorting without
having to look up the code based on serial number.  They could keep
the serial number bar code for package tracking.  I suggested to our
UPS rep that they give shippers sheets of labels where each label has
a single digit in machine readable form (either large OCR or bar
code).  We would then stick a bunch of stickers on the package to
represent the ZIP code.  As an alternative, software could print the
ZIP bar code on the shipping label.

    Of course, this is a bit off telecom, but it does seem to be
related to packet switching networks.  In a packet switched network,
we include a packet serial number to aid in tracking (did we lose a
packet, or did it show up twice, or received out of order), but we
also include the destination address.  Each router looks at that
address and figures out where to send the packet next.  The router
does not look at the packet serial number and request routing from
some central database.  One of our products includes a routing table
at each site.  There is an entry for each site in the system.
Whenever a packet is received, we note which port that came in on in
the routing table.  When we have a packet to send, we refer to the
routing table and send the packet out that port.  If the destination
site is not in the table, we send the packet out all ports except the
one we received it on.

We could probably set up a system like the USPS where we would not
need a routing table for every possible destination but could base
routing on each digit of the address, starting with the most
significant.  If the most significant digit were 0..3, I might send it
out port 1, 4..8 might send it out port 2.  If the MSD is 9 (the same
as the MSD of my address), I'd start looking at successive digits to
determine which port to send the packet out, unless the entire address
matched, in which case I'd keep it.

    So, those of us in telecom really do have something in common
with the USPS?


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Oakland)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology
Date: 18 Mar 1993 23:00:56 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Garrett Wollman) writes:

> When I was in Finland a while back, they used electronic sorting as
> well.  However (and here's the catch), for a meager FIM 1,80 (about 50
> cents or so), first-class letters which arrived at the post office
> before 5PM on any postal day would be delivered the next day.

> Even with all the automation, the USPS still wants $8.95 for this.

You seem to be overlooking a simple matter of scale: Finland has a
population of about five million, and an area of 130,000 square miles.
The United States has a population of 250 million and an area of
3,500,000 square miles.  (Thanks to my trusty almanac.)

With fifty times the population and twenty-five times the area to
service, it's not reasonable to expect the US postal service to work
as quickly and cheaply as Finland's.  Multiply that Finnish $0.50 for
overnight delivery by 25 to reflect the extra work necessary in the US
and you get $12.50 ... seems like our $8.95 is pretty reasonable!


Andy Oakland       [e-mail]

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

From: Jospeh Malloy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?
Organization: Bates College, Lewiston, Maine
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 21:21:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <john@zygot.
ati.com> writes:

> My unfortunate experience with the Post Office is that if you REALLY
> need to get a document from one location to another, you should use
> another service. NEVER EVER send an original, valuable document
> through the US mail -- certified, registered or otherwise. I have had
> irreplacable documents lost and the extra money spent registering or
> certifying was literally wasted. The USPS has no way of tracking
> anything within its system (unlike Federal Express which can).

I hear this from time to time and have to wonder why I've been so
lucky.  In all my years (and there are many of them!) of using the
postal service, I've never once lost anything that I know of, and I've
sent important documents via USPS often enough to have had that sort
of thing happen, were it frequent.  USPS can be quite slow, to be
sure, and I'm not saying that I don't use alternate carriers (mostly
for speedy delivery), but on the whole, I really cannot complain about
what that $.29 buys me.

Now, my telephone service, on the other hand ...


Joseph T. Malloy, guerilla Germaniste | WB2RBA | [e-mail]
Associate Professor of German | Hamilton College | Clinton, New York


[Moderator's Note: Maybe it is the big city post offices which are
more troubled in their operations. I know the post office where my box
is located (Chicago 60690) is a 24 hour per day operation (go in
anytime to send mail or get mail from boxes, etc.) I've had my post
office box for 22 years (in fact, the old post office was on that spot
when I took out my box; it was torn down and the new post office
opened in 1975. During the interim they used a make-shift storefront
down the street for boxholders to get mail.) They've had decent help
there over the years, and they've had some that were rotten to the
core. It seems there is always someone working there (out of a couple
hundred employees at any given time) that finds out if you are getting
money in the mail (as in cash) then beats you to it.

The Missionary Fathers (that's the bunch with the name and address
labels, pens and other gifts which come free from the orphan children
on the Indian Reservation that you don't have to pay for but feel
guilty keeping if you don't) were getting $2000-5000 *cash* daily in
their box at 60690 and a couple postal employees were ripping off
great amounts of it. They finally got caught when the Postal
Inspectors 'seeded the mail' with marked money then spied on the
clerks as they were helping themselves then going back for a second
helping. Our readers in Canada may recall the post office clerk in
Toronto who ripped off Oral Roberts for close to $100,000 in cash over
a three or four year period sent to the Canadian box of the uh,
esteemed USA evangelist.

The US Postal Service has a lot of troubled, angry people working for
it. Don't forget Royal Oak, Michigan and Edmund, Oklahoma: angry clerk
comes to work, brings a gun and shoots everyone in the place. I use
the USPS -- don't we all? -- but have mixed feelings about how much
longer it will survive between the competition and its own internal
strife.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon P. Knight)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Dept of Comp. Studies, Loughborough University of Tech., UK.
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 22:34:39 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott
D Fybush) writes:

> one Beacon Hill lawmaker says he's gotten fed up with drivers who miss
> the light turning green ... or weave all over the road ... because
> they have the phone to their ear!  So he's proposing a bill that would
> make people pull over to use the cellphone.

This is already law in the UK, and a jolly good job too.  Too many
accidents were occuring with fools concentrating on their latest
marketing deal on the cell phone whilst driving down the motorway.
When it first became law, I remember a few people were caught using
cellphones whilst driving live on national radio; they'd called in to
a phone in!  The radio presenter would usually tell them to pull over
and carry on or, if they were on the motorway, to try another time and
thenn ring off.

 From what I remember (I neither have a cellphone, a car or a desire
for either), the law does permit you to use a communications device
whilst driving if it leaves both hands free, but I could be wrong
about that bit.  No doubt someone else will set the record straight.


Jon Knight, Research Student in High Performance Networking and Distributed
Systems in the Department of _Computer_Studies_ at Loughborough University.

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 17:40:05 MST
From: Woody M. Collins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


> That's just what one Massachusetts legislator wants to legislate.
> According to a radio report on WBZ Boston on 17 March [disclaimer:
> Yes, I work there; no, it wasn't my report; yes, I wish it had been],
> one Beacon Hill lawmaker says he's gotten fed up with drivers who miss
> the light turning green ... or weave all over the road ... because
> they have the phone to their ear!  So he's proposing a bill that would
> make people pull over to use the cellphone.

> I suspect this one will get eaten alive by the cell companies' lobby-
> ists.

I have to agree with the MA legislator.  The cellular phone makers and
the cell companies, both warn users of the danger of driving and using
a cellular car phone.  To solve the problem, most good phones comes
handsfree speakerphone option (mike and/or speaker).  With a handsfree
phone, it is very little different than tuning your radio.  I have
heard that some top of the line phones are voice activated.  Bottom
line, I think the phone makers will go for it, forcing the sales on
more expensive models; the cellular companies will be neutral.

Another solution, requiring a co-pilot to handle non-driving duties.
The same as attack planes and helicopters. :-) Or maybe they will
require steering wheel knob, used in the old days (prior to power
steering) when the driver could only use one hand.


Woody

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 06:46:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/
OU=[e-mail] wrote:


> (And of course, if it ever becomes a national issue, the Californicators
> will scream bloody murder.  If it's true that average commute times in
> the LA basin are over an hour each way, then a ban on car phone conver-
> sation in a moving vehicle would shut that town down.)

The commute time is so long because you spend a lot of the time
stopped in traffic jams or creeping along at 10-15 mph.  Seems
reasonably safe to use the phone then.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
                    Previous play (obselete): [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #189
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03127;
          19 Mar 93 4:52 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30587
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 19 Mar 1993 02:24:57 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22149
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 19 Mar 1993 02:24:08 -0600
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 02:24:08 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #189


TELECOM Digest     Fri, 19 Mar 93 01:14:45 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 189

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Dave Levenson)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Richard Nash)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Marc Unangst)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Bill Campbell)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Bob Frankston)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (H. Hallikainen)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology (Andy Oakland)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Joseph Malloy)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Jon P. Knight)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Woody M. Collins)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Rich Greenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 02:01:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> So, realizing it's popular to bash the usps, I was quite impressed
> with what they're doing.

I, too, am impressed with some of the technology at the Postal
Service.

BUT ...

There was a time when neither snow nor hail ... would stop the mail.
Today (as much of the Northeast continues to dig out from under an
unusually heavy snowfall) the local post office informed us that they
were unable to deliver our mail, and that we could call for it at the
post office, after the truck returned, at 4:00 pm.  The reason for
this?  The township plowed the street, and didn't plough it full-width.
The mail carrier couldn't get his truck close enough to our roadside
rural mailbox to reach it without leaning out of his window.  This
happened to about half the residents of our town.

Maybe I'm being overly critical, but this seems a bit severe.
Everybody else within hundreds of miles was inconvenienced by the
recent weather, many of us a whole lot more than having to lean out a
window to reach a mailbox.

Sometimes, I think the postal service employees need to be gently
reminded who it is that pays their salaries.


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

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

Date: Fri, 19 Mar 93 14:48:13 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology?


Jon Mellot wrote:

> What amazes me is how naive some people are.  That USPS can charge
> $0.29 for a one ounce letter is amazing. Almost anywhere else in the
> world the cost is at least twice what we pay here.

There are only *two* profitable postal agencies in the world. They are
in Hong Kong and Singapore. Both are small and densely populated
cities.

It probably would not be fair to compare local postage rates (US 12
cents) with that in the US. But how about aerograms? An aerogram to
anywhere in the world is S 35 cents or US 22 cents.

In other words, it is cheaper for someone in the US to send me an
email, transfer it onto an aerogram and then mail it to the US, than
to mail it in the US direct.

Don't ask me how this thing works but when I was applying for grad
school in 1986, I sent a package by courier to Florida (halfway round
the world) for US$10. Then I got billed for a package from California
(1/3) round the world for US$25.

I boil it down to labour costs.

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 21:51:42 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?


John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

> My unfortunate experience with the Post Office is that if you REALLY
> need to get a document from one location to another, you should use
> another service. NEVER EVER send an original, valuable document
> through the US mail -- certified, registered or otherwise. I have had
> irreplacable documents lost and the extra money spent registering or
> certifying was literally wasted. The USPS has no way of tracking
> anything within its system (unlike Federal Express which can).

> All of the fabulous technology notwithstanding, the USPS provides
> miserable, not even barely-adequate service. Add to that the miserable
> attitude on the part of counter personel and you have an institution
> whose demise will draw no tears from me.

Is the US Postal System really *that* bad?  I trust then that John
Higdon would never ever use the US postal service?  From what I can
gather, the choice to use the postal system is entirely up to you, the
user.  Does the USPS have a monopoly on mail delivery?  One would
expect that there are no arcane laws as we have in Canada that
prohibit the hand delivery of utility bills by a contracted courier?

Our gas company used to just have their bill dropped in the mail-box,
but for several years now, has to pay 43 cents postage plus the
envelope.  Somehow I doubt that Fedex or UPI would or could handle the
volumes of mail that the USPS does at the amazingly low price of less
than 30 cents, complete with instant tracking of every envelope
through its entire voyage.  And do I really care if it takes longer to
mail across town than clean across the continent?  Or that
historically we all know that postal clerks will treat you as rudely
as possible?

Yes indeed, USPS may have a multitude of blemishes, but who wouldn't
after more than (200 years?) as a service provider?  Until Star-Trek
beaming becomes a reality, the necessary physical delivery of items
for the lowly John Q. Public, will probably be performed by our public
servants the post office.  Remember though, you don't have to use them
if you don't want to.  There definitely is a freedom of choice, but
just that your alternative options require more out of the pocket
book.  From my perspective up in Canada, when I want to have something
shipped from the other side of the 49th parallel (US), I would prefer
the mail service over ever relying upon Federal Express or any other
####qKinter-national courier to deliver it without a lot of Customs
Canada/brokerage hassles.  I have found that this view is shared by
others also.


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


[Moderator's Note: In fact, the US Postal Service does have a legal
monopoly on the delivery of First Class Mail.  Also, the mailbox in
front of your house *belongs* to the Postal Service for their
exclusive use from the day you mounted the box in your yard, on your
front porch or wherever. From that point on, even you are not
permitted under the law to leave a note for your neighbor in that box
unless the proper postage has been affixed and then cancelled or some
other postal indicia appears on the front of the envelope.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Date: 18 Mar 1993 23:22:31 -0500
Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(MARK STEIGER) writes:

> I'm not sure on this, but couldn't they get in trouble for bar coding
> it on the package?

I doubt it.  UPS uses USPS ZIP codes to determine for which rate zone
a package is destined.  I'd be more willing to bet that it just isn't
very efficient to sort based on ZIP code when your delivery scheme
doesn't use ZIP codes.  UPS/FedEx would be more likely to barcode
based on destination office or something similar, I would think.


Marc Unangst, N8VRH    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Campbell)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 16:46:13 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jon Mellott)
writes:

> What amazes me is how naive some people are. That USPS can charge
> $0.29 for a one ounce letter is amazing. Almost anywhere else in the

Actually the Postal (dis)Service hasn't raised the price of postage in
years!

Postage is still $0.03, the rest is for storage.


Bill

INTERNET:  [e-mail]   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!bill   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!bill   Mercer Island, WA 98040; [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?
Date: Thu 18 Mar 1993 11:29 -0400


One minor correction, page printers were available since the mid-70's
and were common at IBM mainframe shops. The fact that ECom didn't use
them was symptomatic of their technology problems.

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 22:08:41 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(MARK STEIGER) writes:

> Actually, what Fed Ex and UPS do is keep records like package serial
> numbers going to zip code xxxxx.  Zip code is a trademark of the Post
> Office.  I'm not sure on this, but couldn't they get in trouble for
> bar coding it on the package? Anyway, they electronically sort all of
> the packages based on what zip code belongs to that serial number.
> It's pretty cool to see in action.  Fed Ex gave us a tour at work
> since we ship so much.

    Sorting based on a package serial number seems like it would
be tremendously complex.  Someone has to key all those ZIP codes into
the system along with scanning the package serial number, then each
sorting station has to reference that database.  As I recall (subject
to error), both UPS and Fed Ex do all their air freight packaging in
one city (each has their own national air freight sorting center).  By
doing this, they can offer overnight service, but it can be costly (I
can mail a first class letter to Santa Barbara for $0.29, UPS of Fed
Ex letter would be about $10.00, both would arrive about the same
time).  Seems to me that UPS and Fed Ex should start putting Zip Codes
on packages in machine readable form, allowing machine sorting without
having to look up the code based on serial number.  They could keep
the serial number bar code for package tracking.  I suggested to our
UPS rep that they give shippers sheets of labels where each label has
a single digit in machine readable form (either large OCR or bar
code).  We would then stick a bunch of stickers on the package to
represent the ZIP code.  As an alternative, software could print the
ZIP bar code on the shipping label.

    Of course, this is a bit off telecom, but it does seem to be
related to packet switching networks.  In a packet switched network,
we include a packet serial number to aid in tracking (did we lose a
packet, or did it show up twice, or received out of order), but we
also include the destination address.  Each router looks at that
address and figures out where to send the packet next.  The router
does not look at the packet serial number and request routing from
some central database.  One of our products includes a routing table
at each site.  There is an entry for each site in the system.
Whenever a packet is received, we note which port that came in on in
the routing table.  When we have a packet to send, we refer to the
routing table and send the packet out that port.  If the destination
site is not in the table, we send the packet out all ports except the
one we received it on.

We could probably set up a system like the USPS where we would not
need a routing table for every possible destination but could base
routing on each digit of the address, starting with the most
significant.  If the most significant digit were 0..3, I might send it
out port 1, 4..8 might send it out port 2.  If the MSD is 9 (the same
as the MSD of my address), I'd start looking at successive digits to
determine which port to send the packet out, unless the entire address
matched, in which case I'd keep it.

    So, those of us in telecom really do have something in common
with the USPS?


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Oakland)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology
Date: 18 Mar 1993 23:00:56 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Garrett Wollman) writes:

> When I was in Finland a while back, they used electronic sorting as
> well.  However (and here's the catch), for a meager FIM 1,80 (about 50
> cents or so), first-class letters which arrived at the post office
> before 5PM on any postal day would be delivered the next day.

> Even with all the automation, the USPS still wants $8.95 for this.

You seem to be overlooking a simple matter of scale: Finland has a
population of about five million, and an area of 130,000 square miles.
The United States has a population of 250 million and an area of
3,500,000 square miles.  (Thanks to my trusty almanac.)

With fifty times the population and twenty-five times the area to
service, it's not reasonable to expect the US postal service to work
as quickly and cheaply as Finland's.  Multiply that Finnish $0.50 for
overnight delivery by 25 to reflect the extra work necessary in the US
and you get $12.50 ... seems like our $8.95 is pretty reasonable!


Andy Oakland       [e-mail]

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

From: Jospeh Malloy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?
Organization: Bates College, Lewiston, Maine
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 21:21:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <john@zygot.
ati.com> writes:

> My unfortunate experience with the Post Office is that if you REALLY
> need to get a document from one location to another, you should use
> another service. NEVER EVER send an original, valuable document
> through the US mail -- certified, registered or otherwise. I have had
> irreplacable documents lost and the extra money spent registering or
> certifying was literally wasted. The USPS has no way of tracking
> anything within its system (unlike Federal Express which can).

I hear this from time to time and have to wonder why I've been so
lucky.  In all my years (and there are many of them!) of using the
postal service, I've never once lost anything that I know of, and I've
sent important documents via USPS often enough to have had that sort
of thing happen, were it frequent.  USPS can be quite slow, to be
sure, and I'm not saying that I don't use alternate carriers (mostly
for speedy delivery), but on the whole, I really cannot complain about
what that $.29 buys me.

Now, my telephone service, on the other hand ...


Joseph T. Malloy, guerilla Germaniste | WB2RBA | [e-mail]
Associate Professor of German | Hamilton College | Clinton, New York


[Moderator's Note: Maybe it is the big city post offices which are
more troubled in their operations. I know the post office where my box
is located (Chicago 60690) is a 24 hour per day operation (go in
anytime to send mail or get mail from boxes, etc.) I've had my post
office box for 22 years (in fact, the old post office was on that spot
when I took out my box; it was torn down and the new post office
opened in 1975. During the interim they used a make-shift storefront
down the street for boxholders to get mail.) They've had decent help
there over the years, and they've had some that were rotten to the
core. It seems there is always someone working there (out of a couple
hundred employees at any given time) that finds out if you are getting
money in the mail (as in cash) then beats you to it.

The Missionary Fathers (that's the bunch with the name and address
labels, pens and other gifts which come free from the orphan children
on the Indian Reservation that you don't have to pay for but feel
guilty keeping if you don't) were getting $2000-5000 *cash* daily in
their box at 60690 and a couple postal employees were ripping off
great amounts of it. They finally got caught when the Postal
Inspectors 'seeded the mail' with marked money then spied on the
clerks as they were helping themselves then going back for a second
helping. Our readers in Canada may recall the post office clerk in
Toronto who ripped off Oral Roberts for close to $100,000 in cash over
a three or four year period sent to the Canadian box of the uh,
esteemed USA evangelist.

The US Postal Service has a lot of troubled, angry people working for
it. Don't forget Royal Oak, Michigan and Edmund, Oklahoma: angry clerk
comes to work, brings a gun and shoots everyone in the place. I use
the USPS -- don't we all? -- but have mixed feelings about how much
longer it will survive between the competition and its own internal
strife.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon P. Knight)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Dept of Comp. Studies, Loughborough University of Tech., UK.
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 22:34:39 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott
D Fybush) writes:

> one Beacon Hill lawmaker says he's gotten fed up with drivers who miss
> the light turning green ... or weave all over the road ... because
> they have the phone to their ear!  So he's proposing a bill that would
> make people pull over to use the cellphone.

This is already law in the UK, and a jolly good job too.  Too many
accidents were occuring with fools concentrating on their latest
marketing deal on the cell phone whilst driving down the motorway.
When it first became law, I remember a few people were caught using
cellphones whilst driving live on national radio; they'd called in to
a phone in!  The radio presenter would usually tell them to pull over
and carry on or, if they were on the motorway, to try another time and
thenn ring off.

 From what I remember (I neither have a cellphone, a car or a desire
for either), the law does permit you to use a communications device
whilst driving if it leaves both hands free, but I could be wrong
about that bit.  No doubt someone else will set the record straight.


Jon Knight, Research Student in High Performance Networking and Distributed
Systems in the Department of _Computer_Studies_ at Loughborough University.

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 17:40:05 MST
From: Woody M. Collins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


> That's just what one Massachusetts legislator wants to legislate.
> According to a radio report on WBZ Boston on 17 March [disclaimer:
> Yes, I work there; no, it wasn't my report; yes, I wish it had been],
> one Beacon Hill lawmaker says he's gotten fed up with drivers who miss
> the light turning green ... or weave all over the road ... because
> they have the phone to their ear!  So he's proposing a bill that would
> make people pull over to use the cellphone.

> I suspect this one will get eaten alive by the cell companies' lobby-
> ists.

I have to agree with the MA legislator.  The cellular phone makers and
the cell companies, both warn users of the danger of driving and using
a cellular car phone.  To solve the problem, most good phones comes
handsfree speakerphone option (mike and/or speaker).  With a handsfree
phone, it is very little different than tuning your radio.  I have
heard that some top of the line phones are voice activated.  Bottom
line, I think the phone makers will go for it, forcing the sales on
more expensive models; the cellular companies will be neutral.

Another solution, requiring a co-pilot to handle non-driving duties.
The same as attack planes and helicopters. :-) Or maybe they will
require steering wheel knob, used in the old days (prior to power
steering) when the driver could only use one hand.


Woody

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 06:46:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/
OU=[e-mail] wrote:


> (And of course, if it ever becomes a national issue, the Californicators
> will scream bloody murder.  If it's true that average commute times in
> the LA basin are over an hour each way, then a ban on car phone conver-
> sation in a moving vehicle would shut that town down.)

The commute time is so long because you spend a lot of the time
stopped in traffic jams or creeping along at 10-15 mph.  Seems
reasonably safe to use the phone then.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
                    Previous play (obselete): [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #189
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03246;
          19 Mar 93 4:54 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23848
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 19 Mar 1993 02:22:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25022
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 19 Mar 1993 02:21:32 -0600
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 02:21:32 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #190

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 19 Mar 93 02:21:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 190

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network (John Higdon)
    Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network (Richard Pauls)
    Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges (Graham Allan)
    Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges (Amy Wong)
    Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges (Mark Brader)
    Re: Country Codes and Area Codes Within Countries (Olivier Crepin-Leblond)
    Re: Country Codes and Area Codes Within Countries (Tom Gilheany)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Paul Coen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 18:57 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network


On Mar 16 at 16:46, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Whether or not 'local service in the USA now costs
> an arm and a leg' is a very subjective decision. I know my phone bill
> has skyrocketed since ten years ago, far out of line with what
> inflation would have taken it to.

Well, let's see. When I got excommunicated from the family phone back
in 1959 and had to get my own or do with out, it was $5.05 per month
(plus tax and license bringing it to about $6.00 per month). A
similarly rated residence line (including all taxes and surcharges) is
today just about $15.00 -- a three hundred percent increase. I am not
a financial historian, but I do believe that inflation is well beyond
300% since 1959 is it not?

> I am paying 60-70 cents for each directory assistance call

Good. I very rarely use directory assistance, so I am very happy to
see that you are paying for a service that you use rather than have us
all chip in for it whether we need it or not. I have also noticed that
my long distance rates are a tiny fraction of what they were in
decades past, not even accounting for the worthlessness of today's
dollar. I would assume that you make a lot of long distance calls if
you make such heavy use of DA. The lower price you pay for those calls
more than makes up for the tiny service charge that you well deserve
to be paying.

> I am paying $1 per line/month for a '911 surcharge' that I have no
> use for; and while this can hardly be blamed on the new carriers in
> the industry, it just adds frosting to the whole thing.

911 charges on bills were commonplace before divestiture. It is a red
herring to bring it up in this discussion, since those charges are
locally and politically influenced and have nothing to do with
divestiture.

> It is not because of divestiture that the USA phone network has held
> together as well as it has, it is *despite* the architecture of our
> divestiture.

A number of Pac*Bell executives disagree with you. If the Bell System
still existed we would have been surpassed technologically years ago
by other countries. California would still be saddled with mechanical
switches and would not have the industry-leading customer service that
is now in place. I thank the divestiture gods daily for keeping alive
the promise of modern communications. Under the Bell System, Pacific
Telephone was a poor stepchild, offering the most bare of barebones
service. Now it is one of the most technically advanced of the RBOCs
(what the PUC allows it to actually deliver is another matter, natur-
ally). The Bell System? Phooey! Give me post-divestiture telephony
ANY day of the week.

> If you have plenty of money and telephone costs are only a small part
> of your budget, these costs may be only a small annoyance. To some of
> us, they are financial killers.   PAT]

Yes, since divestiture telephone costs are only a small part of my
budget. In days gone by, the telephone cost significantly more --
particularly those long distance calls.

The telephone works much better than it ever did. But then, that is
just frosting on the cake.


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


[Moderator's Note: For some reason, you failed to comment upon my
earlier remarks about the 'network access fee' now being charged,
which adds several dollars per month to the phone bill. Also, why
can't the OCCs share the cost of 555-1212 with AT&T in order to keep
the cost to the end user less, even it if is true those of us who use
it should pay for it?  It costs *more* than 60 cents ... that is just
the part AT&T is passing on. Let Sprint and MCI pay some of it so the
cost for users could go down to maybe 25 cents.   PAT]

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

From: Richard Pauls <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 12:55:35 -0500


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

> ... But we can now see the "all digital" light at the end of the
> tunnel for the entire state of California -- something that is a
> result of competition and divestiture, not in spite of it. I dare say
> that had it not been for market forces, California would still sport
> mechanical offices even to this day.

This is interesting.  Just how much of this country is "all digital"
these days?  And what exactly does this mean?  I mean the lines into
the houses and the phones themselves are still analog.

When I moved to Massachusetts (508)/(617) I noticed the phone lines
were significantly more noisy than those where I used to live in
Pennsylvania (215).  I remember hearing several years ago in PA that a
lot of the analog circuitry was being replaced with digital circuitry.
Is it possible that this has not yet happened in MA and this is the
reason for the greater noise here?  Also, there's something wrong with
the way people drive up here! ;-)


Rich

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 22:38:12 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network
Reply-To: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>


[e-mail] (John Higdon) wrote:

> Frankly, I never thought for an instant that there has been a single
> SXS or even a Xbar switch anywhere near Toronto for many years. Never
> would I suggest that Canadian telecommunication (or anything else
> there) is inferior in any way. But there is a faction in Canada (just
> as there was in the US nearly a decade ago) that is predicting doom,
> gloom, and the collapse of the telephone system if Bell Canada is
> relieved of its monopolistic hold.

Ha!  The last crossbar in Metro Toronto was removed only last
November.  To this day there is still a 5XB in Stouffville, just north
of the Metro boundary and within the local calling area on 416 640.
Try 640-1184 (a test number) if crossbar sounds are music to your
ears ...

Bell Canada has managed by a masterful PR effort over the years to
convince Canadians that their telephone service is the best on earth.
While basic local and LD service is generally very good, and
installation is quick and reasonably priced, I have seen nothing to
indicate that service in the US is worse in any way.  And when it
comes to choice of facilities, whether business or residential, the US
wins hands down.

Just a few examples that come to mind: Toronto got overseas dialing in
1978.  Many US cities had it long before then.  We got automatic
calling card service only a couple of years ago -- most of the US had
it years before.  I got used to those first AT&T card phones in the US
years before the first such units appeared near here.  And so on ...

> I have been carrying on e-mail correspondence
> with a Canadian who has been genuinely concerned with the impending
> competition. He was surprised to learn that local telephone service
> did NOT cost an arm and a leg in the US. The fact that the party line
> had all but disappeared was news to him. That I can call anywhere in
> the country by dialing only ten digits and that the call is completed
> instantly was contrary to the impression he had been given by some of
> the propaganda up there. He had visions of dialing twenty digits (or
> even having to place calls manually giving VISA card numbers, etc.)
> and waiting long periods of time to get through the "long distance
> nightmare".

The Telecomunications Workers Union has been carrying on a scare
campaign about this for several years now.  And certainly Canadians
visiting the US do get ripped off by COCOTs and such.  But that is
only one tiny aspect of the telecom situation south of the border.

And the obvious downside to our excellent telephone service the way it
is run today is the price.  Arghhh!  Well -- competition is coming in a
big way, so we shall see ... but more and more I think we need a
divestiture and local competition too.


Tony H.

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

From: [e-mail] (Graham Allan)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges
Organization: University of Minnesota - High Energy Physics
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 18:01:17 GMT


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

> I'm mad with Bell Canada. I wanted to use a payphone one night
> recently to make a call from Smith's Falls, Ontario, to Utica, NY (a
> distance of about 300 miles at the most).

> [Moderator's Note: I'm sorry to hear about your experience. While some
> (maybe most?) pay phones in the United States do connect with a robot
> to collect cash if you dial 1+ or get billing information if you dial
> 0+, some places still require an operator to come on the line for
> either purpose. Maybe that is the case in Canada. It is too bad you
> got one who was rude, but that is not all that uncommon either it
> seems. I think the operator should have accepted your British Telecom
> calling card; this is an acceptable card in the USA at least, although
> perhaps to use it the call has to go back to the UK; I am not sure of
> the technicalities. By definition, pay phone calls cannot be 'direct
> dialed' at the lower rates since an operator's intervention -- even a
> robot operator -- is required to prompt for payment or billing infor-
> mation. Calls between the USA and Canada are expensive.   PAT]

The British Telecom card can only be used to call the UK from abroad;
you can't use it as a normal calling card when outside the UK. When I
last used it for this (about three years ago) there were only a few
operators who knew how to process it, too, although these days there
is an 800 number to talk directly to a BT operator.

Maybe a more convenient system may be possible with the ties between
Cable and Wireless (who own Mercury in the UK) and (I think) Sprint. A
card which could genuinely be used both in the UK and US would be
useful. However, Mercury certainly still have to get their calling
card act together in the UK, so it is probably some way off, if it
ever happens!


Graham

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 23:23:36 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] wrote:

> I'm mad with Bell Canada. I wanted to use a payphone one night
> recently to make a call from Smith's Falls, Ontario, to Utica, NY (a
> distance of about 300 miles at the most).

> I'm mad because:

> - You can't direct dial the number! (I dialed the right number but
> the operator pops up out of nowhere and starts handling the call). I
> didn't realise who she was at first (thought I had reached a wrong
> number), and she treated me like complete dirt.  It's a while since I
> used a North American payphone and I forgot this happens, but I was
> amazed it still does. How much intelligence does a phone need anyway
> just to take your money?

It's an old complaint (and a valid one), but the immediate problem is
probably that the phone in question had a rotary dial.  There is no
provision for automatic handling of payphone calls from dial phones.

> - It's cash or nothing. If you're not a US or Canadian resident
> you're unlikely to have an acceptable phone company credit card.  OK
> it's not that unreasonable that Bell would/could not charge my British
> Telecom card, but what else is a tourist supposed to do?  No pre-paid
> cards available in newsstands like in many countries, and there aren't
> too many of the Visa-accepting payphones that I saw later in larger
> cities.

I agree completely.  Neither Canada nor the USA has developed stored
value card phones to any serious extent.

> - Cost. The operator wanted $2.35 (Canadian) per minute. I was
> thinking of maybe a 10-minute call, and the largest piece of money
> that would go in this Bell Canada ugly tin box was 25 cents. So I
> would have needed a bucketful of quarters, plus it is really expensive
> -- I could call NY cheaper from London! From a UK (Mercury) payphone
> the cheapest rate is #1.17 (roughly $1.95) per minute, and _that_ is
> for 3600 miles of call.

I can't believe that such a call could cost $2.35/minute.  Almost
certainly you were quoted a rate for the first minute that included a
transaction charge ($1.75 last time I looked) for the privilege of
dealing with the operator.  Yes -- I know you didn't *want* to deal
with an operator in the first place ... the rates listed from last
year's phone book from Toronto to New York City (which should be
comparable to Smith's Falls to Upstate New York State) are $.50 during
prime time, and $.20 off peak.  Higher than US rates certainly, but
not criminal.  And probably lower than UK rates for a similar
distance.

As for "ugly tin box" -- the Northern Telecom Centurion phone won
various design awards ... and newer (Millenium) NT phones take
$1 (Loonie) coins.

> [Moderator's Note: I think the operator should have accepted your
> British Telecom calling card; this is an acceptable card in the USA at
> least, although perhaps to use it the call has to go back to the UK; I
> am not sure of the technicalities.

Nope.  And Canadian and US cards are not accepted in the UK for calls
other than those back to the card holder's country either.  Canadian
and US cards are about the only ones that work in each other's
countries.


Tony Harminc

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

From: [e-mail] (Amy Wong)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 23:32:50 GMT


It seems like Bell Canada is changing all their payphones. (Maybe
someone working at Bell can comment on this) Here on campus at the
university of Waterloo, (Waterloo is not a big city, population is
about 75,000) all payphones are changed to the type which accepts
major credit cards and calling cards.


Amy Wong   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 93 01:37:19 GMT


> I'm mad with Bell Canada. ...

And in part justifiably so.  However...

> - Cost. The operator wanted $2.35 (Canadian) per minute. I was
> thinking of maybe a 10-minute call,

That was not the cost per minute.  That was the cost for the FIRST
minute, and about $2 of it was the startup surcharge because the call
was (necessarily, since it was a payphone) operator-assisted.  If
you'd asked about the price for additional minutes, you'd have found
that it was something you'd call reasonable.

Of course, the operator might well have volunteered that information,
but perhaps Bell assumes that they have to deal with people who can't
hold two prices in their head simultaneously.  Or maybe it was just
the particular rude one that you encountered.  (The exception, in my
experience.)

> and the largest piece of money that would go in this Bell Canada
> ugly tin box was 25 cents. So I would have needed a bucketful of
> quarters ...

And they don't even have the excuse that US phone companies do, namely
that the quarter is the largest coin in common circulation.  Here
we've had $1 coins in general use since 1987.

However, Bell has finally attended to this in the new type of
payphones ("Millennium" phones).  This doesn't help if there isn't one
of those where you are, but I've seen enough payphones replaced by
Millenniums [Millennia? :-)] in Toronto in the last year or so that I
wouldn't be surprised to hear that Bell plans to replace all the older
phones.  (Anyone know for sure?)  As these phones have already been
described here in the past, and are not remarkable by world standards,
I'll say no more about them here.


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

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

From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 20:05:24 +0000
Organization: Imperial College, London, UK.
Subject: Re: Country Codes and Area Codes Within Countries


[e-mail] (Ted Koppel) wrote:

> I don't care about prefixes within a city, just the fact that within
> France (for instance) the city code for Lyon is 7 and the city code
> for Nice is 93.

This is incorrect. For nearly ten years, France has had no local
codes, except for Paris which has a code "1". All the rest of France
has full telephone numbers of the type <ab cd ef gh>. (not including
the country code which is +33).

ab = 93 used to be the code for the "Alpes Maritimes" area in the
past, but now other codes are used in the area as well, such as 92, or
91.  This is due to shortage of numbers in some areas while others
have plenty of them available. Even if you are calling your next door
neighbour, you have to plug-in all eight digits.

I am sometimes amazed at the litterature given in telephone
directories in countries around the world. So often is the information
in the international section out of date.

On a similar note, I use Mercury telecommunications to call relatives
back in Cannes (South of France -- yes, it's a 93 number) long
distance from London (my current place of abode). My last itemised
billing displayed the country I was calling as being "Monaco". I think
that some smart bum in Mercury equated the fact that "+33 93" was
common to all numbers in the Principality of Monaco (Monaco, although
having a special no-tax status etc. is on the French telecom network --
long story :-) ) and re-programmed the billing computers accordingly.

Eagerly waiting for my next itemized bill ...


Olivier M.J. Crepin-Leblond, Digital Comms. Section, Elec. Eng. Department
 Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London SW7 2BT, UK
       Internet/Bitnet: <[e-mail]> - Janet: <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Gilheany)
Subject: Re: Country Codes and Area Codes Within Countries
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 00:55:28 GMT


TELECOM Moderated noted in response to Ted Koppel:

> [Moderator's Note: You bet we have it! Check out the Telecom Archives
> using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu (login anonymous, use name@site as
> your password, then 'cd telecom-archives' and 'cd country.codes'.

I tried telneting from two different sites with no luck. (Logged in
anonymous and kept getting "invalid password").

Can someone verify that anonymous login is still operational at this
site?    Thanks in advance.


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I tried it just now (1:45 AM Friday) and it worked
fine. The place you telnetted from would probably not make a difference.
If anything, anonymous ftp may have been shut down temporarily due to
some other situation. Netiquette dictates whenever possible doing your
anonymous ftp calls after normal business hours.  It could be, like
sites where I normally drop off comp.dcom.telecom via their nntp
socket that sometimes the load is so high they respond 'cant talk to
you now' and close the window, in which case I put them on the end of
the list and go back a few minutes later to try again.  If lcs.mit.edu
refuses your anonymous ftp request, I suggest trying later, or try to
get in with gopher or web ... both of those work now.    PAT]

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

Date: 18 Mar 1993 09:37:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Coen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


> one Beacon Hill lawmaker says he's gotten fed up with drivers who miss
> the light turning green ... or weave all over the road ... because
> they have the phone to their ear!  So he's proposing a bill that would
> make people pull over to use the cellphone.

Great idea!  I've seen the same thing happen.  To be blunt, you
shouldn't be able to operate anything that isn't part of the car with
one or more of your hands.  If you have a tire blow out on the highway
while holding a cellphone in one hand, you may have a real problem.
People should have to maintain two hands on the wheel.  The
speakerphone units aren't as bad, but they really shouldn't allow the
driver to dial out while the car is moving.

A guy got himself killed in Rhode Island a number of years ago.  He
was apparantly having a heated conversation on a cellphone, and pulled
out into the breakdown lane/shoulder (this was on I-95 southbound,
around Warwick, I think -- if anyone cares) -- he was either going to
pull over, or pass someone on the right.  Nobody's sure.  Because he
was paying attention to the 'phone, he ended up slamming the car into
the back of a tractor-trailer truck that was stopped in the breakdown
lane.

> I suspect this one will get eaten alive by the cell companies' lobby-
> ists.

Probably.  It's a good idea, though.  Someone probably needs to do a
study or two on cellphone-related accidents, and some experiments on
how much using a cellphone distracts people.


Paul Coen -- [e-mail]

------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V13 #190
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05644;
          19 Mar 93 6:02 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17362
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 19 Mar 1993 03:18:58 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27614
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 19 Mar 1993 03:18:04 -0600
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 03:18:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #191

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 19 Mar 93 03:18:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 191

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: TDDs and Modem Standards (Curtis E. Reid)
    Re: TDDs and Modem Standards (Ron Dippold)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Ron Dippold)
    Re: CHILL Information Wanted (Ketil Albertsen)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Leonard P. Levine)
    Re: 1-800-TADPOLE Wanted! Help Locate 'Touch America' ([e-mail])
    Re: How Do I Get Rid of Line Noise? (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: California SS7 Announcement in Newsbytes (Bob Longo)
    Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy (Stephen Wood)
    Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Steven Warner)
    Re: ATM Information/White Paper/Newsgroup Wanted (Ketil Albertsen)
    Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (Edward D. Schulz)
    Re: Bellsouth Cordless Phone (Joe George)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 18 Mar 1993 18:54:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Curtis E. Reid <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TDDs and Modem Standards


In a message received on 18 Mar 1993, 18:45 Ken Thompson <kthompso@
donald.wichitaks.NCR.COM> wrote to TELECOM Digest V13 #186

> Are TDD's compatable with any modem standard?

No.  You can obtain TDD specifications and other goodies via anonymous
ftp to lcs.mit.edu.  TDD uses BAUDOT code (5-bit) while modem
understand ASCII code (8-bit).  Thus, they are inherently
incompatible.  However, there are dual ASCII/BAUDOT modems out on the
market.  As well as some PC software that translate ASCII into BAUDOT.


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)

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)
Subject: Re: TDDs and Modem Standards
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 07:13:00 GMT


Ken Thompson <[e-mail]> writes:

> Are TDD's compatable with any modem standard?

Modem standards and TDD standards are generally incompatible ... not
only in text encoding (Baudot vs. ASCII) but speed (few modems can go
as slow as 45 baud) and signalling format.

Depending on what you need there may be good news, however.  There are
several modems on the market which have support for TDD built in.
Just make sure it explicitly says it does.  And many of the newer TDDs
have a ASCII/Baudot option switch, although that's not the only
hurdle.  I haven't looked at TDDs in the last year or two, so more may
be offering standard modem protocols as well, since they're so cheap.


I know my old Novation Apple-Cat II (possibly the best modem ever made
in terms of technology at the time) would let you talk to TDDs.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 07:26:57 GMT


[e-mail] (Scott D Fybush) writes:

> I suspect this one will get eaten alive by the cell companies' lobby-
> ists.

Not to mention by all the influential types who use car phones.  Well,
this should make the road safe for all those putting on makeup,
shaving, eating and reading as they drive.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ketil Albertsen,TIH)
Subject: Re: CHILL Information Wanted
Organization: T I H / T I S I P
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 11:32:14 GMT


(I could have mailed, rather than posted this. But I relly like the
CHILL language myself, and I think a lot of other people would like it
too if they knew about it. So here is my halfpenny of CHILL marketing.)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Harald Vogt)
writes:

> I am looking for information about the programming language CHILL.
> CHILL is used for programming phone switches.

> I am interested in the following items:

>   o a formal specification of the language CHILL
>     (is there a grammar for CHILL?),

Yes, CHILL is one of the better defined languages. You'll find the
formal spec and a lot of not-so-formal info in CCITT recommendation
Z.200.  It looks like Z.200 hasn't been updated in 1992 (is this
correct?), so it is *not* available from [e-mail] - you'll
have to buy the bluebook hardcopy.

If you are not that familiar with formal specs, you should start out
with the "CHILL User Manual" -- as far as I can see, that is something
written by AT&T and Philips Telecommunications. The preface of my copy
states the following mail address:

   C.H. Smedema
   AT&T and Philips Telecommunications (Belgium)
   80, Rue des Deux Gares
   B1070 Brussels  Belgium
   tel. [phone]

Note: My copy is dated April 1984; names may have changed (although I
would think the office still exists).

>   o tools available for manipulating CHILL,

>   o programming environments for CHILL,

In our college courses, we are using the CHIPSY (CHILL Programming
SYstem) from:

   KVATRO A/S
   Pirsenteret
   N-7005 Trondheim
   Norway
   Tel: + 47 7 52 00 90

(Note: The phone number will change this summer, due to a restruct-
uring of the number plan!) I know they will be present at the Hannover
fair the last week of March (24th to 31th), stand A54-C55 in Hall 2
according to the invitation they sent me. So if you can get there, or
know someone who is going to go, you'll have a chance to evaluate it.

There are several others, too -- notably Philips and AT&T, and I am
quite sure they will be at the Hangover fair, too.

>   o pointers to articles about CHILL, and

That CHILL User Manual is a 'special issue of the CHILL bulletin'.  I
don't know if this bulletin still exists, but at the above quoted
addresses they will probably be able to help you.

>   o hints to get more info about CHILL.

If we can initate more CHILL activity, we should have a newsgroup (I
am 99% sure that there is none -- at least none are available to me).

For those that don't know CHILL at all: It is a general, algorithmic
language that just happens to be defined by CCITT; it could very well
be used as a replacement for c, modula etc. (but with significant
extensions), It just isn't marketed very much outside the telecomm
environments.


Ketil Albertsen, College lecturer
Trondheim College of Engeneering (TIH), Dept. of Comp.Sci
N-7004  TRONDHEIM  Norway.

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard P Levine)
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!
Date: 18 Mar 1993 20:53:52 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, by Monty Solomon <monty%
[e-mail]>:

> In our new book, the listings have a bizarre alphabetization:

>   SOLOMON Alan.......
>     Ann.......
>     ...
>     Marilyn.......
>     Michael.......
>   SOLOMON-MITTLEMAN J & Robt.......
>   SOLOMON Robt.......
>     Sherwin.......
>     ...

> Their algorithm has problems with hyphenated last names.

Also with spaced last names:

   LEVINE
    Al
    Betty
    Leonard
   LE VINE
    Leonard
   LEVINE
    Nathan
    Samuel


Leonard P. Levine                    e-mail [e-mail]
Professor, Computer Science             Office [phone]
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee       Home   [phone]
Milwaukee, WI 53201 U.S.A.              FAX    [phone]


[Moderator's Note: How many readers are familiar with the way in which
exact names (of different people) are handled? IBT says if the name is
exactly the same, i.e. John G. Smith and John G. Smith (but they are
different parties) then the sort continues by the street name, with
someone on i.e. Main Street being listed ahead of someone on Maple
Street. If both parties live on the same street, then the sort
continues by number on the street, with the person at the lower
numbered address i.e. 1234 Main Street listed ahead of 1432 Main
Street. If both parties have the same name and live at the same
address (which I assume is rather rare) then the sort continues by
telephone number, with the 'lower number' first and the 'higher
number' next, i.e. 222-2222 would be listed ahead of 333-3333.  A
person doing business in Chicago on Adams Street as 'A' is listed
ahead of a person doing business on Dearborn Street as 'A'. Illinois
Bell says apostrophes (O'Connor), ampersands (Johnson & Johnson) and
hyphens (Hillary Rodham-Clinton) are ignored, as are periods (W.L.S.)
unless their presence or absence is critical in distinquishing one
entry from another, i.e. if there were a (fn)Hillary (mn) Rodham
(ln) Clinton and a (fn) Hillary (ln) Rodham-Clinton then the name
absent these marks would appear ahead of the name with those marks. It
appears they follow ASCII ordering with a space (hex 20) coming ahead
of a hyphen (hex 2D). Spaces are taken into consideration however; the
name La Fayette would appear before LaFayette. I guess that still
follows ASCII ordering, since the space comes ahead of any letters. I
suspect some of the more obscure entries are strictly data-entry
operator optional or did telco ask Mr. LaFayette if he had a space in
the middle of his name or not?  :)    PAT]

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

Subject: Re: 1-800-TADPOLE Wanted! Help Locate 'Touch America'
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 13:16:29 PST
From: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Jim Thompson) writes:

> As you can see from the headers, I work for Tadpole Technology, Inc.
> Tadpole would really like to have '800 TADPOLE', (800 823 7653).

> Perusing the Telecom Archives, the 823 NXX is 'owned' (?) by a company
> called 'Touch America'.  Has anyone heard of them?  Any contact
> information for 'Touch America'?

> Also with 800 portability just around the corner, what will the
> situation be after May 1?  Will I be able to call my favorite 800
> vendor and say, "I'd like to have 800 823 7653." (If it is unassigned,
> of course.), or will I still need to call Touch America, and then
> 'move' the 800 service?

Well, I just called the number and got a recording saying that the
call couldn't go through; the old "We're sorry, the number you have
reached ..."  deal.  That means that the chances are no-one is using
it.  Of-course, if you don't act quick one of the less ethical telecom
readers (most of us are great guys and gals of-course) could snap up
the number and try to sell it back to you for $500.  As to how you get
numbers after May 1, I have no idea, but would also be interested in
finding out, I hope that it's something simple, like call your
favourite carrier and tell 'em which number you'd like and then they
give it to you.


Cheers,

dag

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 06:58:17 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: How Do I Get Rid of Line Noise?


Bill Blum <[e-mail]> gives a rather lengthy
description of how to make a noise killer for a 2400 bps modem.  Every
time I see this subject come up on the Digest, I feel obliged to
mention the excellent $17.95 (about two years ago) Z100A RF filter you
can get at your local AT&T phone store.  Works great, lasts a long
time.

I used to be right next door to twin 50 kW AM transmission towers for
KNX newsradio in Torrance.  The interference I got was unbelievable.
Being in GTE-land didn't help, either.  I dropped in the RF filter,
and voila!  No curly brackets anymore.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]
                         After April 2 : [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: Bob Longo <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: California SS7 Announcement in Newsbytes
Date: 18 Mar 93 12:03:00 PST
Organization: Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines


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

> An article appeared in the 12 March Newsbytes (clari.nb.telecom)
> announcing the arrival of some CLASS end-user services in California.
> It briefly outlines the functionality of Call { Trace | Return |
> Screen }, Select Call Forwarding, Repeat Dialing, and Priority
> Ringing. The article points out that the SS7 technology would have
> allowed PacBell to offer the "controversial Caller ID services", but

> "While the company cannot offer Caller ID in California because
> of regulations set by the California Public Utilities
> Commission, it is allowing California residents to make use of
> the SS7 technology ..."

 [stuff deleted]

I believe Pacific Bell has left out a few key words out of this
statement.  It should read:

   "While the company cannot offer Caller ID in California because
   of regulations set by the California Public Utilities
   Commission [would reduce potential profits], it is allowing California
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   residents to make use of the SS7 technology ..."

You are correct.  The CPUC has NOT prohibited Pacific Bell or GTE or
anyone else from offering Caller ID.  They have, however, imposed
reasonable restrictions based upon input provided at public hearings
to protect the privacy of telephone subscribers.  The phone companies
are refusing to offer the Caller ID service because they feel they
might not reap the massive profits with the CPUC restrictions that
they might otherwise.

If you care about Caller ID, call or write Pacific Bell and complain.
I did, and as your quoted statement might indicate, they tried to
blame it on the CPUC.  They tried to get me to call the CPUC and
complain!  They are trying to make it appear that they are the
innocent victims of the CPUC saying "NO", which simply isn't true.


Bob Longo ([e-mail])  Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines   Los Angeles, CA

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 15:02:32 PST
From: Stephen Wood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada


Frankly I don't believe there is prohibition of use of English when a
business answers the telephone in Quebec.  The places I call all have
an automated voice response first in French, then in English, telling
me to dial the local, if I know it and have a touch tone, otherwise to
stay on the line for a real person.  I think the French/English
response is quite standard.


[Moderator's Note: Directory Assistance seems to answer in French and
then switch to English if that is how I respond (which it is).  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 23:42:13 EST
Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


On 12 Mar 93 07:33:16 GMT, [e-mail] (James Borynec; AGT
Researcher) said:

> I have a question, if long distance were REALLY competitive, wouldn't
> we see AT&T, Sprint, and MCI competing on PRICE?  Their prices have
> gotten a lot closer to each other in the last few years!

The prices are so close because price competition has already brought
everybody's most discounted prices down to the lowest economically
viable prices.  This has, at times, pinched some of the carriers
pretty badly.  I remember a couple of years ago, one of the big three
showed "price leadership" by *raising* prices in a particular market
segment where everybody's margins were known to be really thin.
Rather than trumpet the price increase, the rest of the industry
quietly matched the price increase and breathed a big sigh of relief.
Note that this was not collusive price fixing behavior, but rather
three (or more) separate business decisions that continuing a price
war was going to have no winners.

Price competition has been in place for a long enough time that the
market has pretty much equilibrated, which is why you see such
similarity.


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: Steven Warner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 21:36:07 PST


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> What about using paging to get data TO remote equipment?  Are there
> any devices that are pagers with an RS-232 port, instead of a display?
> This way, you could send (short) commands to remote locations, without
> requiring a phone line be present.

A Motorola ADVISOR pager can do this now.  Get that pager, and
standard ALPHA paging service. Order from Motorola, the device called
a PRINT-PAL. (I have the stock # for it someplace) it is about $99.
The device is designed to dump all messages stored in the pager to a
printer.

The pager sits in the PRINT-PAL. On the side is an RS-232 port that
will output data at a variety of standard baud rates.

This setup ALSO has the advantage that as pages are received, they are
simultaneously sent out the serial port, which would give you the
feature of Remote data command entry.  You can use a computer and any
terminal program to send pages to these pagers, or use a variety of
some expensive and some not expensive software packages that make it
easy to send pages from PCs.  (Including one I have given away for
free at one time).

The PRINT-PAL can also be used to program MANY undocumented features
into ADVISOR pagers.  A topic for another time.

> Also, why is there a delay in the delivery of pages?  I can understand

In the SF bay area, the paging services are heavily loaded. Alpha
service also causes larger loads.  If you have a scanning receiver,
tune to a paging channel.  During peak use periods, you will hear LOTS
of data before the transmitters go idle.  When I used PacTel years ago
(called IRT then) delays of five minutes were not unusual for me.


Steven Warner  (34W 36L)    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ketil Albertsen,TIH)
Subject: Re: ATM Information/White Paper/Newsgroup Wanted
Organization: T I H / T I S I P
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1993 14:08:16 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Eric
Berggren) writes:

> I am seeking the definative guide to ATM networking. "What is it
> precisely and how it works" type information. Pointers to the relavent
> groups/guides welcome.

This is one of the currently most popular Frequently Asked Questions -
problem is that the question appears in one newsgroup after the other,
so it doesn't belong in one single FAQ list.

However: The answer is comp.dcom.cell-relay - for the group, that is.

Discussions in that group is at a fairly high level, not exactly a
"starter's forum". Follow it for a while, pick up those ftp-able
papers people refer to there (there is hardly a week without someone
pointing out one paper or another that can be ftp-ed). If you are a
true beginner in ATM, maybe you should pick up one of the books
covering it, eg.  W. Stallings: ISDN and Broadband ISDN (Macmillan) or
M. de Prycker: Asynchronous Transfer Mode solutions for broadband ISDN
(Ellis Horwood).  There sure are others as well; these are the two I
have learnt from.

Expect less maturity of the written material than what you would see
when reading about eg. RS232! Although some ATM standards were agreed
upon more than two years ago, there are still a lot of undecided
points.

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

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 08:31 EST
From: [e-mail] (Edward D Schulz [phone])
Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs


> I found a pay phone in Texas that would not accept 10-ATT-0 to get me
> on the AT&T network.  Isn't that illegal?  If so, where should I
> report this?

Doug,

AT&T wants to know.  Please call 1-800-742-6260 to report the pay phone
that blocks 10-288-0.  Thanks.


Ed Schulz, AT&T CellNet Systems
Holmdel Corporate Plaza, 2137 Hwy 35, Holmdel, NJ 07733
[phone] voice              [phone] fax
[e-mail]  [e-mail]  attmail!edschulz

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

Subject: Re: Bellsouth Cordless Phone
From: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 93 06:34:31 EST
Organization: The Waffle Whiffer, Atlanta, GA


[e-mail] (Ray Normandeau) writes:

> "automatic security code scanning to prevent signal cross from other
> sources."

I don't have that particular phone, but I do own a Panasonic 3730 with
the same "security code" feature.  What happens when I take the
handset off hook is that an identifying code of some sort is
transmitted from the handset to the base to identify the call as
valid, before I even get dialtone.  Every time I place the handset
back in the cradle to charge a new code is generated and loaded into
the phone.  I guess, if someone has the same type handset and the same
code, they could theoretically use my base unit until I put the remote
back on to charge.  I think it's a pretty good feature.  Also, this
particular phone does some sort of alteration to the transmitted
signal where it's very hard to hear clearly on a radio scanner.  Not
impossible, but it's not a signal you can listen to for very long.


Joe George ([e-mail], gatech!mathcs.emory.edu!whiffer!jgeorge)
#include disclaimer.h    #include quote.h

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #191
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19793;
          21 Mar 93 4:45 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20433
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 21 Mar 1993 02:06:55 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29815
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 21 Mar 1993 02:06:00 -0600
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1993 02:06:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #192

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 21 Mar 93 02:06:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 192

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Caller ID to be Made Available State-Wide in New York (Dave Niebuhr)
    Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (Magnus Hedberg)
    Telephone Plugs, International (Peter H. Stott)
    Good Cheap DAA Module? (Scott Coleman)
    Fraud, Abuse, and Politics (Joe Konstan)
    Washington Times Blows It (Phillip Dampier)
    A Life That Spanned the Communications Revolution (Adam Ashby)
    Need History of Telecom Issues (Chris Heim)
    Fiber Optic Television (Martin Egan)
    ISDN (Re: Phone Line Bandwidth) (Peter da Silva)
    Cable Pair Tracking (Gary Breuckman)
    Telephone Wire Outdoors (Seth B. Rothenberg)
    Phone Sex Reaches Out to Girl Scout Callers (Sharon Crichton)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 20 Mar 93 07:32:51 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Caller ID to be Made Available State-Wide in New York


New York Telephone announced in their latest bill that Caller ID will
be going state-wide by the end of the year.

The milestones are:

  Bronx and Manhattan (currently undergoing an area code realignment) will
  get it in April, 1993.

  July will see its introduction in Westchester County, Binghamton, Syracuse
  and Buffalo.

  Albany is last with Caller ID being made available in August.

The Rochester Telephone part of Area Code 716 which includes is in the
Buffalo LATA has had Caller ID for some time if I remember correctly.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Magnus Hedberg)
Subject: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?
Date: 20 Mar 93 08:29:44 GMT
Organization: Telia Research AB, Aurorum 6, 951 75 Lulea, Sweden


Normally telephones in public networks (PSTN) are supplied by
electricity from the telecom network.

We believe that it should be possible to power the telephone from the
electric mains in the house instead of from the telecom network. The
goal is to avoid using "hogh voltage" on the telecom network.

Does anyone know if this idea already has been rejected or performed
somewhere in the world.


Regards,

Magnus Hedberg

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telephone Plugs, International
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1993 19:44:38 GMT


It would be very useful for travelers to know the names of the
different telephone plugs they need in different countries in order to
connect up with various networks. Does such a list exist?

If not, could readers familiar with other types of plugs send me the
name and any relevant details, and I will summarize here.

For starters,

Country     Plug Designation      Remarks
US          RJ11
Canada      RJ11
UK          IPC jack plug (?)      Commercial RJ11-IPC connectors are
                  reverse-wired for North American phones.


Peter H. Stott  Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy
Urban & Environmental Policy    Tel. [phone]
Tufts University                Fax. [phone]
97 Talbot Avenue     e-mail: [e-mail]
Medford, MA  02155             [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Coleman)
Subject: Good Cheap DAA Module?
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1993 14:36:12 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


I'm looking for a DAA (a module which I can use to interface a project
to the telephone line). I'd like to build an interactive voice
response system using a SoundBlaster card (along with its speech
systhesis drivers) as well as a DTMF decoder circuit. I have an old
article in Byte magazine in which Steve Ciarcia builds something
similar (he called his a TIMS) in which he used a Cermetek (?) DAA to
interface his project to the phone line safely and legally. The
article is several years old, so surely there must be a newer (and
better and cheaper) DAA module available on the market today.

Any recommendations?

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

From: Joe Konstan <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 93 11:20:27 CST
Subject: Fraud, Abuse, and Politics


Two cases of phone fraud in recent days:

Wednesday's {Minneapolis Star Tribune} reports that the Minnesota
House (and the account of the House Majority Leader) in 1991 were
taken for some $50,000 in phone fraud.  Apparently, they had a system
where representatives could call in through an 800 number and dial out
after giving their five-digit secret code.  These codes were often
known to staff and family, but in this case the code got nationwide
usage.  The House (and MCI) decided it would be too expensive to
investigate the thousands of phone calls (since it was clear that they
were made by many different people) and the House paid up and wrote it
off (but has avoided publicity until now and never released the phone
logs).

They switched to a reimbursement-based system using personal phone
cards and total cost has gone way down (despite the per-call
surcharges -- maybe Pat should make a presentation to the legislature
for the unmentioned, no surcharge card?).  Incidentally, the state
Senate still has 800-dialin with one shared code for all senators.
They claim no problems (and they do change the code occasionally)
despite the lack of accountability.

The next day, UPI has a story on U.S. Speaker of the House Tom Foley
having a calling card issued to his office (no indication whether it
is personal) being charged at least $1200 last December for unauthorized
900-calls to dial-a-porn services.  This one interests me in particular
 because:

    a)  how did they know the 900-numbers were porn rather
        than sports or stock tips (were they followed up by
        "authorized" calls to check?)
?    vt)Ld:_fRk,<6
T7#Z}4~Y(y??ixeA1w=+b)  I didn't think any calling cards still allowed calls
        to premium services.

This report came from the {Washington Times} -- I don't know how much
credence to put in the technical details.

Now back to passing an economic stimulus package -- maybe we'll
designate a couple of hundred million for phone fraud?

v?S]zMeHP6iN?QH(b.GW
Joe Konstan   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1993 12:47:47 -0500
Subject: Washington Times Blows It


The "Moonie paper" in Washington, {The Washington Times}, in an
attempt to sting the Democrats with sex related charges, fouled up in
trying to portray Foley's calling card as being used to call 900
numbers.  When one considers the right wing bias of the paper, it's no
surprise that they tried it, but next time they should use a
comp.dcom.telecom member for a source.  We know better:

   WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Speaker Thomas S. Foley said Thursday his
office telephone credit card number had been stolen and unauthorized
calls made, but he denied a report they were made to dial-a-porn
services.

   {The Washington Times}, quoting unidentified sources, said Thursday
that at least some of the unauthorized calls were made to 900-dial-a-
porn numbers and charged to telephones issued to the speaker's office,
including a cellular car phone.

   Foley, in response to reporters' queries, confirmed that his office
was notified in December that a telephone credit card issued to his
office had shown unusual activity and was being cancelled and
replaced.

   But Foley said no "900" calls were involved, and that no congressional
telephones or credit cards can access those services. "They are blocked
automatically," he said.

   "There were no 900 calls charged to my office," he said, and the
office was not billed for the other fraudulent calls that were made.

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

AP reported that the calling card in question was issued by MCI. By
the way, on a related note, Friends & Family customers can now add the
Capitol Switchboard to their calling circle if they'd like -- they are
MCI customers.  The Capitol number is [phone].

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

Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1993 12:54:00 +0000
From: Adam (A.) Ashby <[e-mail]>
Subject: A Life That Spanned the Communications Revolution


 From {The Daily Telegraph} March 18th 1993.

"The oldest person in Britain died in her sleep yesterday, aged 115.
Mrs. Charlotte Hughes, born on the day Alexander Bell founded his
first telephone company - Aug 1st, 1877 - was also the second oldest
person in the world."

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Need History of Telecom Issues
Date: 20 Mar 93 15:12:45 CST
Organization: Buena Vista College, Storm Lake, IA


I have a few questions I need to answer for my professor and would
appreciate some input if you like.  We have been discussing the
history of telecommunications, starting with the telegraph and now
focusing on HDTV.  If you have any insight to provide, your help will
not be copied, but simply used as a reference to help me compile some
quality in-depth answers.

Who will pay?
Who will profit?
Who will have access?
How will conflicts be resolved?
Who will provide what services and under what conditions?
What are the transnational implications of technologies that recognize no
boundaries?

Identify our key, historical communications goals in the US and using
those as a yardstick, discuss how the above questions have been
answered in the early telegraph,telephone, and broadcast industries.


Chris Heim  [e-mail]

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

From: Martin Egan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fiber Optic Television
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1993 21:16:00 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois


I am doing research on the competition between telephone companies and
cable companies over the cable TV market using fiber optic cables.  My
focus is on who is ahead in this race and the possible outcomes of
this competition.  If you have any information related to this topic,
please post it. Thank You!

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

From: [e-mail] (peter da silva)
Subject: ISDN (Re: Phone Line Bandwidth)
Organization: Ferranti International Controls Corporation
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1993 17:41:59 GMT


[from comp.arch]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Donald
Lindsay) writes:

> The old ISDN dream was that the customer could supply 64 kpbs data
> streams, direct to the exchanges.

If ISDN was available, people would do this. But it's not, so they
don't.

If I could buy ISDN for my house at a residential class rate, I'd do
it, and enough other people would do it that it'd be commercially
feasible to sell ISDN services. But I can't. In some countries you can
get ISDN at commercial prices, but without retail customers there's no
incentive for businesses to get into it.

It's not too late. ISDN would become your digital dialtone, and it'd
also be one of your options for long distance data service. The
problem with ISDN isn't technical, it's political.


Peter da Silva   Ferranti International Controls Corporation
12808 West Airport Blvd.  Sugar Land, TX  77478  USA
[phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cable Pair Tracking
Date: 20 Mar 1993 14:34:23 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Our Physical Environment folks have a need for a program or database
to do cable management.  I know that there are both complete systems
and programs out there, and would appreciate any recommendations from
current users of any such systems.

The situation involves multiple, user owned cables between campus
buildings as well as riser cables within buildings.  There is a need
to keep track of "circuits" with the cable and pair numbers,
end-to-end, as well as by "cable" to identify which pairs are in use,
free, or bad.

It would also be nice if the program would understand the whole
topology and be able to automatically assign free pairs to a new
circuit, given the desired endpoints.

The types of circuits involved, probably not too relevent, include T1
multiplexor links, emergency hotline telephones, fire and intrusion
alarms, cardkey control equipment, etc.

Thank you for any references, either by mail or to the telecom
newsgroup!


Gary Breuckman
Technical Services Manager
[e-mail]
414-288-3771

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

From: [e-mail] (Seth B Rothenberg)
Subject: Telephone Wire Outdoors
Date: 20 Mar 93 15:23:48 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


I am in the process of buying a house two doors down from my in-laws
and thought it would be useful to be able to answer their phone from
my house and vice-versa.  I could easily string a four-pair wire
between the houses, possibly without even touching the house in
between (I need to check if the deed allows me to cross the backyard).

My question is whether this is safe?  I understand that the phone
company is supposed to use lightening arrestors at the building
entrance.  Do I need to?  Naturally, the phone wire is not the highest
point anywhere.

Does anyone know of a simple intercom that will run the 100 feet
between the houses?


Thanks,

Seth


[Moderator's Note: Since it is only a hundred feet, why not consider
burying the wire?  Stuff it through sections of conduit and bury the
conduit about three feet underground. That is more vandal proof than
overhead wire which beckons to passers-by, 'cut me, cut me'. The other
thing you could do is get them a cordless phone with a reasonable
range on it. Have the base installed permanently at their place and
you keep the handset at your place with its own permanent charger or
battery eliminator if you can find one that works.

Still a third method, of which this Moderator cannot give his
blessings but of which he informs you for educational reasons only is
to steal a couple of idle pairs from the telco if you can find them.
How do you find them?  In the big city, multiple-family dwellings
usually have a box in the basement where not only the phone lines for
the residents therein are demarked, but so are multiples from the
pairs of all the other dwelling places within a city block or two.

If a phreak were to install an extension phone from his neighbor's
abode to his own, he'd go to the neighbor's phone and put a sounder on
line.  He'd then go to the box in *his* basement and listen for his
sounder.  Hearing it, he'd jump that pair to an unused house pair on
his side and bring it upstairs. If he did not hear his sounder on any
of the pairs in his basement then he'd look for a pair in the
neighbor's basement that did NOT have dial tone on it, and put the
sounder on that pair. He would come back to his basement once again
and start listening on the pairs for that sounder. Finding it (quite
likely), he'd jump that pair to an unused house pair and bring it up
to his place. Then he would go back to the neighbor's basement and
jump the neighbor's house pair to the newly found unused pair in the
cable.  When he got back home, he'd expect to hear the neighbor's dial
tone on the newly connected house pair at his end.

Ah, but I hear you saying, "What if telco outside plant decides to use
that cable pair for someone else in the neighborhood; the guy climbs
the pole (or goes to a basement down the street or wherever) with his
work order in hand only to hear dial tone on that pair? What if a guy
in the CO does the work on that end and hears dial tone on that pair
before he has *his* dial tone on it?  Won't there be hell to pay?" No,
because telco's outside plant records are so bungled up and confused
that the CO guy and the installer will assume there's a mistake in the
records somewhere -- they'll just look for another pair for their
customer and change the records accordingly. It won't occur to them to
ask the Business Office or their own records clerk in the CO who is on
the mystery pair; or they'll assume the last guy out there forgot to
open a multiple somewhere, and rather than look for it the installer
will get the clerk in the CO to give him another pair instead.
Happens all the time that way. Of course, it is illegal to relieve
telco of cable pairs without telling them and offering to pay for it,
but it happens in the big city in old run down ghetto areas where a
shortage of pairs in the cable forces everyone's pair to wind up
multipled in everyone else's basement multi-line demark.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Sharon Crichton)
Subject: Phone Sex Reaches Out to Girl Scout Callers
Date: 20 Mar 1993 14:16:09 GMT
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Reply-To: [e-mail]


First heard this on the news this week. This came through on the UPI
wire and I thought readers would find it amusing.

Sharon

HEADLINE: Phone sex reaches out to Girl Scout callers

   Some callers who want to use an 800 number to reach the Girl
Scout's local office instead get to hear a seductive telephone sex
service message.

    The Girl Scouts' 800 number, which it used since 1984, was dropped
last year. But the listing remains in telephone books distributed last
month by Ameritech Publishing.

    An unidentified sex line snapped up the number, which spells out
800-BAD-GIRL.

    A voice greets callers with a "Hi lover. Call us love right
now ... for the wildest sex party ever."

    Callers are then told to call another 800 number and instructed to
leave their phone numbers for a return collect call.

    "We're not pleased at all," said Jane Crites, executive
director of the Applesee Ridge Girl Scout Council. "The message
you get is surely not reflective of the Girl Scout program."

    AT&T told Girl Scout officials said they would try to persuade the
sex-line operator to agree to place a block on the line on the number
in northwest Ohio.

    Callers from northwestern Ohio now get a recording stating that
the number was out of service in the 419 area code.

    Ana Gabriel, an AT&T spokeswoman who would not reveal the identity
of the sex-line operator, said the company could not force the
telephone sex line to make the change. She said AT&T has a policy of
waiting six months before re-assigning telephone numbers.

                          ----------

Sharon Crichton         Mead Data Central
[e-mail]    P.O. Box 933
uunet!meaddata!sharonc  Dayton, OH 45401
                        FAX: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #192
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14296;
          22 Mar 93 18:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13092
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 21 Mar 1993 03:49:09 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29108
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 21 Mar 1993 03:48:09 -0600
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1993 03:48:09 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #193

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 21 Mar 93 03:48:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 193

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    More on Steve Jackson Games Case Victory (EFFector via Rich Greenberg)
    Periodic Reminder of Dial Up Access to Archives (Mark Earle)
    Baby Bells Block Information Service Says TRI (Nigel Allen)
    Local Telco Requires Landlord's Contact ([e-mail])
    NT "Unity" Phone Manual Needed (Jack Powers)
    Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (Harold Hallikainen)
    AmeriVox vs. Orange Card (Howard Gayle)
    AT&T Counters The Orange Card (John R. Levine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 20 Mar 93 14:52:37 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: More on Steve Jakcson Games case victory.


Extracted from:
EFFector Online Volume 5 No. 4       3/19/1993       [e-mail]
A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation   ISSN 1062-9424

               STEVE JACKSON GAMES WINS LAWSUIT
                  AGAINST U.S. SECRET SERVICE

A games publisher has won a lawsuit against the U.S. Secret Service
and the federal government in a ground-breaking case involving
computer publications and electronic mail privacy.

In a decision announced in Austin, Texas, on March 12, Judge Sam
Sparks of the federal district court for the Western District of Texas
announced that the case of Steve Jackson Games et al. versus the U.S.
Secret Service and the United States Government has been decided for
the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs, which include Steve Jackson, the company he founded,
and three users of the company's bulletin board system (BBS), sued the
government on claims that their statutory rights to electronic mail
privacy had been violated when the BBS and other computers, disks and
printouts were seized by the Secret Service as part of a computer
crime investigation.  These rights are protected under the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), which extended most of the
protections of the federal Wiretap Act ("Title III") to electronic
mail.

Jackson and his company also claimed violations of the Privacy
Protection Act of 1980, a federal law designed to limit searches of
publishers in order to protect their First Amendment rights.

Mitch Kapor, founder and chairman of the board for the Electronic
Frontier Foundation, the public interest/civil liberties organization
that has underwritten and supported the case since it was filed in
1991, said he is pleased with the decision.  "This decision vindicates
our position that users of computer bulletin board systems are
engaging in Constitutionally protected speech," Kapor said.

"This decision shows that perseverance pays off," he added.  "We've
been at this for almost three years now, and we still don't know if
it's over -- the Justice Department might appeal it."  Nevertheless,
Kapor said he is optimistic about the case's ultimate outcome.

Judge Sparks awarded more than $50,000 in damages to Steve Jackson
Games, citing lost profits and violations of the Privacy Protection
Act of 1980.  In addition, the judge awarded each plaintiff $1,000
under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act for the Secret Service
seizure of their stored electronic mail.  The judge also stated that
plaintiffs would be reimbursed for their attorneys's fees.

The judge did not find that Secret Service agents had "intercepted"
the electronic communications that were captured when agents seized
the Illuminati BBS in an early morning raid in the spring of 1990 as
part of a computer crime investigation.  The judge did find, however,
that the ECPA had been violated by the agents's seizure of stored
electronic communications on the system.

The case was tried in Austin, Texas, by the Austin-based media law
firm George, Donaldson & Ford, with case assistance provided by the
Boston, Massachusetts, law firm of Silverglate & Good.

Pete Kennedy, the lawyer from George, Donaldson & Ford who litigated
the case, calls the decision "a solid first step toward recognizing
that computer communications should be as well-protected as telephone
communications."  Kennedy also said he believes the case has
particular significance for those who use computers to prepare and
distribute publications.  "There is a strong indication from the
judge's decision that the medium of publication is irrelevant," he
said, adding that "electronic publishers have the same protections
against law enforcement intrusions as traditional publishers like
newspapers and magazines.  All publishers that use computers should be
heartened by this decision.  It indicates that the works-in-progress
of all types of publications are protected under the Privacy
Protection Act.

"The case also demonstrates that there are limits on the kinds of
defenses law enforcement agents can use, Kennedy said, noting that
"the judge made it very clear that it is no excuse that the seizure of
draft material for publication held on a computer was incidental or
accidental."

Mike Godwin, an attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation who
has worked on the case since 1990, said he is pleased with the scope
of the decision.  "This case is a major step forward in protecting the
rights of those who use computers to send private mail to each other
or who use computers to create and disseminate publications."


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....

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

Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1993 21:33:19 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Mark Earle)
Subject: Periodic Reminder of Dial Up Access to Archives


Pat, just a once-in-a-while reminder, I've excerpted the files request
and telecom related list from my bbs.

January 17, 1993: Most of the files are back on line.

This system is available for file request 23 hours/day (all except Z1
mail hour).

Ye Mailroom [phone] Corpus Christi TX

P.O. Box 3456 Corpus Christi, TX 78463-3456

Note: files gives you the raw directory lists, and the files list with
descriptions. This should let you find the exact file name you want.

Files listed below should be available, but sometimes snafus happen!

The following magic file names work:

files -- This files list

fccscan -- Gets you fccscan.zip, the proposal that would
        limit sale of "cellular capable" radio receivers
Same file is requestable as fccscan.zip or fccscan.txt

fnews -- most recent Fido News, text (non compressed)
You are allowed 55 files/request. Mark Earle, 1:160/50.0
 ----- Files Listing -----
REQUEST  LST  All files available on this system
PKUNZIP  EXE  pkunzip 1.01 exe only
PKXA35A  EXE  pkxarc 3.5
PKZ101   EXE  pkunzip/zip/docs v1.01 used for all zips here
CIDCHIP  ZIP  Caller ID chip
EFF314   ZIP  EFF 3.14 (Electronic Freedom Foundation)
FLOOD358 ZIP  Problems during flooding
HR1674   ZIP  House Bill
HR3515   ZIP  House Bill
INETGATE ZIP  Internet to Fidonet Gateway info
MAILGUID ZIP  Mail from/to various networks
SINGASEN ZIP  Singapore censors
WHATSUP  ZIP  where to get what's up sat track software
----- Files Listing -----
ADAACT.ZIP    American Disability Act, telecom related
BANNED.ZIP    List of banned text, newsgroups, etc.
BOOKREV1.ZIP  Book Review of Early Telegraphers
CALLERID.ZIP  Caller ID review - by area, hardware, etc.
CONSTI.ZIP    Constitutional notes
CRACKDWN.ZIP  Review of crackdown - new book
CUD451.ZIP    Computer Underground Digest 4 51
CUD451.ZIP    through cud462 online  Use r cud45*.*
CUD501.ZIP    through cud520.ZIP
D13IG01.ZIP   Issues 01-156 are offline; leave logoff
D13IG01.ZIP    comment to the sysop if you need 'em
D13IG157.ZIP   Vol 13 156  through Vol 13 192 online
DFP1V5.ZIP    Digital Freedom Press 1 5
EFF289.ZIP    Electronic Freedom Foundation news day 289
EFF314.ZIP    Clinton's Plan for infrastructure
EFF314.ZIP    Electronic Freedom Foundation news day 314
EFF315A.ZIP   EFF news day 315
EFFC405.ZIP   Effector 4 05 major changes at EFF announced
EFFOP.ZIP     EFF Open Platform proposal
GOPHER.ZIP    Cable backhoe fades? How about gophers?
GOPHER.ZIP    Informative article on cable protection
IRIDIUM.ZIP   As of Jan 29, new $$ for this project
NEIDORF.ZIP   Craig's side of story, as Steve Jackson
NEIDORF.ZIP    games goes to trial in Austin this week
NEWAC210.ZIP  Info on ac 210 split from 512 (TX)
NYSNOW.ZIP    Snow storm effects on telecom
RISK1439.ZIP  Risks of Computing newsletter
RISK1439.ZIP  Use r risk*.* to see current issues
RISK1439.ZIP  avail. Through 14-41 online now
RFLINK.ZIP    Reference rf lan solutions
SPRNTOUT.ZIP  Sprint outage day 289 (October 14/15 1992)
TELLLOSE.ZIP  Telecom losers and winners
USLSUIT.ZIP   Unix System Labs suit re: BSD/AT&T
WJCALGOR.ZIP  Text of Clinton and Gore remarks at SVGraphics


[Moderator's Note: Mark Earle is a nice man for having made the Telecom
Archives and selected issues of TELECOM Digest available via dial-up
for the folks without ftp access. His phone number once again is:
         Ye Mailroom [phone] Corpus Christi TX        PAT]

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: Baby Bells Block Information Service Says Tax Reduction Institute
Organization: Echo Beach


Here is a press release from the Tax Reduction Institute.  I have no
affiliation with TRI, and I am not clear whether TRI is a for-profit
company or not.

In general, I don't think that telephone companies should bill for
information providers.

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

Baby Bells Block Information Service Says Tax Reduction Institute
To: Business Desk
Contact: Mary Mack of the Tax Reduction Institute, 800-874-1040

   ROCKVILLE, Md., March 19 -- Three major Local Exchange Carriers
(LEC) revealed Thursday that they will no longer bill for information
providers.

   U.S. West, PacWest and Southwestern Bell have turned their back on
this multi-million dollar industry, according to the Tax Reduction
Institute (TRI).  By doing so the Baby Bells effectively block
legitimate information services to their customers, the institute
said.

   Washington, D.C.-based organizations such as TRI will no longer be
able to provide 24-hour fax back on demand services to millions of
Americans.  When informed of the decision the Tax Reduction Institute
was just hours from launching a major new product for busy taxpayers.
TRI was scheduled to start providing tax forms and tax reducing
information to the public via fax back convenience.

   Mark Mack, director of MIS for this tax research and education
organization said, "This action by the Baby Bells makes it more
difficult for people to receive much needed information in a timely
fashion."  The service is geared to those who need information fast.
"For instance," asked Mack, "it's late at night, the library is
closed, the post office is out of forms or too far away.  Where can
you get the forms you need?  Now the Baby Bells are stopping you from
receiving the forms you need when you need them."

   Tax Reduction Institute, established in 1979, produces one-day tax
reduction workshops across the country and can be reached at 1-800-TRI-1040.

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

Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario   416-629-7000/629-7044


[Moderator's Note: Of course, the Information Providers can always use
other telcos who *will* handle the billing, ie Integretel. Although
the telcos named may be unwilling to originate the billing themselves,
they will still handle it when it is passed to them by other carriers,
same as in the past. The IP's can also use credit cards can't they?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Local Telco Requires Landlord's Contact
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Anonymous contact service
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1993 00:03:31 GMT


Are local telephone companies allowed to require landlord's contact at
subscription time?

A few days ago I called New England Telephone to have the telephone
connected in Cambridge. The first think the operator asked was the
Social Security number; I said it wasn't related to the matter and she
gave up. After providing name and address (the employer's data were
not related, but I gave them anyway), she demanded the landlord's
phone. Asked for the reason, the operator said they have to check the
name is on the lease, otherwise it cannot be done.  After further
pressure, she admitted there would be no problem if it's ok with the
landlord, but his phone number must be provided.  (The landlord, by
the way, does not live in the apartment.)  We reached an impasse.

I don't have much experience on this subject, but in the two previous
times (Princeton, NJ and Arlington, MA) this demand never emerged.
Here no one wants to cheat or steal anything. I just don't see the
reason for these restrictions (real or fictitious). I'm willing to pay
a security deposit if that is the trouble-point.

I'm grateful for any help (and please forgive me for the anonymity).
Replies can be posted or e-mailed. Many thanks.


[Moderator's Note: Why do you feel you have to speak anonymously here?
This is not alt.phone.sex.weirdness.  Usually I just toss anonymous
messages out -- unless they say something really juicy I can develop
on my own :) -- without using them in the Digest, but I thought I
would make an exception for you.

Telco is NOT required to provide service to you until/unless you have
demonstrated an ability and willingness to pay for it.  Telco's
services come to you as an extension of credit. As such, credit
grantors may set any standards they like relating to an extension of
credit provided the factors they use are not discriminatory under
applicable federal or local laws, i.e, one standard for white people,
another for blacks, etc.  Telco is entitled to be assured of payment.
They are entitled to find out who is in control of the premises where
the phone is to be located.  It is not uncommon for someone to move
out stiffing telco, leaving the new tenant in the apartment to take
the heat. Sometimes the deadbeat did not move out at all ... they just
claim they did and ask for service under a new name.  Telco is
entitled to pull a credit bureau file on you if they wish to do so,
and the Social Security number is the accepted identifier for this
purpose.  So yes, your SSN was 'relevant'. Your employment data was
also 'relevant' since it demonstrates your ability to pay for the
service if not necessarily your willingness to do so. Your landlord's
name is 'relevant' since s/he will confirm or deny that you (and the
others there 'who do not want to cheat or steal anything') are the
same bunch that lived there last month or last year and left telco
holding the bag, if that happened. If you do not like questions when
applying for telephone credit, then use the pay station. It doesn't
ask any questions.  Next time you write, please sign your name.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Powers)
Subject: NT "Unity" Phone Manual Needed
Organization: Netsys Inc.
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1993 05:41:56 GMT


A nonprofit organization I work with was recently given several
Northern Telecom multibutton phones with no documentation.  We are
looking for a user's manual or other information on how to use them.
The front panel has the name "Unity" stamped in it, and the bottom
bears the following sticker:

                         NT 4L15AC-35
                           RLS-D15
                            07/89

They work fine as two-line phones with hold on the cable supplied, but
I'm sure they are good for more (four lines?) than that.  There are
two modular connectors on the bottom, one of which contains the plug
for the supplied two-line cord and wall-plug power supply.  There are
two rows of DIP switches on the bottom, one of which has four and the
other has three (larger) levers.

If you have any info to share on this model, it would be most welcome.


Jack Powers   phone/FAX [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1993 07:08:39 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Edward D
Schulz [phone]) writes:

>> I found a pay phone in Texas that would not accept 10-ATT-0 to get me
>> on the AT&T network.  Isn't that illegal?  If so, where should I
>> report this?

> AT&T wants to know.  Please call 1-800-742-6260 to report the pay phone
> that blocks 10-288-0.  Thanks.

    Last week I was on my way to dinner (Taco Bell!) when my pager
went off.  There was a COCOT in front of Taco Bell, but it kept saying
the 950 number to get to my long distance company was "not a valid
number".  I finally got an operator (a Pacific Bell operator) to
connect me with my LD service, but then the keypad on the phone was
dead.  So, can the COCOT keep me from using my LD service if I access
it with 950?


Thanks!

Harold


[Moderator's Note: Interesting you mention it. Saturday night I had
just finished my Number 2 Value Meal and was checking out the COCOT in
that particular McDonalds. No 10xxx access. Touch tone pad goes dead
after about eleven digits. Zero plussing produces something called the
Link Long Distance Network whose operator claims she has no way to
splash me over to AT&T. The number on the phone to call for complaints
(dial 211) resulted in the phone giving me some back-talk: "that is
not a valid number." When I got back to my office, I called Sheffield
Communications, Westchester, IL (the proprietor of the phone) and left
a piece of my mind on his voicemail.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 20 Mar 93 07:29:51 PST
From: [e-mail] (Howard Gayle)
Subject: AmeriVox vs. Orange Card
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Here's a comparison of AmeriVox with the Orange Calling Card.
Both allow calling card calls with no surcharge.

                              AmeriVox       Orange      Notes

rate to US except California  .249           .25         1
rate to California            .189           .25
rate to Canada                .399           -           2
discounts start after         $500           -
billing increment             1 minute       6 seconds
answer supervision            no             ?           3
application fee               -              $10
minimum prepayment            $20            -
minimum reorder amount        $20            -           4
customer service open         5-24 Pacific   ?           5

1) Rates are in dollars per minute.  Orange allows calls to the
   entire U.S.; AmeriVox does not allow calls to Alaska.

2) AmeriVox plans service to Japan, England, Germany, and
   Mexico sometime in 1993.

3) The AmeriVox customer service person I spoke with said
   billing starts after six rings.

4) AmeriVox customers can reorder using VISA or MasterCard by
   calling customer service.  $20 automatic reorders from credit
   cards can also be set up; they happen whenever the
   account balance reaches $10.  They also accept reorders by
   check or money order.

5) The instructions I got with the AmeriVox card say "If you
   need assistance in California, please call 1-800-xxx-xxxx,
   wait for the dial tone and hit `0.'"  This doesn't work.
   The correct customer service number is below.

The choice between these cards depends on how much you expect
to use it, where you call, your time preference for money, how
much you value your privacy, whether you expect these companies
to survive, your security concerns, and other factors.  Because
Orange Communications is extending credit, their application
includes questions like social security number, credit card
number, and phone number.  AmeriVox justs wants a check or
money order for $20.  You could probably buy an AmeriVox card
anonymously, like an AT&T Teleticket.

The AmeriVox California rate is actually lower than the daytime
Pacific Bell intra-LATA rate for many calls.

AmeriVox cards are sold through a multi-level marketing scheme.
I have no financial interest in either AmeriVox or Orange.  I
bought a $20 AmeriVox card from:

   Ivo G. Kucera
   Director of Finance
   World Telecom Group, Inc.
   2015 Landings Drive
   Mountain View, CA 94043
   415 694 4977  Fax [phone]

The address for AmeriVox is:
   624 South Grand Ave., Suite 801
   Los Angeles, CA 90017
   800 827 6299 (customer service)

The address for Orange Communications, Inc. is
   Box 345
   Spring Park, MN 55384
   612 471 0223  Fax [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Orange Card does supervise calls and they plan to
expand to Canada and other international points (when called from the
USA) within several months. You can charge all calls to your VISA/MC
now if desired. Customer service is available 24 hours. Of course
since residuals from the Orange Card are used to support this Digest,
I obviously prefer to see contact with them made through my office,
with my brochure and my indicia on said brochure if its all the same to
you. :) The two cards are competitive; not everyone wants to pay in
advance; not everyone wants open account credit.  PAT]

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

Subject: AT&T Counters the Orange Card
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 93 12:57:12 EST
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


Well, sort of.  AT&T sent me a flyer for their new TeleTravel service.
You sign up, they give you an account number.  Then you call an 800
access number, enter your account number, and make your calls.  There
is a $10/yr annual fee, waived if your bill for the first two months
is at least $40.  What they offer:

Domestic calls        32 cents/min, 30 second minimum, 6 second increments
International calls    comparable rates, not detailed in the flyer
Three-way calling    no surcharge beyond paying for the two calls
Speed calling        up to 10 user-programmable numbers, no extra charge
Sequential calling    no extra charge (wow!)
Sports or weather info    95 cents/minute
Flight info        75 cents/minute
Directory assistance    75 cents/minute

Outgoing voice messages    $1.75/msg domestic, more international

Voice mail        (optional) $15/month plus 39 cents/minute
Language Line (foreign language interpreters) $2.75/minute

You can assign charge codes per call which are itemized on the
invoice.

If you mostly want to make phone calls, it's considerably more
expensive than the Orange Card, though less than calling cards for
short calls.  (And with any luck, the 800 number will remain unknown
to rip-off hotel PBXes for a while.)  The other services are all
already available separately but I suppose it's nice to provide and
bill them together.

To sign up, call 800-544-2222, x64.  For rate info call 800-545-8210
or 904-636-2737 collect from outside North America.


Regards,

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


[Moderators's Note: It seems AT&T is making up for the no-surcharge by
having higher per-minute rates. The extra features are nice if you are
going to use them, but the Orange Card appeal I think is to people who
want to make lots of short calls from payphones during daytime business
hours. I've said before, there are many plans out there with only a
few differences between them and a bottom line which comes out almost
equal unless you are a very large user where every penny counts. If it
really matters, use the telecom services best suited for your applica-
tion. If 'all things are equal' or almost so, then support the Orange
Card and 1+ dialing plan I offer since the residuals offset my expenses
in publishing TELECOM Digest; a painless and transparent way for readers
to help.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #193
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20643;
          22 Mar 93 21:41 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19363
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 22 Mar 1993 19:27:33 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13422
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 22 Mar 1993 19:27:00 -0600
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 19:27:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #194

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 22 Mar 93 19:27:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 194

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia: System Crash Over Weekend (TELECOM Moderator)
    Difference Between ISDN PRI and INS1500? (Douglas A. Chan)
    ATM Network Downed by Storm (NY Times via John Schmidt)
    Old Telephone Numbers (John Higdon)
    Cellphone Roaming Problems "... Denied Due to Fraud." (Phydeaux)
    Liechtenstein to Have Internet Connectivity (Rick Broadhead)
    EDI Help Please (Dave Phelps)
    More Fun From the Massachusetts Legislature (Scott D. Fybush)
    Answering Machines (Lou Kates)
    COCOT Doesn't Know Local Number Prefix (Jonathan Bradshaw)
    OKI 1150 Problems (Monty Solomon)
    Voice Coding (was Internet Radio Program) (Arthur Marsh)
    SLC-120 -> SLC-240 (Yee-Lee Shyong)
    UK Telecom History: Why Hull? (Aled Morris)
    At AlGoreTel, We Hear You (was People, Not Profits) (Robert L. McMillin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 18:01:48 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: System Crash Over Weekend


The delta.eecs.nwu.edu machine crashed early Sunday morning due to a
failure in part of the hardware. The system was down from early Sunday
morning until late afternoon Monday. Incoming mail simply stacked up
at sites all over waiting until things came back on line. The combin-
ation of not issuing any Digests during the day/evening Sunday along
with the big backlog of mail arriving now means many of the REply
messages flooding in will be delayed in getting out or may have to be
scrapped if I can't catch up.  Your understanding is appreciated.


Patrick Townson
TELECOM Moderator

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

From: [e-mail] (Douglas A Chan)
Subject: Difference Between ISDN PRI and INS1500?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 23:54:06 GMT


I'm going to be testing some ISDN PRI equipment soon but they'll be
eventually installed in Japan.  The equivalent ISDN PRI service there
is NTT's INS1500 service.

What are the basic differences between INS1500 and ISDN PRI under an
AT&T or Northern Telecom switch?

Can I assume that equipment which functions correctly under either
AT&T/Northern Telecom will work with NTT's INS1500 service?  (Yes, the
equipment does have JATE approval but I'm not sure if that means
anything in terms of overall interoperability ...)


Doug    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 04:13:16 EST
From: JOHN SCHMIDT <[e-mail]>
Subject: ATM Network Downed by Storm - NYTimes Article


Front-page headline in today's {NY Times} (not to be confused with the
DC paper of the same name ;-) ) "Teller Machines Are a Casualty Of the
Blizzard"

(Datelined Dallas, Mar 19)

To summarize the lengthy article -- "After a week of dealing with the
nation's largest disruption of automated teller machines, bankers are
still struggling to find alternative service for the one million card
holders affected.

The collapse of the roof of a computer center in Clifton, N.J., under
heavy snow, also brought down 5,000 A.T.M.'s nationwide, causing
particularly serious problems in California and Illinois.

Backup site was in North Bergen, N.J. but center was already filled
with other computer operators who had been displaced from the World
Trade Center by last month's bombing.

Discussion of how much disruption will cost (big bucks) and who will
pay ...

Description of some of emergency steps taken, and potential for fraud
because of incomplete database information ...

Site was run by EDS, a Dallas based subsidiary of General Motors, and
served 12 ATM networks, four owned by EDS, and eight owned by others ...

Backup contract was with Comdisco, who also backed up many WTC
businesses.

EDS found an alternative site in Rochelle Park, NJ, and has been
working non-stop to move equipment.  Entire system is yet to be up and
running.  It could have been up in a day if it had been able to use
Comdisco.

6% of the nations 87,000 ATM's were affected.  Better backups needed.

It's estimated that there are 125 to 175 ATM networks in the US, about
600 million transactions per month.  Average machine handles 6800
transactions per month.

This is the first disruption of this magnitude. (Further discussion
of consequences and costs, and steps taken by banks affected ).

1800 ATM's down in California, 90% of ATMs in rural Illinois down.

(Picture of remains of building being torn down).

                   ==============================

All in all an interesting article with a better than average
discussion of a technical subject.


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]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 02:02 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Old Telephone Numbers


The transmitter building for Radio KEEN (San Jose) is about to be
demolished. In preparation for this, I was going through it making
sure that nothing of value remained within. There were files
containing correspondence dating back to the beginnings of the station
in the 1940s.

One thing that caught my eye was a letter from "George P. Adair, Radio
Engineering Consultants" at 1833 M Street, N. W., Washington 6, DC. On
the letterhead were telephone numbers: EXecutive 1230 and EXecutive
5851. We are talking Washington, DC here -- the nation's capitol. When
did that city get real, seven-digit numbers (or at least EXchange + 5
digits)? I know that during that time, my family had a "voice
recognition" telephone wherein you picked up the telephone and
actually spoke the number and the call was placed.

The date on the letter was June 15, 1948.


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


[Moderator's Note: The phone number at the White House for about sixty
years was Executive 1414. It was EXecutive-3-1414 during the 1950's
and 1960's. It became 456-1414 when the White House phone system was
upgraded during the middle 1960's and the White House was put on its own
prefix. When Theodore Roosevelt was president, his twelve year old son
Teddy would attend the switchboard when the operator went out for her
lunch or tea break.

I think Washington, DC had manual service until sometime after the
Second World War, the same as Chicago. It was probably already
'EXEcutive' or 'EXecutive-3' by the time the letter you refer to was
written; the guy was probably using up his old letterhead. It was
commonly understood in those days that the conversion from manual to
dial simply meant dialing the first three letters of the old exchange
name plus the existing four digit suffix with zeros prepended to the
suffix if necessary to 'fill out' the suffix to four places; i.e.
previously asking for "[Exchange] 24" now meant dialing '[EXChange]-0024'.

So people were in no rush to buy new letterhead and business cards. A
more recent example was the conversion to all-number calling back in
the early 1960's; letterheads, business cards and the telephone books
themselves had a mix of both styles for several years.  IBT started
ANC in 1961 I think; all new subscribers (or those who changed
numbers) from then forward were in the book as 7D; the ones who had
service prior to that (or had not changed numbers) stayed in the book
as 2L-5D until they were gone. I think I saw a few in the book the old
way until around 1980. Ditto letterheads, etc.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 11:51:49 PST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Cellphone Roaming Problems "...Denied Due to Fraud."


Hi!

For most of last year I was living in Chicago during the week and New
Jersey on weekends.  I had two NAMs programmed in my cellphone and so
I had home service in both areas.  Back in December I finally moved
back to New Jersey (Nynex Mobile) full time, so I cancelled my service
(Cellular One) in Chicago.

Well, everything was fine for a while.  I travel quite often, and
never have any problems using my phone.  I travel to San Francisco
quite often, and use my phone as a roamer when I'm there.

Last Friday, while in the San Francisco area, I tried to place a call
and received a message from GTE Mobilnet that I needed to contact
their customer service desk.  That's when the fun began.  This call
attempt was my second of the trip.  The first one, earlier that day,
had gone through without any problem.

GTE's service representative told me my call was not put through and
their computer showed the reason as "Denied due to fraud."  When I
complained that this was not an attempt at a fraudulent call, they
forwarded me to a technician who looked into the matter further.
Apparantly, Cell One in Chicago had put my ESN onto a list of stolen
phones.  So, GTE switched me off to the customer service people in
Chicago ...  but they gave me Ameritech in Chicago by mistake.

The Ameritech people listened to my story and handed me off to
Cellular One.  The Cell One representative could not figure out what
was going on and handed me off to her supervisor.  They made me tell
them the whole story (fourth or fifth time now!) and then agreed to
update the fraudulent ESN database so I could make calls.  Apparently
the update is accomplished within about 15 minutes!  All this from my
dialing *611 from my car in the parking lot of a winery somewhere in
the Napa Valley!  35 minutes later I was very happy to hear *611 is a
free call!

The Cell One person told me, that I'd cancelled my service with Cell
One on 12/23 and that on 12/24 an attempt at a call was made using the
phone.  Well, on 12/24 When I was changing planes at O'Hare I
reprogrammed my telephone so the second NAM no longer worked.  Before
I did this my phone thought I still had home service in Chicago when I
was there.  The Cell One switch detected my telephone (I may have
pressed 'send', I don't know) and logged my telephone's ESN as a
fraudulent user.

Now I understand why the Cellphone companies say they are losing so
much money due to fraudulent use.  They have no clue what is going on.
>From the time they 'marked' my phone as being 'stolen' I used it in
about five different cities as a roamer.  In San Francisco, I was on
my *third* trip before they 'caught' me and refused to let me use my
phone.  I was in Chicago the week before, and had used my phone with
Ameritech with no problem.

I must say that this is the first time I've experienced *competence*
from any of the above-mentioned cellular carriers.  Maybe my calls
were directed somewhere other than just the normal customer service
drones.  In any event, I was transferred four or five times and nobody
managed to hang up on me (Imagine trying to reconnect with the right
person!) and they actually got my phone back up and running in about
15 minutes!


-- *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
h:861 Washington Avenue Westwood NJ 07675 201-376-5766   ICBM: 40.71N   73.73W
w: reb  Ingres   Park 80 West Plaza I    Saddle Brook, NJ 07662   201-587-1400

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 13:35:21 EST
Reply-To: Rick Broadhead <[e-mail]>
From: Rick Broadhead <[e-mail]>
Subject: Liechtenstein to Have Internet Connectivity


Breaking News....

Another country will be establishing a connection to the Internet in
the coming weeks.  The Principality of Liechtenstein, a tiny
landlocked nation in central Europe, will be connecting its only
technical school (Liechtensteinische Ingenieurschule) to the Internet
via a high-speed leased line to the Swiss Academic and Research
Network (SWITCH).  Liechtenstein is one of the last independent
nations in Europe to connect to the Internet.


Rick Broadhead   Faculty of Administrative Studies

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 17:05 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: EDI Help Please...


Hello all,

I wonder if anyone could help me on the subject of EDI. My name is
David Phelps and I am studying for a degree in England and I am
covering the subject of EDI for a project. There are a number of
questions that I would like to ask, both on the technical side
(standards, services provided, X400 etc) and the benefits of EDI.

If anyone has any experience at all with EDI, I would greatly
appreciate it if I could mail you a few questions.


Thanks in advance,

Dave Phelps    ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott D Fybush)
Subject: More Fun From the Massachusetts Legislature
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 22:16:46 GMT


Another report from Boston's WBZ radio from this past week:

A Massachusetts legislator has filed a bill regulating "voice mail"
(sic!) systems in the state.  Under his bill, any company with more
than 30 employees that uses a "voice mail" system (we all know he
means automated attendant ... :-) must have a live operator available.

Aside from the confused terminology, this bill seems a bit pointless.
Can anyone think of companies with more than 30 employees that DON'T
have a human attendant available during business hours?  I can't.

Disclaimer: I work for WBZ ... but again, this wasn't my story.


Scott Fybush -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lou Kates)
Subject: Answering Machines
Organization: Teleride Sage Ltd., (Waterloo)
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 11:46:42 -0500


Could anyone recommend an answering machine?  Are there any answering
machines out yet that support Caller ID?


Lou Kates, [e-mail]

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

From: Jonathan Bradshaw <[e-mail]>
Subject: COCOT Doesn't Know Local Number Prefix
Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 20:14:01 GMT


I was out last week in South Bend, Indiana and needed to call into
WNDU.  There are two new prefixes in South Bend for Notre Dame (and
WNDU). Replacing the old 239 and 282 are now 631 and 634.
Unfortunatly, the COCOT had not been updated and told me after the
first two digits it was not a valid number. I called repair and
informed them of the problem.  Thankfully WNDU had left a few 239
numbers forwarding to 631 so I could complete my call anyway. However:

1. Is there anyway around this problem? (Apart from finding another phone)
   I gave up and used an old 239 forwarding number but since it was a
   local call, I couldn't use AT&T etc. and wasn't willing to pay more
   than 25 cents. I think the answer is NO but ...

2. How do these phone know the local prefixes? Is it a central database,
   or one per phone and how do they get updated?

3. Do they have any legal responsiblity to allow all local prefixes to
   work?

Thanks.


 Jonathan Bradshaw | [e-mail] | PGP Key Available On Request
 Packet: n9oxe@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na | Prodigy: XMSN02B | (Os/2)(DOS)(Linux)
 WNDU-AM/FM/TV South Bend, IN | Disclaimer "My opinions are not my employers"

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 14:43:03 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: OKI 1150 Problems

I
 recently purchased a new OKI 1150 cellular phone and have observed
some problems with it.  I was wondering if anyone here has also
experienced any of these problems.

The LCD display appears to have incorrect polarization and cannot be
read if I am wearing polarized sunglasses.  I have to rotate the phone
90 degrees to read the display.  I don't have a problem viewing any
other LCD device including an older OKI phone.

The one minute alert timer only works for the first minute.  It
doesn't beep at all after first beep at 45 seconds.

When the phone is installed in the deluxe car kit, the first keypress
to dial a number doesn't beep whereas the rest of the keypresses do
beep.

The speaker volume control in the deluxe car kit doesn't override the
earpiece volume setting.

Please send any comments about the OKI 1150 to me and I will summarize
for the group if there is any interest.


Thanks,

Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

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

Date: 22 Mar 1993 22:48:06 +1000
From: [e-mail] (Arthur Marsh)
Subject: Voice Coding [was Internet Radio Program]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Camelot Swamp bulletin board, Hawthorndene Sth Australia


On Mon 08 Mar at 16:09 Marc T. Kaufman wrote:

> The rate is 0.5MB per minute, or 64KBPS, which is just straight
> audio. I expect that it would be possible to easily get another factor
> of 2 by delta coding, 3-4 bit cvsd.  If you don't mind compute cycles,
> and you are willing to restrict the information to speech (not music),
> a Linear Predictive Coding system can further reduce the required bit
> rate to about 2.4KBPS, which would bring a 30 minute interview down to
> about 4 MB.

To my disappointment (as a modem user on international lines with no
current cost-effective alternative), I've found out that AOTC uses 32
kbps ADPCM encoding on international voice circuits (CCITT G.763)
during periods of peak demand, as opposed to normal 64 kbps PCM.

New to me today was the availability of CCITT Recommendation G.728
(Sep 1992), coding of speech at 16 kbit/s using low-delay code excited
linear prediction.


Arthur

 * Origin: Camelot Swamp MJCNA, Hawthorndene, Sth Australia (8:7000/8)
|Camelot Swamp bbs, data: [phone] reply to [e-mail]|

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 16:49:12 CST
From: [e-mail] (Yee-Lee Shyong)
Subject: SLC-120 -> SLC-240


I heard somebody said that the new version of SLC-120, SLC-240,
already available. And, they share the same channel bank and cabinet,
just expand the two-line/card into a four-line/vard. Can anybody out
there tell me details?


Thanks!

Yee Lee Shyong

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

From: [e-mail] (Aled Morris)
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 11:38:27 -0800
Subject: UK Telecom History: Why Hull?


Regarding UK telecom history, can anyone explain _why_ Hull has
traditionally had their own telephone company?  How did it come about?
Who carries calls from Hull to the rest of the UK?  What about inter-
national calls?

I'm sure there must be some interesting story here.


Aled

[e-mail]    Network Computing Devices Inc.
[phone]    350 North Bernardo Avenue, Mountain View, CA 94043

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 06:39:53 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: At AlGoreTel, We Hear You (was: People, Not Profits)


Alan T. Furman writes that according to a news release from the
(Bangalore, India) {Deccan Herald}, the Indian government plans to
reduce "the waiting period for for [new?] telephones from about 15
years to two years."  Al Gore, are you listening?

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #194
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23802;
          22 Mar 93 22:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20682
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 22 Mar 1993 20:21:37 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21145
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 22 Mar 1993 20:21:06 -0600
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 20:21:06 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #195

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 22 Mar 93 20:21:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 195

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Discussion of Electronic Correspondence with Clinton Admin (Diana Mostowfi)
    Wanted: Telecom Industry Information/Projections (Stephen Balbach)
    Cellular Conference Announcements Wanted (Leskinen Tom)
    Signs of Desperation? (Jon Sreekanth)
    Answering Machine Features (Les Bartel)
    Automatic Gain Control on Voice Calls? (Mike Whitaker)
    Looking For Tellabs Phone Number (John V. Jaskolski)
    CNID in St. Louis, MO ([e-mail])
    Faculty Position (Social Science) at BGSU (Bruce Klopfenstein)
    Reverse Engineering Tools, Information Wanted (Harald Vogt)
    Multiple T1s to HSSI Mux (Anthony J. Lisotta)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Diana Mostowfi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Discussion of Electronic Correspondence With Clinton Admin
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 02:12:53 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois


I am working on a research project regarding the discussion of
Electronic Correspondence with the Clinton Administration.  I thought
it would be beneficial to implement both a Governmental On-Line
Informational Bulletin Board and a Public Response Board.  Please read
the following information on these two topics and respond accordingly
keeping in mind aspects of cost of implementation, feasability,
standardization, and accessability.  Please e-mail me your comments,
opinions, and any suggestions this proposal may have elicited.  Thank
you!
                         ----------

     The forefathers of this great nation intended the United States
government to be one of the people, for the people, and by the people.
However, this idealistic notion has rarely been seen as a reality.
One goal of the Clinton administration is to bring the government off
its pedestal and make it see eye to eye with the people.  Our plan of
a Governmental On-Line Information Bulletin Board takes gallant
strides towards reaching this goal.

     The Governmental On-Line Informational Bulletin Board would provide
a totally candid means of revealing what is behind governmental curtains.
 On this customized software program, users simply choose from several
folders (much like Nuntius) that contain itemized information ranging
from campaign news, voting records, financial contributions from
political action committees, and committee assignments for incumbents.
For example, if someone questioned whether Sen.  Kennedy was opposed
to the banning of gays in the military, he/she would access the folder
under "Congressional Voting Records."  Or, if you were planning to
lobby for the control on handguns and wanted to know what committee to
direct your efforts towards, you would access the folder called
"Committee Assignments."

    Not only does this plan confront the problem of trying to make the
government more accessible to the people, but we hope that the
governmental information board will ultimately cut down on the
overload of messages through the COMPUSERVE account that Jock Gill
(director of electronic publishing and public access by e-mail for the
Clinton Administration) mentioned.  This informational bulletin board
is in some means a "first line of defense" in that it will answer
questions before they are even asked.

     The Public Response Board is going to be similar to the current
Nuntius bulletin board in use today.  Instead of a variety of topics, the
Public Response Board will contain specific topics of the government.
Provided for the public, there will be folders such as employment
figures, the budget, the deficit, etc., with which the public will be
able to open and post suggestions.  A new feature added on to this system
is G.A.I.S. (Government Access Information System).

This system will be comparable to the current W.A.I.S. system.  If the
public is interested in a specific topic, before they post a message,
all they need to do is type in a key phrase.  Any information
pertaining the phrase will come up on the screen.  Also, if the person
is not satisfied, the G.A.I.S. system will tell them where to look in
Governmental On-Line Information Bulletin Board.  Furthermore , if
what the person wants to know is not available, he/she can post an
article on a new thread on the Public Response Board.  Once a new
thread is posted, an immediate response from the White House is
issued.

All the response will say is, "Thank you for your suggestion and
please view the Governmental On-Line Information Bulletin Board in the
near future."  The new thread is immediately transmitted to the White
House's bulletin board.  With all of the options available for the
public, this will, with out a doubt, help lower the thousands of
messages the White House receives each day.

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

From: [e-mail] (stephen balbach)
Subject: Wanted: Telecom Industry Information/Projections
Date: 19 Mar 1993 03:25:37 -0500
Organization: Taylor Balbach Software, Columbia, MD USA


I am preparing a business proposal and need a good factual source on
the telecommunications industry, specifically telecom services like
Compuserve and Genie.  I am looking for growth rates (projected and
real), size in dollars and heads and anything that can help persuade
that the indusrty is real, alive and growing.  Please point me to
sources or actual data, thanks,


Stephen

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

From: [e-mail] (Leskinen Tom)
Subject: Cellular Conference Announcements Wanted
Organization: Tampere University of Technology
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 11:40:40 GMT


Where can I find calls for papers/announcements concerning cellular
mobile radio conferences or other telecommunication conferences?

Please, mail me some announcements or pointers to them if you have
any.

Thanks in advance!


Tom Leskinen   | HC309       | Tampere University of Technology
[e-mail]  | 931-161889  | Signal Processing laboratory


[Moderator's Note: Well, occasionally we have such announcements here
when people send them in.  You might check the archives over the past
two or three months for announcements of several planned for coming
months.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 08:51:31 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth)
Subject: Signs of Desperation?


I subscribe to {Telephony Magazine}, and my sub is up for renewal, and
though I've been meaning to do it, I haven't gotten around to it yet.
I got this brightly colored envelope with what seemed like a survey:

"Every week, Telephony brings you the latests news in the telecom
industry. To continue to deliver this exclusive coverage, current
knowledge about our readers is required. Please take a few moments to
fill in ALL the questions below, sign and date this form, and note any
address corrections. Remember, this is to update our subscriber
records. It is not a request for money. Thank you for your time."

The very first question it asks is :

1. Please continue my subscription to Telephony        Yes    No
Signature required_________________________________

Hmmmm.


Jon Sreekanth

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


[Moderator's Note: {Telephony} is a very old -- fifty years? --
publication. It was the original magazine about the industry, and the
only magazine for many years. I always thought it was rather dry and
technical compared to the newer publications in recent years. I'm sure
the competition has hurt the circulation badly at {Telephony} over the
past decade. There was a time when that magazine would not allow *just
anyone* to subscribe: they demanded proof you were employed by the
Bell System or one of the independent telcos. They published a few
articles of mine several years ago on my constant theme with
variations: complaints about divestiture.  Editorially at that time
(early 1980's) they did not like it either.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Les Bartel)
Subject: Answering Machine Features
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Intergraph Corporation
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:46:01 GMT


I am surprised that the subject of answering machines doesn't come up
more often on this group.  I really expected to find a FAQ on them in
the archives ... but since I didn't, here goes:

I am in the market for an answering machine, and would like the
opinions of those in the telecom group on what constitutes a
reasonable answering machine.  I am interested in a low-cost solution,
but a general discussion of features and good/bad/mediocre brands is
welcome.


Les Bartel   Intergraph Corporation    Electronics Division
[e-mail]  or [e-mail]   [phone]

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

Date: 22 Mar 1993 04:53:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike Whitaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Automatic Gain Control on Voice Calls?


I was calling (from Cambridge, UK) a friend in the Twin Cities [(612)
551 XXXX] the other evening about 10.30 GMT. It was quite a noisy
line, and I could quite distinctly, as could she, hear the background
hiss level *rise* when neither of us was talking.

Purely out of curiosity -- is there some kind of automatic gain
control or signal compression (which is what this sounded like)
normally put on phone lines? I can't recall ever having heard this
effect before ... [one of my hobbies is sound recording and I'm used
to listening for such things].


Mike Whitaker +44-223 |  [e-mail] (preferred)
Shape Data/EDS 316673 |  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John V. Jaskolski)
Subject: Looking For Tellabs Phone Number
Organization: jvj
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 19:44:07 GMT


Does anyone know Tellabs telephone number?


Thank you very much,

mm

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: CNID in St. Louis, MO
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 13:40:30 CST


According to Friday's {St. Louis Post-Dispatch}, Southwestern Bell
will begin offering CNID (Caller ID) in parts of Missouri later this
year.  Joplin, MO is supposed to be first, beginning in June, and St.
Louis will get it in July.

CLASS Features (other than CNID) have been available in the St. Louis
area for quite a while now.

Per Call Blocking will be available, by default, to everyone, for
free.  Per Line blocking will be available ONLY to police and domestic
violence agencies (presumable for free).  No one else can get per line
blocking (even if your number is unlisted).

The cost will be $6.50 for residential customers, and $8.50 for
businesses.

The PSC voted 3-2 that the service "did not violate the public
interest", inspite of the objections of some interest groups.

Of course, the article had the obligatory comments from battered women
advocates, etc, who said the safety of women was being jeopardized, in
spite of the fact that all they have to do is remember to dial *67.
(Not too hard ... considering that they already have to remember not
to speak the phone number should they get an answering machine) ...

 I'm curious about the prices ... is $6.50 for CNID service about
average?  Above average? Below? ... (E-Mail replies only, please ...
I'll summarize if there is interest) ...


Brett  ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Klopfenstein)
Subject: Faculty Position (Social Science) at BGSU
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 20:30:13 GMT


                BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY
               DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS

NEW POSITION:       Assistant Professor of Telecommunications
                    (Possible Upgrade to Tenure-Track Line)

RESPONSIBILITIES:   Teach undergraduate and graduate courses and
                    conduct research in telecommunications
                    (emphasis in telephony preferred).  Desired
                    areas of specialization include one or more
                    of the following: telecommunications systems,
                    economics, policy, and/or technologies;
                    computer mediated communications; impacts of
                    emerging interactive telecommunications
                    systems.  Duties include serving on masters
                    and doctoral dissertation committees and
                    advising undergraduates.  The successful
                    candidate will have the opportunity to work
                    with colleagues in the School of Mass
                    Communication, the Department of
                    Interpersonal Communication, and WBGU-TV
                    among others.  An earned doctorate and
                    demonstrated commitment to scholarly
                    productivity and teaching excellence is
                    required.  Evidence of successful research
                    funding desired.

SALARY:             Competitive.

SCHOOL OF MASS      The Department of Telecommunications is one
COMMUNICATION:      of two departments in the School of Mass
                    Communication; the other unit is the
                    Department of Journalism.  The School, which
                    has 17 fulltime faculty members, offers three
                    undergraduate degrees (the Bachelor of Arts,
                    the Bachelor of Arts in Communication, and
                    the Bachelor of Science in Journalism), a
                    Master of Arts and a Doctor of Philosophy.
                    Currently there are 320 undergraduate majors
                    in the TCOM department and about 50 graduate
                    students in the school.  The department also
                    collaborates with WBGU-TV and its Northwest
                    Ohio Educational Technology Foundation.

UNIVERSITY:         Bowling Green State University is a state-
                    assisted university with an enrollment of
                    approximately 18,000 students including more
                    than 2000 graduate students.  It is located
                    in a pleasant college town located 20 minutes
                    south of Toledo, Ohio, and about one hour
                    south of Ann Arbor/Detroit.  The university's
                    new electronic classroom building will be
                    available as a site for teaching and research
                    activities in interactive telecommunications
                    upon completion in February 1994.  The
                    University has adopted as one of its major
                    goals the enhancement of graduate education
                    and continues to dedicate an increasing
                    percentage of its resources to this cause.

STARTING DATE:      August 15, 1993

APPLICATION DATE:   Review of applications will begin
                    immediately.  Full consideration will be
                    given to all candidates who apply by 15 April
                    1993.

APPLICATION         Send letter of application, curriculum vitae,
PROCEDURE:          complete official transcripts of all college
                    and university level work, and three letters
                    of reference to:

                         Dr. Bruce C. Klopfenstein, Chair
                         Department of Telecommunications
                         322 West Hall
                         Bowling Green State University
                         Bowling Green, OH  43403

      Bowling Green State University is an AA/EOE Employer


Bruce C. Klopfenstein             |  [e-mail]
Department of Telecommunications  |  [e-mail]
Bowling Green State University    |  [phone]; 372-2224
Bowling Green, OH  43403-0235     |  fax [phone]

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

From: Harald Vogt <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 17:20:19 +0100 (MET)
Subject: Reverse Engineering Tools, Information Wanted
Organization: Utrecht University, Dept. of Computer Science


Hello,

I am looking for reverse engineering tools, especially reverse
engineering tools used for maintaining and writing the thousands of
lines of code written for phone switches.

I am particular interested in a reverse engineering tool for the
language CHILL.

Reverse engineering (design recovery) recreates design abstractions
from a combination of code, existing design documentation (if
available), personal experience, and general knowledge about problem
and application domains.

In short, design recovery must reproduce all of the information
required for a person to fully understand what a program does, how it
does it, why it does it, and so forth.

Any information on this subject is welcome.


Harald Vogt     E-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Anthony J. Lisotta)
Subject: Multiple T1s to HSSI Mux
Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation Program / NASA
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 16:37:54 GMT


Hello,

I am looking for a product that will accept multiple T1s and multiplex
them into a T3, or some fraction thereof, with a High Speed Serial
Interface (HSSI).

     Multiple T1s
    -------------|\
    -------------| \
    -------------|  \   HSSI (T1 - T3)
              .      |   -------------------->
          .      |    /
          .         | /
    -------------|/

As of today, I am aware of products by T3 Plus, and Adaptive, however
these products are geared more towards SONET, and therefore rather
expensive.

I am trying to find such a device because our internal circuit
provider has an IDNX backbone, and they claim NET has not released
their HSSI yet, so all they can provide us is multiple T1s, instead of
a fractional T3 (HSSI).

If anyone knows of a company(s) that make such a device, I would
appreciate the help.  If you could send the information to me, I will
post a summary to the net.


Thanks in advance.

Anthony (Tony) Lisotta        Internet: [e-mail]
Network Development Engineer       Phone: [phone]
NASA/CSC   Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation  NASA Ames Research Center
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed are not those of NASA or CSC,
but strictly of my own accord.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #195
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26276;
          22 Mar 93 23:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21517
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 22 Mar 1993 21:21:01 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23237
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 22 Mar 1993 21:20:30 -0600
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 21:20:30 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #196

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 22 Mar 93 21:20:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 196

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    ISDN PRI Simulators or Test Facilities? (Douglas A. Chan)
    CRC Error Checking (Bob Thayer)
    Blocked COCOTs: Apology and Correction (Edward D. Schulz)
    Baby Bells Block Information Service Says Tax Reduction Institute (N Allen)
    Update: Billing For Information Providers (Nigel Allen)
    Big Upgrade For US Law Enforcement Telecom Network (Nigel Allen)
    Looking For Information on SHOMATEC (George Thurman)
    Mobile Cellular Systems: TDMA and GSM  (Peter Chan)
    Zoom Modems? (Tony Clark)
    Making Your Life Easier (Arthur Marsh)
    Apple and Siemens Sign Strategic Cooperation (Thomas Diessel)
    New Proposed AUSTEL Requirments (Anthony Rumble)
    ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements? (Magnus Hedberg)
    EBU - European Broadcast Union Address Wanted (Joerg Meyer)
    Multiplexing Help Needed (Joel Disini)
    Need Help Setting up a Videoconference (Ed Finerty)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Douglas A Chan)
Subject: ISDN PRI Simulators or Test Facilities?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 00:16:03 GMT


What kind of ISDN test equipment is around?  Ideally, I'd have a real
ISDN PRI circuit to play with but New England Tel won't have any ISDN
service for another year or two here. Are there any places which will
rent ISDN PRI simulators? What kind of simulators and test equipment
are available? Or even better, where is the nearest ISDN test facility?
(preferably in the New England area ...)


thanks,

Doug   [e-mail]

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 19:33:06 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: CRC Error Checking


A friend and I are doing a reseach project on CRC error checking.  If
anyone has any information on the subject, it would be greatly
appreciated.


Thanks,

Bob Thayer   ([e-mail])

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 12:14 EST
From: [e-mail] (Edward D Schulz [phone])
Subject: Blocked COCOTs: Apology and Correction


Last week I posted obsolete information about calling AT&T to report
pay phones that block 10-288-0.  Apparently the number was turned off
without telling AT&T employees -- at least *I* didn't get the word.
The updated information follows.  My apologies for wasting your time
and net bandwidth.  [From the internal FindATT database]

   Topic: Report Public Phones Blocked to AT&T Access Code (10+ATT+0)
   Question: Employee Inquiries
   Entity: American Transtech
   Business Unit: American Transtech
   Organiztion: Public Phone Assistance  PPA
   Name: Nancy Coan  PPA Project Manager
         8000 Baymeadows Way Executive Building 5 Floor 2 - 15b
         Jacksonville, FL  32256
   Email addr: !attmail!attati!ncoan

[Disconnected number deleted]

This 800 number will be turned down during February/March.  The
promotion requesting that employees call this number to report a
blocked phone has formally ended.  Should an employee call who wishes
to report a blocked phone, they should be directed to an AT&T Operator
who can enter this information in MIMS.  If an employee is having
difficulty placing a long distance call away from home, they should be
instructed to try AT&T's access code, 10+288+0.  If the access code is
blocked, they can call AT&T's 800 number, 1-800-321-0ATT, to reach the
AT&T Network.


Ed Schulz, AT&T
Holmdel Corporate Plaza, 2137 Hwy 35, Holmdel, NJ 07733
[phone] voice              [phone] fax
[e-mail]  [e-mail]  attmail!edschulz

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: Baby Bells Block Information Service Says Tax Reduction Institute
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


Here is a press release from the Tax Reduction Institute.  I have no
affiliation with TRI, and I am not clear whether TRI is a for-profit
company or not.

In general, I don't think that telephone companies should bill for
information providers.

Baby Bells Block Information Service Says Tax Reduction
Institute
Contact: Mary Mack of the Tax Reduction Institute, 800-874-1040


   ROCKVILLE, Md., March 19 -- Three major Local Exchange Carriers
(LEC) revealed Thursday that they will no longer bill for information
providers.

   U.S. West, PacWest and Southwestern Bell have turned their back on
this multi-million dollar industry, according to the Tax Reduction
Institute (TRI).  By doing so the Baby Bells effectively block
legitimate information services to their customers, the institute
said.

   Washington, D.C.-based organizations such as TRI will no longer be
able to provide 24-hour fax back on demand services to millions of
Americans.  When informed of the decision the Tax Reduction Institute
was just hours from launching a major new product for busy taxpayers.
TRI was scheduled to start providing tax forms and tax reducing
information to the public via fax back convenience.

   Mark Mack, director of MIS for this tax research and education
organization said, "This action by the Baby Bells makes it more
difficult for people to receive much needed information in a timely
fashion."  The service is geared to those who need information fast.
"For instance," asked Mack, "it's late at night, the library is
closed, the post office is out of forms or too far away.  Where can
you get the forms you need?  Now the Baby Bells are stopping you from
receiving the forms you need when you need them."

   Tax Reduction Institute, established in 1979, produces one-day tax
reduction workshops across the country and can be reached at
1-800-TRI-1040.


Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario  416-629-7000/629-7044

[Moderator's Note: This message arrived with a flood of others on
Friday and before it could be used, the system crashed. Then today's
mail brought the next message from Nigel, an update to the original
press release.  PAT]

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: Update: Billing for Information Providers
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


Here is a press release from the Tax Reduction Institute.

Baby Bells Appear to Reverse Decision Refusing Service To Information
Providers, Says Tax Reduction Institute

 Contact: Tim Gardner, 800-456-8291, or Bob Branting, 206-776-7262,
          both of the Tax Reduction Institute

   BETHESDA, Md., March 20 -- It appears as though two, if not all
three, Baby Bells who pulled the plug on Local Exchange Carrier (LEC)
billing on Thursday reversed their decision on Friday.

   Tax Reduction Institute of Washington, D.C., voiced its concern
earlier about the arbitrary suspension because it would destroy
legitimate information providers.  TRI was delighted to learn that
U.S. West and Pacific Bell have reconnected with their business to
business services.

   "This is great news," said Mary Mack, director of MIS.  "It appears
as though the interruption of LEC billing for business to business was
just a temporary disconnect due to a small group of unethical
advertisers.  Tax Reduction Institute supports the Baby Bells'
investigation of such practices."

   Bob Branting, national marketing director for TRI, announced that
the tax research and education organization will proceed with plans to
provide tax forms and other information through fax on demand
technology.

   Tax Reduction Institute, established in 1979, produces tax
reduction materials and information for small businesses nationwide
and can be reached at 800-TRI-1040.


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada   [e-mail]
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario   416-629-7000/629-7044

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: Big Upgrade For U.S. Law Enforcement Telecom Network
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


Here is a press release from the Federal Bureau of Investigation.  I
don't work for the FBI. I found the press release on another system
and thought that readers of this newsgroup would want to see it.

FBI Announces Multi-Million Dollar Contract in Effort to Modernize
National Crime Information Center
Contact: FBI Press Office, 202-324-3691


   WASHINGTON, March 19 -- In a much anticipated step toward
modernizing its National Crime Information Center (NCIC), the FBI
today awarded a multi-million dollar contract to the Harris Corp.

   Six companies competed for the project, known as "NCIC 2000," with
the Harris Corp. submitting the winning bid of $46,962,336.  FBI
Director William S. Sessions proudly noted that, "NCIC 2000 will serve
the public well and bring law enforcement's national telecommuni-
cations system into the 21st century."

   Since its inception in 1967, NCIC has become the largest law
enforcement telecommunications network in the world.  More than 72,000
criminal justice agencies throughout the United States, including
police departments, courts, probation agencies, and correctional
departments, complete over 1.3 million NCIC transactions each day.
Agencies enter, retrieve, and exchange a wide variety of information
to identify and locate fugitives, missing persons, violent felons,
stolen vehicles and other stolen property.

   The contract award is the result of a six year development effort
by the FBI in consultation with the NCIC Advisory Policy Board and the
MITRE Corp.  In addition to improving the capabilities of existing
files, NCIC 2000 will introduce significant new advances such as
transmission of images directly to and from patrol cars on the street.
A fingerprint of a suspect can be transmitted to NCIC where it can be
compared against those of wanted and missing persons.  This capability
provides a major enhancement in the positive identification of
individuals.  Photographic images will also be available on this
system.  Other improvements include on-line entry and retrieval of
uniform crime reporting data, and access to other law enforcement data
bases for information such as parole and probation records.

   With these new capabilities, modern programming, and prototype
workstations, NCIC 2000 will improve the ability of the criminal
justice community to combat crime.  These improvements and others
developed as part of this new contract are consistent with the
president's initiative to build our infrastructure and to provide
national data highways.

   Completion of the installation phase of the contract is expected
to occur by March, 1995, with the testing phase to be completed by
December, 1995.


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada   [e-mail]
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario  416-629-7000/629-7044

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

From: [e-mail] (George Thurman)
Subject: Looking For Information on SHOMATEC
Organization: Gagme Public Access UNIX, Chicago, Illinois.
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 15:25:38 GMT


I am trying to contact a company that manufactures telephone equipment
called SHOMATEC.  They have no listing with 800 information.  Does
anyone out there in comp.dcom.telecom-land have any information on this
company?


Thanks,

GEORGE S. THURMAN   [e-mail]   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Chan)
Subject: Mobile Cellular Systems: TDMA and GSM
Organization: Dept of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, Univ. of Melbourne
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 04:03:27 GMT


Hello Netters,

    I am looking for information regarding standards of TDMA
or/and the European GSM system, and the recommendations on TDMA/GSM
system.

    Can anyone out there give me a pointer to where I can find a
good refenece on those matters?

    Please reply through e-mail to [e-mail]

    Your help is much appreciated.


Regards,

Peter Chan

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Clark)
Subject: Information Wanted on Zoom Modems
Date: 22 Mar 1993 01:11:55 GMT
Organization: Computer Newspaper Services, Howden, UK.


Zoom 14400 Baud Modem (I think) --

Has anyone heard of this make of modem and which company manufactures it?
 From what I see here its a 14400 Baud modem with Fax compatibility.
Anyone know anything about this modem ?


[e-mail]   [e-mail]
Macintosh Information Systems   Computer Newspaper Services Ltd.
Howden, Nth Humberside. UK
My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.

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

Date: 22 Mar 1993 02:01:52 +1000
From: [e-mail] (Arthur Marsh)
Subject: Making Your Life Easier
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Camelot Swamp bulletin board, Hawthorndene Sth Australia


In a similar vein to previous posts, I was told that Telecom
Australia's Business Services consultants receive bonuses for helping
business customers get the most cost effective solution for their
needs. All well and good.

Being a residential customer however, I had to write to the Manager,
Technical Regulation, AOTC (who reports to the CEO) to ask for help in
finding the most cost-effective solution for *my* needs, having
exhausted Telecom's "Network Plus" toll-free information service.

Do any telephone companies offer business-like service to their high
volume (over A$400 per month in my case) residential customers with
legitimate needs for consultancy services?


Arthur

[Telecom Australia, the only local carrier and major national carrier in
Australia and OTC, Australia's major international carrier are part of AOTC]

Origin: Camelot Swamp MJCNA, Hawthorndene, Sth Australia (8:7000/8)
Camelot Swamp bbs, data: [phone] reply to [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Diessel)
Subject: Apple and Siemens Sign Strategic Cooperation
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 09:35:09 +0100 (MET)


Apple and Siemens AG, Munich, Germany signed a strategic cooperation
on new communication products. Apple's PDA and Siemens' private
switching technology will be used in a new product called 'Notephone'.
This will be an improved Newton which will be connected to the
telephone network via a base station. The Newton will act as as phone
directory and be able to dial and send faxes. Siemens plans to
introduce this product this year. First applications will be shown at
the CeBIT computer show in Hannover, Germany starting March 24th.

This information comes from several German newspapers.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Anthony Rumble)
Subject: New Proposed AUSTEL Requirements
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 05:58:30 GMT


I just recieved a copy of a 'Draft Advice to Industry' for compliance
requirments for modems that basically stated that not only does a
modem's hardware and firmware have to be AUSTEL approved, but also the
SOFTWARE!!  bundled with the modem has to be approved WITH IT!!

This is certainly going to make life difficult for anyone wanting to
sell modems in Australia.

Not only that, but you can break your Austel compliance by just
running some software that sets up the modem to perform against the
regulations.

(Eg ATS0=1) or dialing faster than the Regulation permits etc etc.

A suggestion: Anyone running a BBS or Online Data Service in Australia
MAKE SURE YOUR modem does NOT answer in less than 2 RINGS.  (ATS0=2)

It is possible, and highly likely that AUSTEL may again go on a BBS
raid (Like with the HST raid) and go around fining BBS operators for
breaking Austel regulations.

Personally making software have to be compliant stinks. It is hard
enough for people to get modems approved NOW, let alone with this kind
of garbage to hinder you.


Anthony Rumble   aka SmilieZ


[Moderator's Note: What possible complaint could they have with a
computer answering the phone in fewer than two rings?  They're saying
'please tie up the CO for another ring or two ... hold on to our
equipment for another five or six seconds if you can ...' ?? What kind
of sense does that make? I'd think they'd like to see everyone answer
on the first ring.  I suppose ATS0=3 is a better idea, just to make
sure it does not trip after the first ring *heard by the caller* since
you say the modem police may be on a rampage.  Senseless!   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Magnus Hedberg)
Subject: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements?
Date: 22 Mar 93 08:50:16 GMT
Organization: Telia Research AB, Aurorum 6, 951 75 Lulea, Sweden


In Europe ISDN phones are powerd by the telecomnetwork. According to
our information this is not the case in the USA.

Are ISDN phones/terminals in the USA or elsewhere powered by external
electric mains?


Magnus Hedberg

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

From: [e-mail] (Joerg Meyer)
Subject: EBU - European Broadcast Union Address Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Joerg Meyer)
Organization: University of Kaiserslautern (Germany)
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 10:13:06 GMT


Anyone who can mail me the address and / or fax number of the
 European Broadcast Union (EBU) in SWITZERLAND?  I asked the
International Phone Information, but they couldn't find it. Probably
it can be found at a different name?

Any information on this is appreciated!

Please send e-mail to: [e-mail]


Joerg Meyer  E-Mail:  [e-mail]
University of Kaiserslautern, Germany

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

Date: 22 Mar 93 10:21 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Disini SW, Emmanuel Disini,CST)
Subject: Multiplexing Help Needed


hello netters!

I need a device that'll allow me to take two RS-232 cables (just eight
signals -- tx,rx,gnd, rts,cts,dcd,dsr,dtr) and multiplex these onto one
RS-232 cable (I also need a similar device on the other end for
demultiplexing).

If this seems like a strange request, it's because I have a leased
line (64kbps) between two sites and we use Republic Telecom RLX-8
multiplexers. We get eight lines coming from the RLX-8; some are
voice, some are for fax, and some are for data. The RLX-8 will take
eight pins of the data line and relay these signals to another RLX-8
at the other end of the leased line.  So what I would in effect like
to do is have two computers on both ends share one data line.

Another option would be to use an A-B switch that is software
selectable (via another serial port)? Does anyone have any ideas?

Your help is very much appreciated. Kindly cc: your responses to
[e-mail].


Thanks,

joel disini    manila

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 09:53 EDT
From: Ed Finerty <[e-mail]>
Subject: Need Help Setting up a Videoconference


We are looking for help in setting up a videoconference.  Need two-way
video between our site (a soon to be opened teleclassroom at the
School of Public Health in Chapel Hill, NC) and whatevr site we can
find which is within reasonable driving distance of North Eastham,
Massachusetts.  This is a special event which will take place in
October but needs to be planned soon.

Satellite or terrestrial transmission (or both) is OK as long as we
can access it.  We'll have our own dish for downlink, and share with
several other campus teleconferencing facilities a microwave link to
the Microelectronics Center of North Carolina.  If this link is
available at the time (we're looking into that part) MCNC could
connect us to an uplink or to a telephone common carrier.  No idea yet
how we would manage the Mass. end of this, though.  Can anyone help?


ED Finerty   School of Public Health
CB7400 Rosenau   University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7400   [phone]   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #196
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29705;
          23 Mar 93 1:09 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21459
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 22 Mar 1993 22:46:35 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25135
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 22 Mar 1993 22:46:02 -0600
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 22:46:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #197

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 22 Mar 93 22:46:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 197

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good? (Richard Pauls)
    LCI International: A New Long Distance Choice (Phillip Dampier)
    GTE Beats Out OBT (Steve Brack)
    Orange Card Followup (Carl Moore)
    Second Line Installation (Bob Snyder)
    Using the Telecom Archives ([e-mail])
    Routing in Networks and the Post Office (Garrett Wollman)
    Numbering Plans and Standards (Chonoles Michael Jesse)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Richard Pauls <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good?
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 11:51:15 -0500


I would like to know what people think about MCI's Friends and Family
program.  I always thought it was a bunch of bull (mostly because I
don't trust much that comes my way by pushy phone salesmen with deals
that sound too good to be true and end up their speech with "well
shall I sign you up then Mr. Pauls?"  I have always used AT&T as my LD
carrier, and I have been glad to see that AT&T gets a good deal of
respect on this newsgroup.  So I would like to know the following:

Is MCI really less expensive than AT&T?  If so, by how much?

Aside from price, which is better and how? (i.e., operators, clarity ...)

What is the F&F plan and does it really save me 20% as the MCI
salesman told me last night?

I have heard something about keeping AT&T as my primary carrier while
still taking advantage of MCI F&F.  Is this truly possible?  Is it a
good idea?

I really appreciate hearing your opinions on this matter.  Response by
email or followup is great.  If this is a FAQ, please direct me to
information on this subject.  Your input is valuable in extracting the
truth out of the salesman hype, and I promise to spread the truth to
ten of my closest friends and family!


Thanks,

Rich


[Moderator's Note: The truth is, long distance rates are all very
close.  There are small differences, and each carrier has some
'gimmick' the others are lacking. You can have MCI/F&F as a secondary
carrier while keeping AT&T if that is your wish.  As you may know, not
long ago I reached an agreement to sell 'affinity 1+' long distance
with a company that resells all the major carriers. Mine runs between
14-17 cents per minute depending on the package. With mine, monthly
residuals are returned to TELECOM Digest to help offset my costs in
moderating the news group.  Over the weekend, I mailed out information
packages to everyone who had requested one, along with details on the
800 service I offer. People should have the packages Tuesday or Wednes-
day. So if you feel there is no substantial difference in carriers
price/service wise, then passing your business to me will make a *big
difference* where I'm concerned. A few other comparisons between
carriers are made in the next article in this issue. PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 10:31:26 -0500
Subject: LCI International: A New Long Distance Choice


 > From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)

 > They advertise that their "Simple, Fair, and Inexpensive"
> residential plan (their only residential plan) costs $0.17 per minute
> 6 am to 6 pm, and $0.12 per minute 6 pm to 6 am.

The day rate isn't too bad, but the night rate is horrible.

I spoke with their customer service department and learned that to
enjoy these rates, you must be an LCI Dial-1 customer.

MCI has a plan called Easyrate State with costs $4.50 a month and has
two flat rates -- 22c a minute daytime, 10c a minute after 5pm and all
day Saturday and Sunday.  You can tie this in with their Friends &
Family plan and pay around 18c a minute daytime, 8c per minute at
night, intra or interstate.

There is a version for out of state calls which has a lower monthly
service charge.

Therefore, if you are doing only daytime calling, LCI may make good
sense for you.  If you are only doing nighttime calling, this is a
very bad plan.

I recently prepared a review of the major long distance carriers and
their rates for Fidonet's Fidonews.  A reprint follows:


Reaching Out for Long Distance Savings:
Looking at Long Distance Plans in the USA

by Phillip M. Dampier
1:2613/228

One almost needs a degree to play pundit in the highly competitive
long distance telephone marketplace these days.  As the battle
continues between AT&T, Sprint, MCI, and dozens of smaller
competitors, consumers stand to gain significant savings on their long
distance bills, if they select the right plan for their needs.

Many Fidonet nodes spend upwards of hundreds of dollars each month on
long distance calling, many of whom are unaware of possible savings
they could enjoy if they signed up for the right long distance plan.

Here are some plans worthy of consideration for Fidonet nodes and
their callers.


AT&T
1-800-222-0300

Reach Out America
Reach Out Half Hour
Simple Savings

AT&T's old standby, Reach Out America (ROA), helped to pioneer deep
discounting in the residential long distance marketplace.  The plan,
first introduced in the 1980's has seen steady declines in price as
residential long distance usage continues to increase.

AT&T has several variations on the current ROA program.  *** PLEASE
NOTE, THE PRICING INFORMATION AND THE HOURS WHEN THE PLAN IS AVAILABLE
IS CURRENTLY AWAITING APPROVAL FROM THE FCC.  PLEASE CONTACT AT&T FOR
THE LATEST INFORMATION BEFORE PLACING CALLS UNDER THE NEW HOURS. ***

The plans discussed below are for out-of-state calls, also known as
"interstate" calls.

ROA Basic - This plan costs $7.50 for the first hour of calls placed
between 7pm-7:59am Monday to Friday, all day Saturday, and Sunday
until 5pm.  You can call anywhere in the United States for the same
rate.  You will be billed for the entire first hour without regard to
whether or not you used the entire 60 minute allotment.  If you exceed
60 minutes, each additional minute costs ten cents ($6.00 an hour).

ROA Evening - This plan costs $7.80 and includes all of the benefits
of the preceeding plan, but it also provides you with a 20% discount
off all calls placed during the evening hours when the ROA plan is not
in effect (5:00-7:00pm weekdays, Sunday evening 5pm-10pm).

ROA Day - This plan is priced at $8.70 and includes a 25% discount for
calls placed during the evening rate period (as defined above) in
addition to giving you a 10% discount off all calls placed during the
day (8am-5pm).

AT&T is currently negotiating with the FCC regarding these changes,
and some revisions may be made in the next week or so.

If you find you don't place at least an hour in long distance calls
each month, AT&T offers an additional variation on Reach Out America:

ROA Half Hour  -  This plan gives you a half hour of long distance
calling at the times stated above for $4.00.  Each additional minute
costs 12 cents.

If you place over $30.00 in out-of-state calls per month, you should
consider AT&T's new Simple Savings program, which gives you a 25%
discount off calls placed to the interstate area code of your choice
based on AT&T's standard rates. All other calls receive a 15%
discount.  This plan may be especially suited to those calls placed to
locations in your region that don't qualify for plans like Friends &
Family, described below.  Ask AT&T to give you the current rates for
your calls and figure your discounts.

Finally, AT&T offers a Reach Out plan for many individual states for
calls placed between points within a state (intrastate calls).


MCI
1-800-444-3333

Primetime
Friends & Family


MCI has become AT&T's most troublesome competitor for good reason --
they offer very competitive residential long distance plans which can
save people a great deal of money, if evaluated properly.

MCI offers two plans which are often tied together to realize maximum
savings.

Primetime: This is MCI's answer to Reach Out America.  It is currently
undergoing revision and I expect to see even lower rates in response
to AT&T's tinkering with its own ROA program.  Primetime includes an
hour of long distance for calls both in and outside of your state for
$9.95 for the first hour.  Each additional minute costs ten cents
($6.00 an hour).  If you are calling only locations outside of your
state, MCI offers an interstate version of Primetime for $8.45.

Friends & Family: Most people couple the Primetime program with
Friends & Family, MCI's attempt to gain new "dial-1/primary carrier"
customers. With Friends & Family, you switch your primary long
distance carrier to MCI (they will pay to switch you if you ask them).
Then, you specify up to 20 domestic numbers that also have MCI as
their primary carrier, and any time you call them, you receive a 20%
discount off those calls, bringing the cost down to as low as eight
cents per minute.  MCI also will allow you to choose two international
numbers to receive a 20% discount.  Many select numbers in Canada.

MCI also offers a myriad of residential and commercial class
volume-based discount plans.  Contact MCI for information on plans
applicable in your state.


Sprint
1-800-877-4000

The Most
Sprint Select In State
Sprint Select Out-of-State
Sprint +

Candice Bergen has done for Sprint what Bill Cosby has done for
Jell-O.  Recognition means a lot in long distance, especially for
third place Sprint, which has been struggling to find a competitive
niche between MCI and AT&T.

Sprint's programs have generally closely followed whatever AT&T does,
and although their discount programs aren't as radical as MCI, in
several situations, Sprint may save you the most money.

Speaking of "the most," that happens to be the name of Sprint's
heavily promoted discount calling plan for residential customers.  The
Most is based on Sprint's standard dialing rates, which means it is
distance sensitive.  Call cross-country, for example, and you'll pay a
great deal more than calling the state next door.

The Most is also geared to convince customers to become Dial-1
customers of Sprint.  It provides for a 20% discount off all calls
placed to customers who also have Sprint as their primary carrier.

There is no limit, as is provided for in MCI's plan, and Sprint
computes the discount automatically if the number is signed up with
Sprint.  It means you don't have to give the long distance company the
names and numbers of all your friends.  In addition, The Most gives
you a 20% discount off all calls placed to the number you called most
frequently (time wise) during the previous month.  This is of special
interest to those calling commercial locations or mail servers that
are unable or unwilling to change their long distance carrier.  Should
you call a Sprint customer the most during that month, you receive 36%
off those calls.

Sprint also offers a plan along the lines of ROA.  They call it Sprint
Select, and it's provided in two versions -- one for in-state calls
and one for out-of-state calls.  The rates vary from state to state
for the in-state calling plan, but for New York (as an example), calls
placed between 5pm - 7:59am, all day Saturday and Sunday until 5pm
cost $7.45 for the first hour, $6.55 each additional hour.

Sprint's out of state plan is priced at $7.70 the first hour, $6.00
each additional hour (10 cents a minute).

Finally, for high volume users, Sprint has a plan called Sprint +
which offers volume discounts.  The discounts are retroactive to
dollar one, which means as you pass each "plateau," increasing
discounts apply to the entire balance.

You need to spend at least $20.00 a month to take advantage of this
plan.

If your calls total less than $100.00 in a month, you receive 10% off
all daytime calls and 20% off all evening and night/weekend calls.

If your calls total between $100-200, you receive a 10% daytime
discount and a 25% evening and night/weekend discount.

If your calls are over $200.00, you receive a 10% daytime discount and
a 30% discount off evening and night/weekend calls.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

All of these plans may come across as confusing when you try to pick
the one that best meets your needs.

Here are some strengths and weaknesses of each company, to help you out
a little more:

AT&T

Strengths                           Weaknesses

Fastest call connection time.       Most pricey long distance.

AT&T generally bills their          Reach Out America hours are
long distance programs on your      the most limited of the
local telephone bill, meaning       three competitors.
only one bill is required.

Variable plans mean lower volume    Reach Out America does not
users can pay as little as $7.50    include calls placed to points
for that first hour of long         within your state.  You need
distance, which is less than MCI    to sign up for a state ROA plan
charges for Primetime.              in most cases.


MCI

Strengths                           Weaknesses

Lowest price long distance          Slower call set up time.
for calls to other MCI
customers with Primetime &          Some problems with billing of
Friends & Family (8 cents a         ringing/no answer and busy
minute).                            signals can occur on occasion.

Plan has long hours.                You have to give MCI the names
                                    and numbers of those people in
MCI is most responsive to rate      your Friends & Family calling
cutting whenever AT&T cuts their    circle.  If they aren't on MCI,
rates.                              they will be telemarketed
                                    unless you ask MCI not to bother
MCI offers some discounts for       them.
international numbers and runs
promotions for free calls more      Limited to 20 domestic numbers
frequently than other long          in your calling circle.
distance companies.


Sprint

Strengths                           Weaknesses

Unlimited 20% discounts             Relatively few Americans use
when calling other Sprint           Sprint as their primary carrier.
customers when using The Most.
                                    Sprint rates are not as low as
Retroactive discounts on the        they could be.  Sprint's marketing
Sprint + program may help save      arm told the author "We never
money for high volume callers.      promised to be the cheapest."
                                    They aren't.  They often charge
Sprint's The Most may cost          just a tiny fraction less than AT&T.
under 10c a minute for calls
placed to nearby numbers that       Sprint has been plagued with
cannot switch long distance         billing problems in the past,
carriers to take advantage of       although billing procedures have
MCI's lower rates.                  reportedly improved.

Sprint's in-state calling plan      Sprint is slower to respond to
is the lowest priced for lower      industry price declines.  Don't
volume in-state callers, although   sign any long term contracts.
only by a nickel.

Armed with this information and your current long distance bill, it
shouldn't be too difficult to choose a long distance carrier that will
work well for your long distance needs while saving you money.

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

[Moderator's Note: Thanks for sending along this very detailed summary
of long distance plans. Since I printed details of the plans I offer
here about a week ago, it is fair to include these other descriptions
as well.  Anyone who did not see that summary is requested to write me
at '[e-mail]' (NOT the Digest address, please!) and request
a copy of the file 'products'. I'll email it right out, and if you are
interested in this 'affinity 1+' program, send me back your name and
mailing address so I can mail the full information package to you.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 14:55:24 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail] (Steve Brack)
Subject: GTE Beats Out OBT
NReply-To: [e-mail]


    In my area, the city of Toledo is served by Ohio Bell, but the
western suburbs are served by GTE.  Recently, GTE has begun running TV
commercials for CLASS-type services, like priority ringing (based on
who is calling you), call rejection, etc.  The only missing offering
is Caller-ID.  In this case, GTE has beat out Ohio Bell to a great
extent by offering these services before Ohio Bell did.  Does Ohio
Bell have more restrictions on offering services like this than GTE
does, or was it simply a matter of GTE satisfying the regulators
before Ohio Bell did?


Steven S. Brack          [e-mail]
Toledo, OH  43613-1605   [e-mail]
MY OWN OPINIONS          [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 13:33:21 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Orange Card Followup


I have received Orange Card Calling Card Service Agreement.  Quote:
"When we receive the completed and signed service agreement and your
credit has been approved, we will send your Orange Card which will be
active and ready to use."  This is from Orange Communications Inc.,
4144 Shoreline Drive, P.O.Box 345, Spring Park, MN 55384, tel 612-
471-9546, fax [phone] (I believe 612-471 is a Wayzata prefix, in
the Twin-Cities area).  But it is in a letter postmarked Harrisburg,
PA, and the return envelope has Accent Marketing, Inc. in the upper
left corner and is addressed to Orange Communications, P.O.Box 216,
Lemoyne, PA 17043 (mail from there would indeed be postmarked at
Harrisburg).

I do have to estimate monthly usage, and I think (in my case) that I'd
recover the initial cost by having cheap calls available back to the
answering service which handles my incoming calls.  It is on a Newark,
Del. number, and becomes long distance as soon as I reach the Maryland
state line.


[Moderator's Note: The 'estimated monthly usage' is intended to provide
some additional security to the card. If you (for example) estimate
monthly usage at fifty dollars, they will set a flag at say, eighty
dollars, and usage over that point will be brought to the attention of
someone there. I screwed up by not telling people in the initial
brochure to include that item ... quite a few of the forms Carl
mentioned have gone back, and PINS are being mailed this week. Over
the weekend, I responded from here with still more brochures to people
just now inquiring. The Orange Calling Card is a no-surcharge, 25 cent
per minute calling card as part of the affinity long distance services
I offer telecom readers.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Snyder)
Subject: Second Line Installation
Date: 22 Mar 93 18:40:43 GMT
Organization: Drexel University, Office Of Computing Services


How much should it cost to have a second line installed?  I'm going to
be moving in a little bit less than a month, and I want to have a
second line put in for data communications at the new apartment.

New Jersey Bell wants $45 for the visit, plus $16 for each 15 minutes
of work done, with weekend rates "significantly higher."  The operator
I spoke with suggested finding another contractor to install the line.

How much would an alternate contractor cost?  How do you find one?
I've been thinking about trying it myself, but I'm not sure how
difficult it would be, nor exactly where the demarc point would be ...


Bob

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Using the Telecom Archives
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 13:25:32 CST


TELECOM Moderater noted in response to Ted Koppel:

>> [Moderator's Note: You bet we have it! Check out the Telecom Archives
>> using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu (login anonymous, use name@site as
>> your password, then 'cd telecom-archives' and 'cd country.codes'.

> I tried telneting from two different sites with no luck. (Logged in
> anonymous and kept getting "invalid password").

> Can someone verify that anonymous login is still operational at this
> site?    Thanks in advance.

> [e-mail]

You telnetted?  You must ftp to the site to access the archives.  It
is not availbale for Telnet (or remote login) access -- Just ftp
access for getting files.


Brett     ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Someone else (I forget who, the message is lost in
the mess here over the weekend, sorry) brought this up and said I
should have corrected the 'telnet' reference. Well, I say, watch how I
worm out of this one!  Actually, ftp is a software program which uses
telnet to get the desired files. So you can 'telnet lcs.mit.edu ftp' if
you wish, and that will connect you with the ftp socket at that (or
any other) site. I can't recommend this unless you are at a site which
does not allow ftp but does allow telnet ... it will usually work. As
an exercise for the imaginative, if giving the argument 'ftp' to the
telnet command fails -- because your sysadmin is smarter than you are --
then try telnet with the argument being the socket number traditionally
used by Internet sites for ftp purposes. You'll find that number if you
check out a file on your site documenting socket assignments. I won't
tell you the commands to use once it connects -- that, like using telnet
to connect direct with the mail socket to send anonymous mail is best
learned by the perpetrators themselves. But you might try 'help' once
ot connects.  Anyway, check out the Telecom Archives soon. Lots of good
files there for everyone!  ftp lcs.mit.edu  login anonymous.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Routing in Networks and the Post Office
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 21:47:41 GMT


1In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> We could probably set up a system like the USPS where we would not
> need a routing table for every possible destination but could base
> routing on each digit of the address, starting with the most
> significant.

This is the essence of Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) and
"supernetting".  Currently, Internet routing operates by tracking
"network numbers", which can be easily isolated given the "address
class" of every address.  This works fine for a few thousand
destinations, but with 10,000 networks it's beginning to place a
strain on the system.  What CIDR does is associate each network with a
mask, so that (to continue the postal analogy), while I need to know
that 054 is Burlington, 056 is Monpelier, and 050 is White River,
someone in California only needs to know that 05 is Vermont, and
someone in Europe only needs to know that I am somewhere in the US.
This is what is technically known as "aggregation", and is believed
to be critical to the future of the Internet.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Chonoles Michael Jesse)
Subject: Numbering Plans and Standards
Organization: GE M&DSO - VF
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 00:08:54 GMT


I'm interested in any information on the numbering plans of other
countries. Any suggestion on how to get them? Does anyone have one to
send me?

I'm also interested in numbering standards. I believe the CCITT has
one? Does anyone know what it is and/or have access to it?

I already know about the World Zone 1 numbering plan, but could use
information about numbering within an NPA.

For example, why can't all the numbers in an exchange be used? What
numbers are reserved?

Also, does anyone know how many telephone numbers are used in the US
at this time? In the world?

I'm doing some research for my masters's degree. We have a telecomm-
unications department, but a terrible library.


Thanks,

Michael Jesse Chonoles    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #197
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01496;
          23 Mar 93 1:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25847
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 22 Mar 1993 23:25:39 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26020
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 22 Mar 1993 23:25:09 -0600
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 23:25:09 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #198

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 22 Mar 93 23:25:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 198

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cellular Carriers vs. IXC's (Steve Forrette)
    Experiences in Telecommuting (Bill Gough)
    Need Fiber or Copper TDM/Line-Driver(s) for V.35/X.21 (Michael Santangelo)
    Telephone Headsets (Charlie Rosenberg)
    152 & 156 MHz Pagers Needed (Simoun S. Ung)
    Re: 18kf Limit Measurement (David G. Lewis)
    DA Charges ([e-mail])
    Re: What Makes Computer Communications So Exciting? (Sandy Kyrish)
    Re: Consolidating Cellular Sprint Account With Other Phones (S. Forrette)
    Re: MCI 800 Problem (Ehud Gavron)
    Re: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted (Ken Levitt)
    Strange Disconnections -- What Can I Do? (Ron Newman)
    Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps (Graham Toal)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 02:18:12 -0800
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Carriers vs. IXC's


A few weeks ago, someone voiced dismay that LA Cellular was blocking
access to subscribers on the California Super Access Roaming Network
via the roam port.  That is to say, for example, that a San Francisco
cellular subscriber cannot be reached in Los Angeles by dialing into
the LA switch's roam port, but can be reached by dialing the San
Francisco subscriber's home cellular number.  But a roamer from an
area such that calls won't automatically find them in LA *can* be
reached via the roam port.  This can be undesirable since someone
that's in LA who wants to call the SF subscriber who is roaming in LA,
and knows this, can't use the roam port to save the toll, and must
call to SF.

In speaking to someone in the know at Cellular One up here in Seattle,
this practice of roam port "blocking" is going to become much more
prevalent.  Apparently, the IXC's noses are out of joint because of
the roam port.  They argue that if a caller in Los Angeles wants to
call a cellular phone that is assigned a San Francisco number (a SF-LA
call is inter-LATA), that an IXC deserves to get the toll revenue for
the call, even if the SF cellular phone is temporarily in LA and the
caller knows it.  After all, they are calling a San Francisco number.

The IXC's are complaining to the FCC about this, so some cellular
carriers are starting to block access to roamers that can be reached
automatically at their home numbers.  This seems like a total crock to
me, and that the IXC's are just being greedy, or looking for ways to
stir up trouble.  In my opinion, they are trying to force what could
be a local call to be a toll call, just so that they can get the
revenue.  It is very silly on a technical level to route an intra-LA
call through San Francisco just so more revenue can be generated by
the call.

There is a second issue regarding cellular carriers that the IXC's are
complaining about.  In many markets, neighboring cellular systems will
have leased facilities between themselves to carry voice traffic.  For
example, Cellular One of Seattle and Portand are two different systems
(both McCaw owned) and have a bunch of leased long distance trunks
between the two switches.  If I'm in Seattle, and call someone in
Portland (an inter-LATA call), and I call from my cellular phone, the
call gets routed over Cellular One's leased facilities down to
Portland, where it leaves the cellular switch as a local call (or just
terminates within the switch if I'm calling a Portland cellular
subscriber).

In this case, I really am calling inter-LATA, but no IXC gets any
(marginal) revenue for the call.  Cellular One will happily bill me
the standard AT&T direct-dialed rate for the call, though.  The IXC's
don't like this very much aparently, and are complaining.  I would
argue that the IXC *is* getting revenue, since they are getting paid
for the leased facilities.  But, I suppose they could argue that
Cellular One is a cellular carrier, and not an IXC, and thus should
not be reselling inter-LATA switched service to the general public.

Does anyone else have sightings of similar cellular-IXC squabbles to
report?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Experiences in Telecommuting
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 12:25:18 GMT


I am looking for information on distance technology, specifically on
telecommuting, distributed workplaces, and distance education. Even
more specifically than that, I am looking at how people use distance
technology at work. So, if anyone can tell me how telecommuting fits
into their lives, please let me know. As well, if anyone in charge of
telecommuting could describe their experiences in implementing it
(good and bad), it would be appreciated. If you could relate the
problems you have had (from the views of either management or staff),
so much the better.

Please e-mail me your responses. I know this is a pretty broad set of
questions; if there is any amibiguity, let me know, and I'll try to
clarify them.


Bill Gough ([e-mail])
Faculty of Business Administration
Memorial University of Newfoundland
St. John's, NF   Canada

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael F. Santangelo)
Subject: Need Fiber or Copper TDM/Line-Driver(s) For V.35/X.21
Date: 22 Mar 93 21:15:37 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory


I am wondering if anyone knows how I might go about getting a device
that takes one or several V.35 interfaces (actual cable connector is
X.21, V.35 signaling) and multiplexes it/them into standard Fiber
Optic Fiber (ST connectors, 62.5/125 multimode) to another such device
located about 1000 feet away.

We have a new building going in and it will have Fiber Optic cable to
the spec I just mentioned going to it.  It is possible that we will
also have some telephone grade copper as well going there.  We need to
interface some V.35 channels on a T1 MUX in one building to some
equipment in the new building.  We would need two channels at
336KB/sec (6 56KB/sec DS0's) each.  Either I need two such line
drivers (sync V.35 externally clocked to Fiber) on each end (one for
each channel) or a single TDM that could handle both without going to
some kind of full blown T1 MUX to Fiber business or anything.


Michael F. Santangelo                 + Internet: [e-mail]      [work]
Dept. Head-Computer & Network Systems +           [e-mail] [home]
UMCEES / CBL (Solomons Island)        + BITNET:   MIKE@UMUC  [fwd to mike@cbl]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 20:10:52 PST
From: Charlie Rosenberg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone Headsets


I just saw an ad in the Black Box catalog for a HelloSet brand
telephone headset.  Looks like a nice unit.  If anyone has had any
experience with this product or others, that would be appreciated.  I
have one that works fine with Bell phones but won't work with my
Panasonic telephone, so compatibility is the most important factor to
me. I would also be interesting in finding out about a vendor with
lower prices on these things than Black Box.


Charlie Rosenberg   [phone]
8 Everett St.   Jamaica Plain, MA  02130

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

From: [e-mail] (Simoun S. Ung)
Subject: 152 & 156 MHz Pagers Needed
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 17:02:00 GMT


I am looking for 152Mhz and 156 MHz pagers.  I have been told that
only China uses these frequencies.  Does anybody know where I can
purchase a large quantity of either numeric or Chinese character
units?  For the right price, I have a standing order of 10,000 units.

Any assistance or information will be greatly appreciated.  Please
email me directly or contact me at the following numbers:

        [phone]  direct line,
        [phone]  messages, or
        [phone]  facsimile.

Many thanks.


Best regards,

Simoun Ung    [e-mail]
Western Business School  --  London, Ontario

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: 18kf Limit Measurement
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 14:31:59 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Craig Myers) writes:

> [e-mail] (sohl,william h) writes:

>>> Does this 18,000 ft measurement start at the CO or the neighborhood
>>> mux (SLC-96, etc.)?

>> The 18,000 feet is the maximum distance for the two wire loop portion
>> of the circuit, therefore, the 18,000 feet is a maximum from the
>> Remote SLC-96 Mux to the subscriber's Network Terminating equipment

> According to a map provided by our local telco, C&P, the limit for
> ISDN from a SLC-96 is about 5000 feet.

If memory serves (it's been about two years since I've dealt with this
stuff), there are several versions of BRITE card.  The SLC-96 BRITE
card will support either a T interface (4-wire) or U interface
(2-wire), but the U is the AT&T-proprietary "AMI" U, not the
ANSI-standard 2B1Q U.  The SLC-5 BRITE card supports only a T
interface, but the BRITE-II card supports an ANSI-standard 2B1Q U
interface.  The SLC-96 and SLC-5 are not plug-compatible (the cards on
the SLC-5 are half the width of the SLC-96 cards, which is how you get
192 lines into the same rack space as a SLC-96).

The T interface has a length limitation of approximately 5000 ft,
while the 18kft limitation is for the U interface; in particular, for
the ANSI U interface.  The AMI U interface has a variety of cited
length limits, depending on wire gauge, although they're all between
about 17.5 and 22.5 kft.

So I would guess that C&P (a) uses SLC-96s or equivalent for their
DLCs, and not SLC-5s; (b) doesn't support the use of the AMI U
interface (which makes sense if they're doing "National ISDN").
Therefore, the only BRI you can get from a SLC is a T interface.

Don't have to buy an NT1, though ...


Disclaimer - I never worked on this stuff at AT&T, so what I know is
information available to any motivated customer with a competent
account rep.

David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation

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

From: [e-mail] (McHarry)
Subject: DA Charges
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 9:22:47 EST


PAT in another thread blamed long distance competition for the
institution of DA charges.  My memory is somewhat different -- in the
mid to late 70s the local exchange carriers (notably Illinois Bell)
were carrying on a campaign to charge for directory assistance.  I
recall being bombarded with ads puling about the "alarming" number of
DA calls made by some subscribers.

Illinois finally ruled that they could charge for DA for numbers that
were actually in the printed directory.  Illinois Bell declined to
implement that and kept up their campaign.  They finally cut some sort
of deal where they were allowed to charge for DA in return for going
to dial tone first pay phones that could allow no-coin access to the
operator and 911.  They changed those suckers out in a flash!  About
the same time, they slipped the publishing date of the Champaign/
Urbana directory to just after the start of the second semester at
the University of Illinois, guaranteeing the minimum number of
correct student telephone numbers.  (It used to come out early in the
fall, just late enough catch all the new student numbers.)

No PAT, it wasn't competition that did it; it was monopoly greed.


[Moderator's Note: Please do not confuse local directory assistance
with the 555-1212 bureaus used for long distance directory. Long after
(many of) the local telcos were charging for information, AT&T was
still giving it away free through [area]-555-1212.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 18:20 GMT
From: Sandy Kyrish <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What Makes Computer Communications So Exciting?


The reason Ithiel Pool did not follow up on his computer ideas is
because he died nearly ten years ago.  Several Pool works appeared
after his death.  Also recommend reading his "Technologies of Freedom"
for additional insight to your questions.

Don't underestimate some mundane but real attractions to computer
based communications.  1.  When your message is written, you do not
have to perform the physical acts of printing and posting it.  2.
When you hit the "Send" key, there is an instinctive pleasure in
knowing you have near-instant delivery.  3. Again without significant
physical exertion, computer nets provide an effective means for
bringing people with similar interests together easily.

Conferences do the same thing, but they are single-source events you
have to go to.  I know it's not very theoretical, but the wonderful
thing about computer nets is that they take advantage of technology to
provide easy and instant communications to a range of people.  If you
are pursuing this as a research project, look in the Dissertation
Abstracts CD-ROM for dissertations published between 1980-1985 and
find one done by David Myers from the University of Texas, an early
study of BBS users.  Not exactly sure of the publication date, sorry.
Maybe even 1986.


Sandy Kyrish  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Consolidating Cellular Sprint Account With Other Phones
Date: 22 Mar 1993 02:36:25 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brent
Whitlock) writes:

> Concerning the hypothetical reference to having Sprint long distance
> on a mobile phone consolidated-billed with other Sprint calls, I am
> afraid that this cannot be done.  I tried to have my Sprint LD for my
> cellular phone consolidated on the same account as the Sprint LD for
> my home phone (and my calling cards,) but the Sprint Customer Service
> Rep. said they could not do that. :-( I hope they change that soon.

This capability really does exist.  I had just this setup when I had
service with Cellular One of San Francisco.  I had my cellular number
added to the account that already had my four home lines on it, and it
worked just fine.  Since I ran up a substantial long distance bill at
home, I got the benefit of the combined volume discount for my
cellular long distance calls.

In fact, I had an accounting code set up for my Sprint account.  For
$5 per month, they put a prompt for an accounting code for every 1+
call made, and the calls are categorized on the bill according to the
codes entered at the time of the call.  This worked for calls from my
cellular phone as well, so any 1+ long distance call from my cellular
would generate an extra prompt for me to enter the accounting code.
This indicates that Sprint's switch gets real-time ANI from the
cellular switch, and not just a billing tape at the end of the month.

So, perhaps the rep you spoke with was misinformed, or perhaps your
cellular system is set up differently.  What I would do is call back
and say you want to add another number, and not tell them that it's
cellular, and see what happens.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ehud Gavron)
Subject: Re: MCI 800 Problem
Date: 23 Mar 93 04:25:00 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: ACES Research Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Monty
Solomon) writes...

> Should MCI employ beta testers?  That would be my suggestion.  They
> could pay people like me to make trial calls at, say, 3:00 AM CST,
> just to make sure the system worked as advertised.

Eh?  Why should they do that when people like YOU are more than happy
to PAY THEM for the opportunity to beta-test their software, and 24
hours a day, seven days a week at that.  It's called third-rate long
distance service ... get used to it ;-)


Ehud Gavron   (EG76)  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 07:30:29 EST
From: [e-mail] (Ken Levitt)
Subject: Re: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted


In TELECOM Digest V13 : Issue 185 Doug Barr writes:

> We have some dial in modems that "hang". They require power cycling to
> reset them.

If they are 14,400bps v.32bis modems with a Rockwell chipset, this is
a common known bug in the Rockwell ROM program.  Most companies have
updated their ROM programs by now to fix this problem.  Contact the
manufacturer to see if new ROM chips are available.  If they don't
have an update, send them back as defective.


Ken Levitt - On FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390     UUCP: zorro9!levitt
INTERNET: [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Newman)
Subject: Strange Disconnections -- What Can I Do?
Date: 22 Mar 1993 18:14:14 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman (BBN)


I am having a strange problem with my telephone service.

When I call my friend Helene, my call often gets suddenly disconnected
in the middle of our conversation.  This doesn't happen when I call
anyone else.  It doesn't happen when anyone else calls her.  It
doesn't happen when Helene calls *me*.

Sometimes it happens over and over again, which is very frustrating to
both of us.

Neither of us has any idea what is wrong.  We don't think the problem
is in our telephone sets, since it doesn't happen when we're talking
to other people.  Has anyone else had a problem like this?  Any
suggestions on how to report this usefully to New England Telephone?

The call is local, from (617) 628 to (617) 367.


Ron Newman    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 23:02:13 GMT
From: Graham Toal <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps


[e-mail] (Steve Chafe) wrote:

> Has anyone tried to find the cause of bursts of four or five garbage
> characters that appear randomly (ever few minutes to every few hours)
> on a 9600 bps data call that does not have error correction in effect?

Synchronization problems between digital clocks of neighbouring digital
exchanges.  We discussed it a few years ago.  One of the biggest problems
with this fault is convincing your phone company that it exists.


G

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #198
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03125;
          23 Mar 93 2:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09295
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 00:02:03 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26571
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 00:01:31 -0600
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 00:01:31 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #199

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 23 Mar 93 00:01:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 199

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (John Higdon)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Gary W. Sanders)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Richard Budd)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Louis A. Mamakos)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Dale Farmer)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Richard Pauls)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Richard Cox)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Dan J. Declerck)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Graham Toal)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Steve Kaiser)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Matt Healy)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Bill Campbell)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Steven King)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Barry Mishkind)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (John S. Maddaus)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Greg Andrews)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 01:11 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


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

> (And of course, if it ever becomes a national issue, the Californicators
> will scream bloody murder.  If it's true that average commute times in
> the LA basin are over an hour each way, then a ban on car phone conver-
> sation in a moving vehicle would shut that town down.)

This particular Californicator will scream bloody murder because he is
getting bloody tired of laws passed by those thinking that every
problem, irriatation, annoyance, or act of rudeness can be fixed by
passing yet another law. Don't we have enough laws on the books? There
are already laws in most states that prohibit driving erratically or
recklessly. There are laws that prohibit activities of any sort that
interfere with the ability to control the car.

If California ever passes any such law (not beyond the realm of
possibility -- remember we have that stupid helmet law), I will insist
that laws be passed that prohibit the following while driving a car:

* Adjusting or applying makeup;
* Reading a map;
* Reading a newspaper or book;
* Disciplining kids in the back seat;
* Carrying on a conversation requiring gesticulation.

Any of the above are at least as dangerous as talking on the phone.
Every day on the road brings at least several incidents of an
inattentive driver blithely moving into my lane or cutting me off. Not
one of these lousey drivers has been talking on a cellular phone at
the time.

People drive well or they do not. The use of a cellular phone has
precious little to do with that. It just needs to be remembered that
driving is a foreground task, not something that is done while doing
something else. It is not fair to punish everyone because a few people
forget this.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 13:59:17 GMT
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> Woody M. Collins <asqb-oir@
huachuca-emh2.army.mil> writes:

> I have to agree with the MA legislator.  The cellular phone makers and
> the cell companies, both warn users of the danger of driving and using
> a cellular car phone.  To solve the problem, most good phones comes
> handsfree speakerphone option (mike and/or speaker).  With a handsfree
> phone, it is very little different than tuning your radio.  I have
> heard that some top of the line phones are voice activated.  Bottom
> line, I think the phone makers will go for it, forcing the sales on
> more expensive models; the cellular companies will be neutral.

    Its not the using a cellular phone and driving that's a
problem.  Its the salesman trying to cut a deal on the phone, reaching
for his briefcase or now adays his computer. I was just about run off
the road by a guy in a big powerlunch car who was trying to drive, use
the car phone and his computer at the same time. I was in my truck and
could see into his car. There were two phones (voice/data?),laptop,
printer and what looked like a small copier (fax machine?).

When he was talking on the phone its was OK, he was in his lane, but
when he went to use the computer he would weave to the right, then to
the right when he would look at the printouts.


Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR)   [e-mail]
AT&T Bell Labs   614-860-5965

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 15:42:47 EDT
From: Richard Budd <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: CSAV UTIA


You can talk to a passenger while keeping both hands on the wheel and
looking straight ahead.  Unless your cellular unit has a speakerphone,
you need at least one hand on the telephone.  The driver would also
have to hold the receiver up to his/her/its face and keep it there.
That takes some concentration.  Of course, talking to a passenger
requires some concentration that would have been dedicated to keeping
the car on the road too.

> (And of course, if it ever becomes a national issue, the Californicators
> will scream bloody murder.  If it's true that average commute times in
> the LA basin are over an hour each way, then a ban on car phone conver-
> sation in a moving vehicle would shut that town down.)

Of course most of that commute time is spent in traffic jams where the
car is either not or barely moving.  The problem you would find there
is the driver would be so busy talking on the telephone that he/she/it
fails to move along, prompting a honk on the horn from the driver
behind the car or a cutoff from someone from an adjacent lane.

The law could prohibit using a car phone and while driving faster than
15 MPH.  That would be fun to enforce.  One has to imagine what the
speed limit signs would look like after the legislature passed a few
laws of this type.

Am I glad not to be in L.A.

An aside from the town I am in:

Cellular car phones have become quite popular in Prague and even more
so in Hungary.  The quality of land-based lines are so poor and it is
still a four year wait for a telephone in the house.  However, I can
go down to the Cellular Phone Shop in Wenceslaus Square (it's not
right on the square, but in the neighborhood), pick up a cellular
phone today, and have it activated the day after tomorrow.  Seeing
someone in a parked car talking into a cellular telephone is a common
sight in Prague and Budapest.

Family scene in Prague (translation by me):

Son: Hey, Dad.  Can I have the keys to the car?

Father: Sorry, son.  Your sister is on the phone.


Richard Budd  | USA  [e-mail]    | CR    [e-mail]
              |      139 S. Hamilton St.    |       Kolackova 8
              |      Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 |       18200 Praha 8

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 10:43:14 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Louis A. Mamakos)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: The University of Maryland, College Park


So if this proposed law is going to prohibit use of cellular
telephones in moving vehicles, how about old MTS rigs?  Amateur Radio?
CB?  How about the police officer, who may be traveling at high rates
of speed in pursuit; should he be "distracted" by using his radio
while he's moving?  How is use of one two-way radio in a moving
vehicle any different than another?

Of course, even if this proposed law comes to pass and even prohibits
the use of hands-free speakerphones in cars, how would you enforce it?

I think a prior poster's comment about walking and chewing gum really
is applicable here.


Louis Mamakos

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Date: 22 Mar 1993 11:43:00 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


This sound an awful lot like the hoopla that happened here in the US
in the seventies when the "CB craze" hit. (Citizens Band radio) Laws
were passed in many states similar to what is being asked for here.
The laws were generally overturned on various grounds, mainly having
to do with the fact that a driver is already fully responsible for
his/her actions, and the actions of the vehicle under their control.
Therefore this would be a form of double jepordy.  (Which is uncons-
titutional).

    Myself, I have been known to drive at high rates of speed,
hold conversations on two different radio systems, talk on the
intercom, and control the lights and siren ... at the same time.  And
I have never wrecked an ambulance.  So don't prohibit me from doing
something that I have already proved I can do safely.


Dale Farmer

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

From: Richard Pauls <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 12:46:20 -0500


I agree.  Use of a hand held cellphone while driving a car should be
discouraged.  It is clearly dangerous.  I hope the law is passed.
Can't these units be used in a hands-free mode (i.e. speakerphone)?
This seems much safer while driving.  If the sound quality is a
problem maybe we could sell a light headset with a mic, or attach a
mic to the visor, but then it wouldn't look impressive when you drive
by would it;-)


Rich

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 20:18 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Jon P. Knight) said:

>>  This is already law in the UK, and a jolly good job too.

It isn't actually *law* as such.  It's in the Highway Code, a
government publication, but the charge the police would bring, is
"driving without due care and attention" and it is up to the court to
decide if you were or not.

Mind you, I fully agree with the point that it *should* be illegal!

>> the law does permit you to use a communications device whilst driving if
>> it leaves both hands free, but I could be wrong about that bit.

Yes, the British Highway Code DOES exclude fully hands free use -- but
I've often found that handsfree use requires even greater concentration,
and so probably is even more dangerous!


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]     Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan J. Declerck)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 21:09:02 GMT


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

> Some percentage of the population apparently can't walk and chew gum
> at the same time, or drive and talk on the phone at the same time.  So
> what else is new?  If you think somone is driving hazardously, take
> down their license number and report them to the police.

This entire point could be moot, if only people used "hands free mode"
in most car-installed mobiles. The handset is the issue, not the conversation.


Dan DeClerck    EMAIL: [e-mail]
Motorola Cellular APD  Phone: [phone]

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

From: Graham Toal <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Reply-To: Graham Toal <[e-mail]>
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 14:09:18 GMT


We already have such a law in Britain, but you'd never know it by
walking along the street watching drivers.  Such a law is unenforcable
just as a 'thou shalt not' injunction.  The only way to make it work
is to insist that all new carphones fitted have an interlock to the
speedometer so that the phones are disconnected while the car is in
motion.  (Such interlocks are easy to build -- London taxis already
have them connected to the passenger doors).


Graham

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 10:08:20 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


Maybe the FCC will require a hunter-orange sticker on the handset:

    "use of this apparatus above 15 MPH (19 KPH) will be
     injurious to your health and those around you"


Pete

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 23:16:00 GMT


I don't think such legislation will change much of anything in Los
Angeles.  My own experience, when visiting that city, is that for most
of the time I spent on the `freeways', the vehicle's status was
anything but `in motion'.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 02:08:47 GMT


    Are the existing laws against weaving all over the road not
sufficient?  It seems that it is the licensee's (driver's license)
responsibility to do whatever is necessary to insure the car does not
weave all over the road.  The actual cause of the weaving should be
immaterial.  Here in California, I recall a law limiting the number of
unrelated persons that could live in one house.  I think it was a law
in Santa Barbara.  They wanted to limit noisy students.  The
California Supreme Court shot the law down.  In my opinion, it matters
not if the residents are related or not.  If they are concerned about
noise, put a legal limit on noise.  If they are concerned about
population density (typically for health reasons), put a limit on
population density.  If they are concerned about weaving cars, make it
illegal for cars to weave instead of making it illegal to talk on the
phone ...


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Kaiser)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: -> ESKIMO NORTH (206) For-Ever <-
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 23:20:47 GMT


[e-mail] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold) writes:

> [e-mail] (Scott D Fybush) writes:

>> I suspect this one will get eaten alive by the cell companies' lobby-
>> ists.

> Not to mention by all the influential types who use car phones.  Well,
> this should make the road safe for all those putting on makeup,
> shaving, eating and reading as they drive.

It is ironic to me that this report comes from Boston.  Before I made
my first trip to Boston, I was concerned about the safety of driving
there, having heard many rumors.  A friend from Boston advised me,
"just drive like everyone else: drink your coffee, read the newspaper,
and don't make eye contact."  It worked.


Steve Kaiser             Kaiser Data
[e-mail]      13533 Northshire Rd NW
[phone]         Seattle, WA 98177-4033

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Healy)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Yale U. - Genetics
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 15:32:17 GMT


My insurance agent says he's seen quite a few accidents involving
cellular phones.  He now suggests that, if you are involved in an
accident you look for a cellular phone in the other car.  If one is
present, ask if they were using it.  If they deny using it, and it
looks like the accident might end up in court, ask if they would be
willing to repeat that denial under oath ...


Matt Healy   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Campbell)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:27:41 GMT


I assume that all other drivers on the road are asleep, drunk, and
will do the stupidest thing I can think of -- Plus 1.  This has
allowed me to avoid their stupidity in most cases (it doesn't do any
good when I'm sitting at a traffic light and get tail-ended :-).

> what else is new?  If you think somone is driving hazardously, take
> down their license number and report them to the police.

The police are generally too busy collecting easy revenue by giving
people tickets for driving 66 on a road designed for 70+ traffic.
They can't be bothered with other things.

> Meanwhile, the rest of us don't have any problem.  Get off my case!

Talking on a cellular phone WITHOUT HANDS-FREE can impair one's
driving abilities.  In fact any conversation in the car may well
divert attention from driving, as can kids bouncing on the seat, fuzzy
dice hanging from the mirror ...

I use a cellular phone in the car every day, but primarily to answer
incoming calls where all I have to do is to punch one key.  I don't
take messages or write down phone numbers, and try not to dial
outgoing calls unless the number is one that's already stored in the
phone where I don't have to look to put in the number.

If people need to leave a message, I give them another phone number
they can call for voice-mail.  In fact I give people my cellular
number as my primary business number, and put the cell-phone on
call-forwarding to other number (which has the voice-mail, and is a
custom-ringing number on my home phone) when I'm not in the car or on
client sites.  This doesn't cost much since US-West Cellular doesn't
charge for calls that are forwarded on land lines.  It might be
expensive in other areas (Bell Atlantic charged air time for forwarded
calls when I had an account with them in 1987-1988, and charged $0.10
to dial a number that was busy).


INTERNET:  [e-mail]   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!bill   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!bill   Mercer Island, WA 98040; [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 22:11:40 GMT


Let me add myself to the minority here who don't want to see this
legislation happen.  Cellphones may be a visible source of reckless
driving, but if we're going to outlaw their use (by the driver of a
moving vehicle) we should be fair and outlaw eating and applying
makeup at the wheel.  I'd say it's a darned sight worse to be behind a
guy juggling a Big Mac, large Coke, and a manual transmission than it
is to be behind someone on a cellphone.

Personally I'm in favor of nailing the people who drive recklessly for
reckless driving, and let the rest of the population live and let
live.  If you can handle a cellphone and drive at the same time, go
for it.  If you can't, expect to get hit with a reckless driving
charge.  Ditto for those who eat, apply makeup, or whatever.  (Heck,
here in the Chicago environs people don't even need the excuse of a
cellphone to drive like idiots.  It just comes naturally to most of
them.)

Yeah, I know, take a look at my Organization: line and you'll see I've
got something of a vested interest here.  Believe it or not, the fact
that I make my living off these silly things isn't a factor in my
argument.  Needless to say, I speak for myself and not the company.


Steven King, Motorola Cellular  ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (barry mishkind)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 21:59:54 GMT


The prudent solution might be to interlock the phone handset against
the ignition or the transmission.  Or, mandate only speakerphone
useage (which will allow the conducting of business - maybe not the
best solution), or ... encourage people to live closer to work!!!

Yes, I *know* traveling salesmen, etc. can't always do so. But ... is
it always necessary for Americans to rush everything?



Barry Mishkind    coyote.datalog.com   Tucson, Arizona

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 11:17:13 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: AT&T


Don't flame me for submitting second-hand unconfirmed info, but I'm
told by a Corporate Security Officer for a major Texas Fortune 10
company that there are already laws on the books in Texas and Ohio
prohibiting mobile phone calls while in motion.  They have had to warn
their executives on this, most of whom have now opted for the
hands-free alternative.  In this person's case, it resulted only in a
warning from a State Trooper.  Can anyone confirm the (non)existence
of these laws?


John S. Maddaus        AT&T Bell Laboratories
Product Manager - Secure Cellular Communications
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Andrews)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 03:56:32 GMT


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

> I suspect that this proposal will fail, because the lobbyists will ask
> one question that even I can't answer: why is it that talking on the
> phone consumes more attention than talking to someone in the passenger
> seat(s)?  I don't know why it is, but it seems to be true.  Is this
> some kind of psychological thing?  Are people talking on the phone
> spending extra mental effort on imagining the facial expressions of
> the people they're talking to, or what?

To put it in techno-communications terms, bandwidth.

Telephony is a modern miracle, but it's still not the same as being
there, no matter how many pins Sprint throws on the floor.  ;-)

For one thing, the friendly passenger will automatically speak louder
as that hot-rod rumbles past you.  Someone talking over the phone
won't, and you'll strain to understand them until you ask them to
speak louder.  The suppressed high and low frequencies on consonants
(s, sh, t, th, f, b, p) reduce the amount of information reaching the
brain.  The brain must apply more processing power than normal to
extract the information.

These factors make us concentrate harder on the conversation than we
would if the other person were in the car with us.  In most people,
more attention paid to the conversation means less paid to driving.


Greg    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #199
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07005;
          23 Mar 93 3:58 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17302
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 01:32:50 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29198
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 01:32:20 -0600
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 01:32:20 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #200

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 23 Mar 93 01:32:20 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 200

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Battery Packs (Wilson Mohr)
    Re: Cellular Battery Packs (Kevin A. Mitchell)
    Re: Cellular Battery Packs (Dale Farmer)
    Re: Cellular Battery Packs (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy (Lionel Moser)
    Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy (Arthur Marsh)
    Re: France (was Country Codes and Area Codes Within Countries) (Carl Moore)
    Re: France (was Country Codes and Area Codes Within Countries) (MJ Crepin)
    Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (Terry Cooper)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Don Wegeng)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Will Martin)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Blake Tritico)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Wilson Mohr)
Date: 22 Mar 93 17:33:36 GMT
Subject: Re: Cellular Battery Packs


[e-mail] writes:

> Does anyone know if it is worth trying to recover an old NiCad and if
> so how to? Can I do it myself with my trickle-charger and a 6v load of
> some kind?

Well, for what it's worth, (read: std disclaimers) this is what I have
done to resurrect dead protable batteries. The basic problem is that
the metalic materials in each cell eventually polarize in a line and
effectively short out a cell or two due the charge/discharge cycles.
One needs to "fuse" this short and the cell will return to near normal
operation.  "fuse" = blow the fuse (short). My batteries are 7.5v
nominal (5 cells). I hook up a battery (observing polarity) to my car
battery charger. It is one of those handy-dandy Sears 2A-10A-50A
specials. I set it to the 10A position and *then* I plug in the
charger for *not more than 15 secs.*.  (If you try this yourself, do
it in an area where you do not care of the battery explodes) Yes,
there is a *real* chance of the battery exploding! I take appropriate
precautions. I figure since the battery is worthless as it is nothing
ventured nothing gained.

Initially my experience shows a draw of about 5A on the charger's
meter. About 5-15 secs. later the meter drops to near zero amps. I
*immediately* unplug the charger. I then take the battery to my normal
portable battery charger for the phone and give it 10-12 hrs.  note
the normal charger is about a 500mA(?) trickle charger. I have done it
several times to the same battery and it seems to last about a year
between abuses. I cannot stress enough that this is *very* dangerous
and damage can result. I will not recommend you do this. This is just
my (silly) approach.

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin A. Mitchell)
Subject: Re: Cellular Battery Packs
Organization: Datalogics, Inc.
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 18:31:40 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> The battery packs for my NEC P3 handportable cellular seem to last for
> about one year then suddenly fade away.

The so-called "memory effect" does not occur in modern NiCad cells,
except under strictly controlled laboratory conditions.

There are two reasons that your cells may be worn out:

o  You've charged and discharged them enough. NiCad cells are good for
500-1000 charge/discharge cycles depending on the cell type.

o  They've been deep discharged or overcharged. The former can cause
damage if one of the cells in the battery has been driven to reverse
polarity, and the latter can happen if left on trickle too long. The
cells lose electrolyte by venting hydrogen or oxygen gas. Normally
these gases are recycled within the cell, but if the pressures
increase, they come out the vent (the little hole in the + end of
consumer cells).

Don't waste money on a rejuvenator. Just buy a new battery.


Kevin A. Mitchell      [phone]
Datalogics, Inc        Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron           UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!kam
Chicago, IL  60610     FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: Re: Cellular Battery Packs
Date: 22 Mar 1993 12:10:02 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


[e-mail] wrote:

> The battery packs for my NEC P3 handportable cellular seem to last for
  (sacrificed to the gods of bandwidth)
> more money with her but I'm less keen to do it this time. The dealer
> eventually admitted to having what she calls a "recycler" which is
> apparently some device that rapid-charges the battery pack then
> somehow rapid-discharges it. However she says (guess what) this only

    The "memory effect" of Ni-Cad battery packs are a
unfourtunatly well known problem.  What happens is that a fully
charged new pack has for example, 1.0 Amp/hours power.  (technical
details ommitted) you use it and discharge it down to 0.6 a/h, plonk
it into the charger overnight and repeat for weeks/months.  after a
period of time the memory effect develops.  (Don't ask me how, it is
beyond my knowledge) It may be first noticed that one day you use it a
lot and it just seems to go dead when you exceed your normal daily
usage.  What happens is that the remainder of the charge that normally
does not get used, just seems to go away.  As the battery ages, this
gets worse, and eventually eats into your normal daily use.  That is
when most people notice it.

    The solution is preventive maintainance to your batteries.
(not takeing them apart and greasing them :-) Look at your battery
charger.  Does it have a setting labeled "deep cycle, full discharge,
test cycle" or something like that?  If it does, you're in luck, use
that setting on each battery about once a week.  You can go up to a
month but it is easier to lose track that way.

    If you don't then it needs a little more effort on your part.
Turn on the widget and run the battery almost flat.  If it has an
automatic power saver feature this may take a while.  Once it has
discharged completely, plonk it into the charger and run it up to
full.  If you are adventurous and electronically inclined you could
make a device to discharge it thru a resister.  Don't ask me for
instructions.

Hope this is helpful.


Dale Farmer

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Cellular Battery Packs
Date: 22 Mar 1993 00:14:42 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> Does anyone know if it is worth trying to recover an old NiCad and if
> so how to? Can I do it myself with my trickle-charger and a 6v load of
> some kind?

Although I've never tried it myself, I have a friend who swears by
this technique: Hook up the NiCad momentarily to a 12-volt car
battery, using *reverse* polarity.  This can be accomplished with
jumper cables.  He says that this will breathe new life into tired
NiCads.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 11:59:00 +0000
From: Lionel (L.H.) Moser <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy


I'm torn, as always, between proclaiming that it's sad to see c.d.t
go down the drain of Quebec language discussion, as many a good
newsgroup has gone before, while at the same time dreaming that I
might get in the last word.

Mr. Moderator, please exercise restraint, because there are a lot of
Quebecers, ex-Quebecers, and non-Quebec-Canadians who have strong, and
oft-times not-quite-objective opinions on Quebec language laws. I hate
the bad PR we get from half-truths.

Things are not as bad here as the more negative postings would have
you believe. Things are worse than the most optimistic would claim.
It's an imperfect world and almost every other society looks unjust
from some angle -- indeed more so than my own.

Since Quebec is predominantly French speaking, it seems pretty
unremarkable that the phone company answers in French. It also seems
unremarkable that all of the personnel who answer their phones are
bilingual and respond in English when so-addressed (Pat's experience).

Now, as far as telephony goes, I have a question. I have said for
years that in the States people pay more for local calls than we do
since divestiture, but now I'm not so sure.  I'm holding my phone bill
for this month. I have no Bell Canada equipment, and pay for a basic
line (dial pulse), no special features. The bill is C$12.60 (=$US
10.33) before taxes (federal & provincial).  I have unlimited free
local calls in a metro calling area of about three million people.  I
get one or two DA calls per month free for numbers *in* the phone
book.  Now, how does this compare for what people pay in the states?
Are you paying 50%, 100% or 200% more than us? Or does anyone in the
States pay less than us for basic telephone service?  Has this topic
been hacked to death here before (and if so, please moderate me out of
here, Mr.  T.)?


Lionel Moser     Recherches Bell-Northern (BNR)   Montreal
  *** The opinions expressed are personal and do no reflect those
  ***  of my employer.


[Moderator's Note: You're right. It really has gone as far as I can
take it here. We'll have one last message and close the thread.  PAT]

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

Date: 22 Mar 1993 01:40:34 +1000
From: [e-mail] (Arthur Marsh)
Subject: Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Camelot Swamp bulletin board, Hawthorndene Sth Australia


On Sun 14 Mar at 00:26 Dave Leibold wrote:

> Perhaps an idea should be borrowed from the white page introductory
> sections of many other countries (Australia is one such country, I
> believe): a brief description of the phone service (emergency numbers,
> how to dial, etc) is translated into many languages.

The current Adelaide White Pages contains a page on how to gain access
to free interpreter services, 24 hours/day in Arabic, Chinese,
Croatian, Czech, English, Filipino, Greek, Hungarian, Indonesian,
Italian, Khmer, Korean, Laotian, Macedonian, Persian, Polish,
Portuguese, Romanian, Serbian, Spanish, Thai, Turkish and Vietnamese.


Arthur
Origin: Camelot Swamp MJCNA, Hawthorndene, Sth Australia (8:7000/8)
Camelot Swamp bbs, data: [phone] reply to [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 17:16:01 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: France (was Country Codes and Area Codes Within Countries)


I don't have time to write much right now, but I do appreciate seeing
this note about France, which as a result is now easier to relate to
North America in terms of area codes or lack of them.  I am retaining
a short list of previously-existing codes for France; would France now
be doing things like:

Using "overlay" codes? (notice area code 917 in New York) ...

Relieving a crowded area by using numbers from a neighboring,
less-crowded area?  (for example, Delaware is very small, and
next-door Maryland had to split recently).

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

From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 23:18:41 +0000
Organization: Imperial College, London, UK.
Subject: Re: France (was Country Codes and Area Codes Within Countries)


Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I don't have time to write much right now, but I do appreciate seeing
> this note about France, which as a result is now easier to relate to
> North America in terms of area codes or lack of them.  I am retaining
> a short list of previously-existing codes for France; would France now
> be doing things like:

> using "overlay" codes? (notice area code 917 in New York)

I don't know what you mean by overlay codes. Codes in France used to
be associated with French "Departements". Nice, Cannes, Antibes, and
dozens of smaller towns (and hundreds of villages) are all in the
"departement" (<- local area) called "Alpes Maritimes". Monaco is an
independent Principality which is an enclave in that area of France.
What used to be area codes in the past are now fully part of everyone's
phone number. Even when you are in the same area, you have to dial
*all* numbers.

> relieving a crowded area by using numbers from a neighboring, less-crowded
> area?  (for example, Delaware is very small, and next-door Maryland had
> to split recently)

Yes, that's exactly what they can do now. "Alpes Maritimes" is a very
crowded area, because of its geographical position along the
Mediterranean Sea.  Since the last few years, new numbers allocated
can now either start with 93 or 92. 92 used to be the area code for
"Alpes-de-Haute-Provence", a very mountainous area, since it's already
part of the Alps, and hence quite scarcely populated.

By abolishing area codes, France Telecom has managed to use numbers
which used to be theoretically allocated to scarcely populated areas,
into areas where there was a shortage of numbers. Paris being the
Capital, and hence being very densely populated, has got an additional
prefix of (1), thus having much room for expansion.


Olivier M.J. Crepin-Leblond, Digital Comms. Section, Elec. Eng. Department
 Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London SW7 2BT, UK
       Internet/Bitnet: <[e-mail]> - Janet: <[e-mail]>

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

From: Terry (T.A.) Cooper <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 00:00:00 GMT


[e-mail] (Derek Andrew) wrote:

>> From correspondence with Canadians, I have determined that the US has
>> benefitted greatly for deregulation and divestiture. While Canada
>> still has step equipment and multi-party lines in rural areas, that
>> equipment and facility arrangement has all but disappeared in this
>> country. Bell Canada has no technical superiority with regard to the
>> typical service provided in the US; and frequently the reverse is
>> actually the case.

> I just wanted to point out that Bell Canada only services some of the
> Eastern provinces of Canada. It probably compares to GTE!

> Fibre was installed in Saskatchewan at a faster rate than any other
> North American phone company.  We got no stinkin step by steps left
> and I am not aware of any multi-party lines left.

 From what I have read on this news group about GTE, I would not
compare Bell Canada to them.  From what I have read and have
experienced in other countries there is no better phone system than
that which we have here.  Yes it's more expensive that in the US but
we can rely on our phones to work ALL the time.

To clarify the above statement, Bell Canada covers central Canada
(Ontario and Quebec).  These two provinces contain 2/3 of the
population of the country so Bell is the largest of the regional phone
service providers.

There are still some steppers and other Analogue systems in Canada,
but these are typically used by the smaller independant Telcos.  Bell
has some analogue systems left in service but they won't be there for
long.  Most of the remote villages that I know of are served by at
least DMS-10s or remotes off of a DMS-100. Several of the provincial
telcos have fully digitised their networks, Bell plans to hit this
point next year.


Terry Cooper    Northern Telecom   "Opinions expressed are personal and"
Ottawa, Ontario                    "are not those of Northern Telecom  "

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Wegeng)
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Xerox Corp., Henrietta, NY
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 15:39:05 GMT


I was vacationing in Naples, Florida during the big storm.  Naples
missed the worst of it, though the waves were pretty big and the condo
that I was staying at lost electricity for about 20 hours.

Trying to get through to United Airlines to reconfirm my flight home
for Monday, March 15 was interesting, however.  As you might guess,
most calls to their 800-241-6522 reservations number didn't go though
(sometimes I got reorder, sometimes I got an "all circuits busy"
message).  Every so often, though, I would get through to their
menu-based system, which would instruct me to "press 1 to get flight
info, press 2... ,etc), and upon making a selection I'd again get
reorder or an "all circuits busy" message.

Anyone know what was happening here?  Was United's menu system dialing
another number based on my selection?  If so, why not use dedicated
lines?


Don Wegeng   [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 10:21:25 CST
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


Just a quick follow-up: The credit-union-supporting Automatic Teller
Machine network(s) that were brought down by the storm appear to still
be down. The in-building ATM for our credit union here in St. Louis
has had one of those printed notices mentioned by other Telecom'ers
stuck to it, and its display has shown "out of service", all last week
and remains so today.  Ironically, the week changing has made the
printed notice become meaningful again -- it says that they hoped to
have service up by Tuesday or early Wednesday, a claim made
meaningless by the latter part of last week, but which now could be
said to be true again!  :-)


Will

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

From: [e-mail] (Blake Tritico)
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 11:32
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


I was in Austin, TX this past weekend and Liberty Bank, a local S&L,
which displays Cirrus, Pulse, and Bankmate logos, was still out of
service with a sign referencing the great storm as of 17:00 03/21/93.
Additionally, there were several branches of Nations Bank, in Houston,
TX that were down as late as Friday, the 19th.


Blake Tritico    Telecommunications Analyst
Internet: [e-mail]
Voice 713-560-1225  Fax   [phone]
USnail: Landmark Graphics, Inc.
        15150 Memorial Drive
        Houston, TX 77079-4304

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #200
******************************