Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1993.volume.13/vol13.iss201-250

Text File | 1993-04-09 | 1MB | 25,679 lines

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09711;
          23 Mar 93 5:18 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30358
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 02:41:31 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29840
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 02:40:59 -0600
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 02:40:59 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #201

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 23 Mar 93 02:41:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 201

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Stephen Friedl)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Jeffrey Jonas)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Clive Feather)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (John Higdon)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology? (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (John R. Grout)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Henry Mensch)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 ([e-mail])
    Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (Daniel E. Ganek)
    Re: Bell South Cordless Phone (Brian Oplinger)
    Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola Advisor Pager (Steven Warner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 05:43:29 GMT


I have been holding off from participating in this discussion about
USPS versus UPS because it seemed too off the subject, but Harold
brought it right into my field with his comments about packet
switches.

First, though, let me state for the record that I think the post
office is doing a much better job than they get credit for, and they
might do it even better if you all would appreciate what they do well
and acknowledge that bad service is the exception (and of course
should be dealt with when it does occur).

I was also amazed at the claim that USPS has no way to trace a
package, but Fed Ex does: It is just that they don't activate this
costly tracking unless you ask for it and pay for it up front. It is
called registered mail; in principle registered mail is tracked by
signed log books everytime it changes hands. Few people use it,
though, because sending a registered letter costs almost as much as
sending the letter by Federal Express ...

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> 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.

For UPS, this makes sense; for FedEx and clones, it doesn't. The
database transaction to look up the routing code from the serial
number is what creates the tracking entry at the sorting hub.

> 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.

What you are describing is the particular form of packet switching
called transparent bridging. It works well in smaller networks, but
collapses as the network grows larger, because the tables required
grow too large to be practical.

> 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.

Indeed, this is the difference between bridging and routing in a
structured network. The most successful protocol for large networks is
IP (Internet Protocol), where each 32-bit host address consists of a
network number and a hostpart ("extension number") within that
network.  The global numbering authority gives out network numbers,
and the network manager assigns his own host part. The addresses are
thus guaranteed to be globally unique.

Each router has a list of nearby network numbers, and which port on
the router would be used to get to that network. Anything not listed
goes "higher up" towards the well-connected center of the network. The
routers in the center must keep track of ALL network numbers. Most of
the work of the core routers is not forwarding packets, but keeping
track of all the network numbers, and which direction is CURRENTLY the
best way to get there. There are about 50,000 network numbers issued,
of which about 14,000 are reachable online (the rest are either not
connected to the common backbones, or represent numbers that are kept
on reserve for later use).

As more and more (and smaller and smaller) organizations connect their
local networks to the Internet, the routing tables will get
explosively larger. Also, the division of the address into a network
number and a host number within the network means that we are not
filling up the number space, and by some estimates up to 98% of the
number space is wasted. (Reality check: My employer runs a network
with a couple hundred machines on it, but we have allocated a "class B
network" with 65,000 numbers in it; that means we are currently using
0.3% of the allocated space.)

To solve these two problems, two complementary management schemes are
being deployed:

(1) CIDR (Classless InterDomain Routing) allows issuing of network
    numbers for networks of arbitrary sizes, which could lead to less
    waste, since you would be able to get a chunk of addresses only 4
    times as large as what you think you need instead of having to take
    65,000 numbers anytime you think you might need more than 256.

(2) Hierachical address assignment means that number ranges are being
    delegated to specific continents, i.e. while a router in the US
    still has to know all the networks issued up till now, it would be
    able to say begins with 231.x.y.z - must be in Europe, lets send it
    towards Amsterdam, and the router in Amsterdam might be able to say
    206.z.y.x - South America. This is expected to greatly simplify
    future maintenance of the routing tables and slow the exponential
    growth of the tables to a linear growth.

    There is wide agreement that the top level must be by continent;
    there is much less agreement about the next level: Should it be by
    metro area or by local carrier (in the Internet we have had
    competition in the local loop for a while).

> So, those of us in telecom really do have something in common
> with the USPS?

It's really all the same. There are only so many ways to solve the
same problems. But don't you wish they had sat down together and
designed a single numbering system?  Life would have been so much
simpler if Zip codes and NPAs were the same numbers.

> Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]

Are you involved with KCBX, the local NPR station that covers both
SLO and SBA ?


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] (Stephen Friedl)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?
Date: 22 Mar 93 15:07:32 GMT
Organization: Software Consulting, Tustin, CA


Bill Campbell writes:

> Actually the Postal (dis)Service hasn't raised the price of postage in
> years!

> Postage is still $0.03, the rest is for storage.

Even at $.29, it's still just three cents per day!


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


[Moderator's Note: Ah, you better check your figures and caucus with
Clive on this -- in another message in this issue he says it is *one
cent* per day.  :)   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 11:04:02 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?


[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]

May I elaborate upon these comments?

1) When I lived in Esopus, New York (upstate, near Kingston and
Poughkeepsie), there were NO addresses on the buildings.
There was no mail delivery: the post office was ONE person, so
everybody had a PO box or got their mail over the counter.

There's no such concept as equal access.  ONLY the US Post Office may
deliver mail to a PO box.  So how's anybody else to send me mail?  I
could not put a mailbox in the hall (violates the lease -- even
christmas decorations on the door were frowned upon).

For United Parcel Service / Federal Express, people could NOT use my
regular PO address: they had to use a street address of "Black Creek
Apartments, Apt 5J" and the driver had to know where the apartment was
located.  That ment I had two addresses: one for USPS, one for all
others.  In telephony, this would not be tolerable!  It would be like
having a different phone number for every long distance carrier!

2) there was a case of a Boy Scout troop being sued or otherwise
pursued by the USPS for placing their flyers in people's mailboxes.
As Pat said, the USPS has EXCLUSIVE USE of your mailbox.

I guess that's why:

- newspapers put their own boxes on the mailbox posts;
- the pizza places and Chinese restaurants put their ads on the
doorknob or in the door, but never in the mailbox.


Jeffrey Jonas    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Clive Feather)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?
Organization: IXI Limited
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 08:48:38 GMT


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

> Actually the Postal (dis)Service hasn't raised the price of postage in
> years! Postage is still $0.03, the rest is for storage.

One cent per day.


Clive D.W. Feather     | IXI Ltd (an SCO company)
[e-mail]          | Vision Park
Phone: [phone] | Cambridge   CB4 4RZ
Fax:   [phone] | United Kingdom


[Moderator's Note: Ah, you better check your figures. In another
message in this issue Steve says it is three cents per day. :)   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 03:14 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 Modern Technology?


[e-mail] (Richard Nash) writes:

> 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.

Yes, it is really that bad. And you can bet that for any non-first-
class delivery requirements, the USPS is NEVER used. I sat down and
compiled a list of USPS failures and even I was astounded.  Notable
examples:

A customer on the east coast was annoyed that I was not delivering
some goods. I maintained that until I received payment, such goods
would not be released. The customer insisted that a check had gone out
via Priority Mail. A month later, the check showed up in an envelope
that looked as though it had gone to the moon and back without benefit
of spacecraft.

I have shipped things Parcel Post and had the boxes arrive EMPTY.
(Yes, apparently someone had removed the contents enroute.) Insurance
was moot; the timely delivery of the eproms was the issue.

But the real issue is that communications have progressed beyond our
Pony Express holdover. People used to stay in touch by writing
letters; telephony was expensive. Now it is cheaper to call -- and
with fax technology, graphic communications no longer require our
citadel of inefficiency, the USPS.

> 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?

If you have no standards of excellence, are willing to be treated like
dirt, and are generally content to be provided with bad service and be
walked upon in the process, then the USPS is for you. Sounds like a
match to me. You probably get a warm glow all over when something you
send never arrives at all, right?

I am not quite sure what you are saying here. I have given my
experiences with the USPS. I use it as little as possible, as you have
pointed out is my right. Are you denying the accuracy of my
observations, or are you bragging that your own standards are so low
that the USPS, even in light of these problems is perfectly fine?

> 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
> inter-national courier to deliver it without a lot of Customs and
> Canada/brokerage hassles.  I have found that this view is shared by
> others also.

Then they, like you, obviously have had no real experience in
international shipping. I have shipped countless items to Japan, from
small disk drives to complete computer systems. I have used FedEx,
DHL, Nippon, and several other carriers. None had the slightest
problem with customs. And we were shipping "restricted" items --
material that was forbidden to be shipped to specific areas of the
world. I would suggest that you "try it before you knock it".

But if you are satisfied with the level of "service" a bloated, sloppy
institution such as the USPS provides, then you have a perfect right
to continue using it. And with my blessings.


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

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 14:21:29 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology


Several readers/subscribers have mentioned how awful the delivery
service of the USPS is and I can think of one really beauty that
happened to me.

Several years ago, around property tax time, I was mailed my bill and
forwarded it to my mortgage company for payment out of the escrow
funds.  It was sent as certified, return receipt requested at an
additional charge as is everything else in the USPS (pay for what you
want, which I have no disagreement with).

 From my post office on Long Island, it went to the nearest processing
center to be sent to Rochester, New York (third holder of the
mortgage).  After a week of not receiving the receipt, I began to get
nervous and called the bank and they in turn said that the bill had
not been paid yet.  Calls to the post office yielded nothing but "it
will get there, don't worry."  I should worry since a tax lien would
be placed on my house if the payment wasn't made on time.

Finally the receipt arrived.  The USPS, in its infinite wisdom, sent it
first class to Barranquila(sp), COLOMBIA with a stop somewhere in the
Caribbean; from there it went to Fort Wayne, Indiana and then to the bank.

I've even had a certified letter take two weeks to go about six miles
(distances between post offices) and not receive the receipt. Complain
I did and on paper; straight into the bit bucket.  Even a local
congressman had this happen to him.

BTW: The tax bill was paid one day before a lien would have been
placed on my house.


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

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

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, 22 Mar 93 19:38:26 GMT


The defendant in the definitive case on the USPS monopoly on
first-class mail was the Brennan(?) private-delivery service in
Rochester, NY (where I lived at the time).

If I remember correctly, the Supreme Court ruled that the USPS
monopoly does require correct first-class postage on all first-class
mail, and mailboxes used by US Mail are still reserved for them, but
that's all ... a delivery service such as Brennan _could_ provide
value-added services (e.g., same-day delivery of first-class mail) if
they met those critieria.  Brennan lost the case only because they did
_not_ require first-class postage on the mail they delivered.


John R. Grout    INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 11:15:38 -0800
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Dave Levenson) wrote:

> There was a time when neither snow nor hail ... would stop the mail.

These were, undoubtedly, in the era before labor unions.


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

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

From: Ops Mgr <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: JVNC
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 15:34:10 GMT


Will Martin <[e-mail]> writes:

> 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.
> ...<deleted>...

> 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

 Manufacturer's Hanover (soon-to-be Chase-Manhattan) experienced this
problem with all their ATM machines last weekend also.  Customer
service reps seemed very nonchalant about it saying that service
would be back to normal on Monday.


Lee


[Moderator's Note: Perhaps they remembered thirty years ago when banks
were only open 9 AM to 2 PM (or 3 PM) Monday through Friday, and that
is when you went to get a check cashed or make deposits, etc. If you
have ever heard the expression 'bankers hours' (as in 'she works
bankers hours'), that is where the expression came from.  PAT]

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

From: Daniel E. Ganek <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 15:26:42 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA


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.

This may be two questions but I'll just tell the story.  We stayed at
the Days Inn in DC last weekend. I attempted to make a AT&T call.

I first just dialed 8 + 0 + number and heard "BONG Comtel" So I hung
up and started to dial 10ATT and as soon as I dialed the "0" I got
some intercept saying "no, no".  So, I dialed 8 + 0 again and just
entered my AT&T calling card number after the "Comtel" and lo and
behold I heard "thank you for using AT&T" !

1) Is Comtel AT&T?

2) Does AT&T want to know about this hotel blocking other LD companies? :-)


dan ganek

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Oplinger)
Subject: Re: Bell South Cordless Phone
Organization: GE Corp. Research & Development, Schenectady, NY
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 16:46:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(MARK STEIGER) writes:

> 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..).
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Is this true? Are the odds low? I have one of the AT$T 5400 10 channel
phones and my neighbor and I take turns using each others phone lines.
I know this happens because occasionally I get a bad connection so I
pick up the corded phone to get a clearer line and get dialtone. I can
still talk through the static to whoever called on the cordless at
this point. Is my situation unique? Is there anything I can do about
it (short of burning down my neighbors house to destroy his phone)?


brian    [e-mail]
<#include standard.disclaimer>

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

From: Steven Warner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager
Organization: Beach Systems / RTFM UN*X Solutions, Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 17:18:57 GMT


Android Rubin writes:

> 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).

Having pages show up on the second display line and send silently is a
programmable feature, either thru the hard contact [hardware]
programmer or thru Motorola's radio service software, which can
program it 'over the air'. (Over the air programming must be enabled
thru the hardware programmer first).

I have not seen documentation on how to do this with regular pages
using control codes.


Steven Warner  (34W 36L)  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #201
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11284;
          23 Mar 93 5:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30006
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 03:24:02 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30844
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 03:23:30 -0600
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 03:23:30 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #202

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 23 Mar 93 03:23:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 202

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    ATM Networks (was Telecom and the Blizzard of '93) (Brad S. Hicks)
    Re: TDDs and Modem Standards (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (Mike Schenk)
    Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (Darren Alex Griffiths)
    Re: Looking for Distinctive Ring Discriminator (Chris Schmandt)
    Re: Good Cheap DAA Module? (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Good Cheap DAA Module? (John K. Scoggin, Jr)
    Re: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted (John Rice)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 19 Mar 93 16:25:54 GMT
Subject: ATM Networks (was Telecom and the Blizzard of '93)


> 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.

Oversimplified version of the world of ATM networks:

LEVEL 1: =Almost= every bank does run its own ATM network, using
modems or tie lines to connect each branch bank and its ATMs back to
the headquarters central computer system.  But if I understood the ATM
part of the EDS failure, it was because EDS operated ATM networks for
a lot of credit unions who were too small to run their own network,
which is why pretty well all CUE (Credit Union Exchange) ATM cards
went down during the snow storm.

LEVEL 2: There are about a dozen or twenty =regional= ATM networks,
such as NYCE, MPS, and BankMate. These interconnect each bank and its
own ATM network to a centralized system that routes transactions at
from any ATM back to the issuing bank's clearing system, if necessary.
This is the part of the picture that Alec Isaacson was talking about
in his message, quoted above.

So for example, if I'm a Boatmen's Bank of St. Louis customer and I'm
at an ATM for Commerce Bank of St. Louis, Commerce doesn't have a tie
line back to Boatmen's data center (for obvious reasons) but they
=are= both members of a regional network called BankMate, so (in this
example) Commerce sends the transaction to BankMate and BankMate, for
a fee, sends it to Boatmen's -- which is why the issuing bank charges
extra for transactions at "foreign" ATMs.

LEVEL 3a: There are two world-wide ATM networks, Cirrus and Plus.
(Cirrus covers a =lot= more ATMs, and more countries.) These work the
same way that the regional networks do; member banks sign up and buy
some kind of a communications link to a clearing system.

LEVEL 3b: Then there are the newer debit card products, Maestro vs
Visa Debit. What separates these two from Cirrus and Plus is their
emphasis on the ability to use ATM cards at merchant locations, not
just at ATMs ... eventually, both products promise that you'll be
able to use an ATM card for almost any transaction you can do with a
credit card.

What differentiates Maestro from Visa Debit is that Visa Debit started
with a Plus-type centralized network and is trying to impose its rules
for merchant transactions and settlement on the banks, whereas Maestro
came up with a much simpler set of rules for interconnecting the
regional ATM networks to each other, and leveraged off of their
existing merchant programs.

That's why there are already 13 million Maestro cards in the world;
your BankMate or MPS or whatever ATM card =is= a Maestro card already,
and you can use at any store, restaurant, or gas station where you see
the blue and red circles of the Maestro logo. (If it hasn't done so
already, your bank will soon re-issue your ATM card, and you'll see
the Maestro logo on it.)

The first Maestro transaction was less than a year ago, but there are
already roughly 2000 merchants with Maestro stickers; by the end of
the year that will include ARCO, Amoco, Target and Safeway. Here in
St. Louis, I already use my Maestro/BankMate card for all of my
grocery purchases (at Schnuck's or Deirberg's) and all of my gasoline
purchases (at Mobil).

When you use a Maestro or Visa Debit card, it's like a cross between a
credit card transaction and an ATM transaction: the merchant rings it
up on a cash register, and then swipes your card, but instead of
signing the receipt (ala credit) you punch in your PIN on a terminal
next to the register.

Disclaimer: I work for MasterCard, the parent corporation for both
Cirrus and Maestro. I'm not in marketing or public relations, I'm just
proud of the products and thought you'd enjoy learning more about
them.


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


[Moderator's Note: Actually, we who are customers of First National
Bank of Chicago have had debit cards available to us for about five
years now. Our debit cards are called 'Banking Cards' and they work
like cash station cards but they also have a Master Charge logo on
them and work that way also. I use mine all over town, and in cases
where I ordered something through the mail where a credit card was
requested, I've given my Master Card debit card number instead. It has
always worked fine. We only punch in our PIN if we are using the debit
card at a cash station. If we are using it in a merchant's place of
business then we sign a charge ticket as though it were a credit card
and sales authorization is obtained in the say way via the Xon, Jr.
terminals, as they call them. Our Banking Card numbers fall within the
Master Charge numbering scheme, coincidentally. In some cases, the
charge is immediatly debited to our accounts and the charge ticket we
sign is sent through only as a memorandum of the transaction. In other
cases, I've seen the charge not show up on my checking account for a
few days until it went through the Elgin (VISA/MC) Credit Card Billing
Center.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: TDDs and Modem Standards
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 01:58:41 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Ken Thompson <kthompso@
donald.wichitaks.NCR.COM> writes:

> Are TDD's compatable with any modem standard?

I seem to remember that TDD is based on the OLD amateur radio AFSK
standard frequencies of 2125 Hz and 2975 Hz.  I used to directly shift
the oscillator of my transmitter and on reception would use a "BFO" to
demodulate the RF FSK down to audio at the above frequencies.  I
demodulated it with a couple LC tuned circuits (using telephone type
22 mH torroid loading coils) driving a differential amplifier (a
12AX7) driving a 6L6 that keyed the 150 volt loop that drove the
selector magnets in the Teletype model 15.  Since then, RF Teletype
has gone to 170 Hz shift (or perhaps moved on from there ... I know
there's HF packet stuff going on).

    We did run AFSK using the above frequencies on VHF FM.  So, to
answer the question, I think TDD is compatible with the old amateur
radio Teletype standards.

    If, indeed, that is the case, it would appear relatively easy
to build a modem to do TDD.  The simplest approach would be to use the
existing serial port in a PC.  These chips are programmable as to
number of bits and the data speed.  The word length can be set to 5,
6, 7 or 8 bits.  The speed can probably also be programmed to the same
as TDD standard.  A lookup table could do the ascii to Baudot
conversion and back.  A simple two chip AFSK modem could then be built
using an XR2206 and XR2211.  These chips will generate and demodulate
pretty much any AFSK signal.  There MAY be a chip that is designed for
just this standard, which would require fewer external components.

    Finally, it should be pretty simple to make an internal modem
to talk with a TDD.  This would, again, use something like the 2206
and 2211 and be driven by a 16450 or 16550 serial chip.  You'd still
have to deal with FCC part 15 registration (radiation) and FCC part 68
registration if directly coupled to the phone line.  If the modem were
external (using a serial port in the computer) and used acoustic
coupling to the telephone, no FCC registration would be required (the
XR chips do not use frequencies above 10 KHz, so do not need
registration under part 15).

    So ... again, I THINK the TDD is based on amateur Teletype.


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: 22 Mar 1993 09:33:14 +0000 (GMT)
From: [e-mail] (Mike Schenk [phone])
Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?
Organization: PTT Research, The Netherlands


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Magnus
Hedberg) writes:

> 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.

The big advantage of having the network supply the electricity is that
in case of a powerfailure, the phone still works because the the
exchanges have backup facilities.

Besides from that, you need a closed circuit between phone and
exchange anyway so it does not really matter. The only difference is
that the high voltage to make the bell ring is not necessary if the
phone is powered from other mains.

Disclaimer: Although I work for PTT Research, PSTN is not my line of
work so the above is just my own idea.


Mike

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

Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 22:00:02 PST
From: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Magnus Hedberg) writes:

> 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.

I was recently doing some research on telecommuting and learned
something kinda relevant.  I was looking into the possibility of using
ISDN phones to connect the homes of my fellow engineers to work.
Pac*Bell is pushing the use of ISDN, including free installation and
very low monthly rates.  They would like to offer these services at
residential rates where appropriate, which would mean calls from my
house in San Francisco to work in Emeryville would be considered local
and not charged for.  The Pac*Bell rep told me they were not allowed
to offer residential ISDN service because the CPUC mandates that all
residential lines have to be able to dial 911 during an emergency,
since ISDN requires a box that's plugged into the electric system if
an emergency cut out the power system the line wouldn't work and I
wouldn't be able to dial 911 on my ISDN line.

This means that all ISDN lines have to be at business rates and, even
though I have two regular phone lines in my house that would work fine
without the power system, I cannot an additional get residential ISDN
line in my house.  Pac*Bell told me that they are trying to change the
tarriff to allow residential ISDN in places that have standard phone
lines but due to CPUC bureaucracy they don't expect changes within the
next few years.  Even though Pac*Bell would like me to give me
residential service, and I'd like to buy it, it's not possible because
of CPUC regulations (sound familiar?)

Instead I'm going to have to either pay business rates for ISDN
service, pay extra for a leased line, or pay for two more standard
phone lines to get similar but slower service as I would get from
ISDN.


Cheers,

Darren Alex Griffiths        [e-mail]
Open Systems Solutions Inc.  [phone] x139
Fujitsu Ltd.                 Fax: [phone]
6121 Hollis Street           Emeryville, CA 94608-2092

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Schmandt)
Subject: Re: Looking for Distinctive Ring Discriminator
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 03:46:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu (Dave Ptasnik) writes about distinctive ring detectors:

> 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.

I too, have been using one of these for about six months now, in part
the result of answers to a post to this group (thanks, gang!).

I'm quite happy with it (got it via the AT&T catalog) but I don't
think it really is adaptive.  It listens to the first ring, the whole
ring.  Then it switches (relay) the line onto the appropriate virtual
line, which hears the next ring.  Seems pretty simple.

Yes, it is reliable.  It never switches the wrong way.

Incidently, I am amazed by how hard it is to explain these "virtual
lines" to non-telco types.  I can see why NETel markets Distinctive
Ringing as "you won't have to answer your teenagers calls again!".


chris

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Good Cheap DAA Module?
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 18:59:40 GMT


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

> 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.


    The only DAA I've seen advertised is that from Cermetek.  It's
kinda expensive.  They are Cermetek Microelectronics, Inc., 1308
Borregas Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3565, phone [phone].  I
would think that Teltone would manufacture a DAA, but I don't see one
in their catalog.  In general, I think it's less expensive to buy a
board (such as the DTMF/voice board) with the DAA already attached.
There's still lots of room for creativity in the software.


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: John K Scoggin Jr <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Good Cheap DAA Module?
Date: 22 Mar 1993 13:04:26 GMT
Organization: Delmarva Power & Light Company
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> 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.

We have been using General DataComm DAA's for years -- never had a
problem.


John K. Scoggin, Jr.              Email: [e-mail]
Supervisor, Network Operations    Phone: [phone]
Delmarva Power & Light Company    Fax:   [phone]
500 N. Wakefield Drive            NOC:   [phone]
Newark, DE 19714-6066
The opinions expressed are not those of Delmarva Power, simply the
product of an over-active imagination...

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 03:55:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(BARR DOUG) writes:

> 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?

We had a similar occurance on a UNIX system I was working with. The
modems would randomly lock up, and require a power cycle to clear. The
root cause of the problem was quite logical (once we figured it out).

The UNIX system was configured to send a 'logout message' when the
user entered the logout command. This messages was "AUTOMATICALLY
LOGGING OUT".

In many 'Hayes Compatible" modems, in answer mode, any ascii text sent
from the computer, toward the modem, when no carrier is being
detected, is run through the 'AT' command decoder. If the user logs
out, and immediately disconnects (hangs up), the system still sends
the logout text to the modem and the modem attempts to decode that
logout text as 'AT' command strings.

Usually, this is ignored, as the strings aren't preceeded by the "AT"
attention string BUT -- in our case the "AT" in AUTOMATICALLY, was
decoded. Any characters after the AT were interpeted as modem
commands. AS I recall, either the "C" or the "A" were causing the
modem to ignore further commands. (Look up the Hayes command "ATC" - I
don't have them here).

It was intermittent, because everybody didn't hang up immediately. And
a disconnect without proper logout didn't result in the 'logout
message'. In our case, it was some 'scripted' P.C. programs that were
causing the problem, but I was able to re-create it (with difficulty)
manually.


John Rice        K9IJ     |  "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was
                          |   MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially
                          |   Not my Employer's....
[e-mail]     |   Purveyor of Miracles,Magic and Sleight-of-hand


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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #202
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14098;
          23 Mar 93 6:36 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31696
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 04:01:54 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31903
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 04:01:19 -0600
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 04:01:19 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #203

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 23 Mar 93 04:01:15 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 203

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Local Telco Requires Landlord's Contact (Jack Decker)
    Re: Washington Times Blows It (Michael Rosen)
    Re: Washington Times Blows It (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Update: Billing for Information Providers (John Higdon)
    Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps (Floyd Davidson)
    Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps (John Higdon)
    Re: ISDN (Phone Line Bandwidth) (Tom Lynch)
    Re: IXO (TAP) Protocol For Pagers (Brian Cartmell)
    Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges (Bryan Montgomery)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 11:42:01 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
Subject: Re: Local Telco Requires Landlord's Contact


In message <[e-mail]>, Pat (the Moderator) noted:

> 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.

Let me just interrupt for a moment here.  Please keep in mind that we
are talking about a regulated MONOPOLY.  It's not as though if you
don't like the terms under which your local telco offers service, you
can go elsewhere (at least not yet ... I'm hoping that day comes
quickly).  But the point is that as a regulated monopoly, you lose
some rights that you might otherwise have.  In effect, the telcos have
wanted the government to meddle in their business (in order to protect
them from the "evil" of competition), and the governmental regulatory
agency will often require the monopoly telco to accept customers under
terms that they'd prefer not to have to live with ... in particular,
customers who may not have a spotless credit record.

> 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.

Up to this point I was with you ... after all, it's not fair for those
who do pay their bills to get stiffed with the expenses resulting from
those who don't.  BUT, I have a BIG problem with the two statements
you have made above.  To take the last one first, employment data
isn't relevent simply because there is no requirement that you have
employment in order to have a phone.  And I've yet to hear of a telco
tariff that says that the telco can charge a security deposit solely
because someone is unemployed.  I don't particularly mind them asking
for this information, but a refusal to provide it should not be a
basis for denial of phone service (on the other hand, a customer's
willingness to give that info might be a valid reason for telco to
waive a security deposit that they are otherwise legally entitled to
collect).

But where I really tilt is when a utility asks for a Social Security
Number.  No utility has ever gotten my SSN, and they never will
(unless there is some drastic change in the law), because they're not
legally entitled to have it.  It was not so many years ago that you
used to see signs hanging on the sides of cash registers warning
people that their Social Security card was not supposed to be used for
identification.  Now, suddenly, it seems that everyone wants it.  But,
not everyone is legally entitled to have it.  Government agencies are
not supposed to ask for it unless they give a Privacy Act
notification, telling you exactly what use they plan to make of your
SSN and whether disclosure of the number is mandatory or voluntary.
Certain others are required to have it (your employer, your bank if
they pay you interest, etc.)  but other agencies are not.  Credit
reporting agencies in particular may find it convenient to key your
records off your SSN, but there is no requirement that you provide
them with that information.  Of course, a private business might
decide not to extend you credit if you refuse to provide your SSN, in
which case you are perfectly free to take your business elsewhere.
But a telephone company is a monopoly regulated by the government, and
since they have other ways to protect themselves (requiring a security
deposit, for example), they cannot legally require disclosure of the
SSN.

In my experience, I have found that any utility will back down if you
outright refuse to give your SSN, though they may ask you to come to
their office and show them a picture ID (e.g. a driver's license) if
they have an office in your area.  I don't mind doing that.  But,
since most local telcos have abandoned their local business offices,
they don't even have that option in many cases.

I won't go into a long dissertation as to why I refuse to give my SSN,
but I will say that it is NOT to avoid payment (I'm never even LATE
with utility payments).  I will just say that it's because I don't
trust credit reporting companies to enter all the data on me
accurately, and since they generally seem to think they are
accountable to no one but themselves, I want to make it as difficult
for them as possible to maintain a file on me, accurate or otherwise.
And, frankly, I don't really care if I don't have a credit rating,
since I avoid buying things on credit (I don't even have credit
cards ... you stay out of a lot of trouble that way).

For those interested in both the reasons why you should not give out
your SSN to just anyone who asks for it, and what to do in order to
avoid giving it out, there is a FAQ called "What to do when they ask
for your Social Security Number" that is available on some FTP sites
and that is (or used to be) posted occasionally in the misc.consumers
newsgroup.  I don't endorse all of its recommendations (particularly
where it advises you to tell outright lies ... that's just asking for
trouble!) but it does contain a few good tips.  If you want to read it
and have trouble locating it, you might try asking in misc.consumers
(or perhaps another TELECOM Digest reader could tell us where it can
be obtained via FTP).  I would imagine the folks in the various
privacy groups could give you that info as well, but I'm not all THAT
paranoid so I don't read those groups.

> If you do not like questions when applying for telephone credit,
> then use the pay station.

Uh, Pat, shouldn't the security deposit give the telco adequate
protection?  I thought that's what it was there for.  Even if a person
has terribly rotten credit, I think telco is required to provide
service as long as the security deposit is paid (unless the applicant
actually owes money to the telco itself).  Again, I think you forget
that we're talking about a regulated monopoly here.


Jack Decker | Internet: [e-mail]
Fidonet: 1:154/8 or [e-mail]
Note: Mail to the Fidonet address has been known to bounce. :-(


[Moderator's Note: If you prefer to put down a security deposit or an
advance payment for the first month of service, that is your right. I
prefer to work with them on open account as do many other people, so
we make the required trade-off. Yes, telco is a utility service and a
controlled monoply. They *cannot* refuse to do business with any
*qualified* customer. The tariff defines 'qualified customer' as a
customer who has exhibited an ability and willingness to pay for the
service, ie, advance deposit, good credit history, whatever.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 00:14:35 GMT


Does anybody happen to know the BBS number for G. Gordon Liddy's BBS
in DC?  He harped on this story on his show when it was reported.  I'd
love to shove it back in his face.


Mike

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1993 19:27:26 GMT


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

> 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].

    Which reminds me, I heard on NPR's Morning Edition that
Clinton has an email account.  It sounded like a Compuserve number,
but I was not awake enough to write it down.  Anyone know the email
address?


Thanks!

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, 22 Mar 93 23:13 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Update: Billing for Information Providers


Nigel Allen <[e-mail]> writes:

> Here is a press release from the Tax Reduction Institute.

> "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."

You can believe that, or you can take a more cynical view. Pacific
Bell, for one, has been publically bad-mouthing IPs for years. It says
in press releases and to customers individually that the company would
rather not carry Information Services traffic nor bill for same. It
generously waives IAS charges at the drop of a hat by any customer who
calls (thereby screwing the provider who delivered the service) and
attempts to paint itself as the shining white knight.

Pac*Bell would LOVE to discontinue billing for IAS. It would love to
see IPs go out of business. That way it would have no competition in
an arena that it has been salivating over for years. Pac*Bell (and
certainly US West, as well) would like nothing better than to put each
and every IP six feet under and then move itself into the highly
profitable markets to fill the void.

I have said it before and will say it again: The LECs want into a
pristine IP market and will resort to any and all dirty tricks to
accomplish that end. Since the public is entirely ignorant on the
subject and if there is any opinion at all it is usually AGAINST the
IPs, the sisters Bell are almost brazen in their actions. They have
restrictive entry requirements (stiff deposits, high installation
charges), crippling program regulations that they managed to sell to
the PUCs, and a public attitude that is guaranteed to help hammer
nails into IPs' coffins.

After Pac*Bell's history of sabotaging local service so that it could
push "reliable" Centrex to customers, I would not trust the company
one little bit in this area. If it suddenly decides to stop billing
for IPs, there is only one motivation. It wants to wear down its IP
competitors -- business people who unfortunately require the services
of the LEC to operate.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps
Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 08:04:20 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Graham Toal <gtoal@gtoal.
com> writes:

> [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.

The cause specifically is controlled clock slips on digital carrier
interface equipment.  Which can be caused by a lack of proper
synchronization between digital exchanges when they are first
installed.  A few years ago that was common as exchanges were
switching from analog to digital at a rapid clip, but it isn't
necessarily the likely cause today.

Mis-optioned equipment or defective equipment on each particular
carrier system is much more likely today than it was a few years back.
The difference usually displays itself when one can sometimes call
between exchanges and get a perfect connection, but at other times it
is quite bad.  It depends on which T1 group is slipping and whether
you happen to hit a trunk in a group that is or is not.  When the two
exchanges are not in sync at all there just isn't going to be a good
trunk between them at all!

Likewise there has been some change in how likely one is to convince
the local telco that they have a problem with carrier slips.  A mere
couple years ago they didn't likely know what a carrier slip was and
had no idea if it was happening to them.  Today most telco craft
people probably have heard of it even if they don't necessarily
understand it.  And many now do have a good understanding too!


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

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 00:52 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps


Graham Toal <[e-mail]> writes:

> 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.

This is (or should be) becoming less and less of a problem. With
current digital technology, frame slip has virtually become a thing of
the past. And if you DO experience it, it is due to a malfunctioning
piece of equipment can be found with normal testing procedures.

Pac*Bell now considers a phone line or connection to be substandard
and in need of repair if "9600 bps modems have trouble on the call".
And that is how it should be; standard modems were, after all,
designed to work on the public switched network. If you are having
problems with devices certified to function on standard phone lines,
then the fact that they are having problems is strong evidence that
the line is "substandard".

Time marches on. Digital telephony is no longer a black art. It is the
current standard.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (tlynch)
Subject: Re: ISDN (Phone Line Bandwidth)
Organization: ECE Dept, University of Texas at Austin
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1993 20:43:42 GMT


> If ISDN was available, people would do this. But it's not, so they don't.

A friend in Paris was not in his office early one morning because of
`talking to the guys installing an ISDN line at my apartment'.  Seems
someone must have it.  Or something else with the same name ...


Tom Lynch    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Cartmell)
Subject: Re: IXO (TAP) Protocol For Pagers
Organization: Encryption
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 00:12:37 GMT


Does anyone have access to source code for UNIX that calls a IXO
protocol system and transfer the information over modem?


Thanks,

Brian

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

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 15:31:27 GMT
From: Bryan Montgomery <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Payphone Charges
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: IBM Havant UK


TELECOM Moderator noted:

Stuff deleted ....

>> [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.

And Tony Harminc replied:

> 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

(Technically the card holders country could be the UK -- mine is & I
have both an MCI and an AT&T card!)

> and US cards are about the only ones that work in each other's
> countries.

Not strictly true -- with an MCI or AT&T card you can use it to call
any country, other than the one you are in.I'm not sure when this
becomes cost effective, especially from the UK where prices seem to be
getting a bit more competitive but maybe if you call Japan at the UK
peak time.


Enjoy,

Bryan Montgomery  (Production Engineer)
Tel : +44 (705) / [phone] Extn 8602   Mail Point 33/10
Fax : +44 (705) / [phone]             IBM Havant
Tie : 721 - 8602                            PO Box 6, Havant
Internet : [e-mail]               Hampshire, PO9 1SA
VNET     : BRYANM at HVTVM4                 Great Britain

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #203
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22213;
          24 Mar 93 2:26 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09327
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 23:43:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09007
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Mar 1993 23:43:02 -0600
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 23:43:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #204

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 23 Mar 93 23:43:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 204

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    "The British Are Coming..." (Paul Robinson)
    Final Program -- Mobile Computing Day at Rutgers (Br Badrinath)
    Disconnect After Prolonged Ringing (Robert M. Hamer)
    International Calling Card (Evangelos Kontogiannis)
    Telephones in the Army in the Korean War (Dave Niebuhr)
    '83 Novel Foresaw a Bombing (Paul Robinson)
    Phone Items in the News (Paul Robinson)
    Touch-Tone For Everyone in DC Metro Area (Jacob DeGlopper)
    Amerivox Debit Card (Andrew Luebker)
    Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors (Matt Healy)
    Re: Fraud, Abuse, and Politics (Steve Forrette)
    Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Bruce Albrecht)
    Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN (Ralph Hyre)
    Re: Phone Sex Reaches Out to Girl Scout Callers (Andrew E. Mossberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 09:58:26 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: "The British Are Coming..."


Summary from {The Washington Post} of 3/9, Page D1:

"Global communications giant British Telecommunications PLC yesterday
asked the U.S. government for permission to set up an international
telephone network linking businesses in the United States and other
countries."

American companies complain that this should not be allowed because
they can't do the same thing in Britain, the same argument being used
to block the purchase of USAir.

British Telecom ("BT") filed a petition with the FCC to get into the
$5 billion business telecommunications market, and become the first
point-to-point carrier for facsimile, data, video and voice traffic
with the U.S.  There are many carriers and many (complicated) billing
options for current transactions, including private networks, which
add to the costs of global operations.  BT's filing "seeks to end all
of that by establishing an 'international virtual network' -- that is,
the global transfer of telephonic information through one system."

AT&T is deciding if it should protest since foreign markets are not
open; MCI had no comment.  BT says "Our customers are demanding the
single-supplier approach," due to better response from a single
supplier and reduced billing problems.  BT also says that there is
equal treatment in Britain.

Dan Briere, president of New Jersey-based Telechoice says that the
problem is more of a fear that "the British are coming" which people
are nervous over, and is less to do with a lack of equal treatment of
U.S. telephone companies in Britain.

"'The international virtual network,' the system proposed by British
Telecom, 'is for the big guys.  It's going to become the preferred
service for large business customers,'" Briere said.

                        ---
In a related Story:

Washington (DC) Times, March 11, Money Section:

The Washington Post Co. said it may expand its cable business by
adding telephone service to its existing British cable TV service.

John Morse Jr., the company's vice president for finance, told the
Atlanta Society of Financial Analysts that the company will decide
"very soon" whether it will enter the telephone market in Britain,
where it is the 14th-largest cable TV operator.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Br Badrinath)
Subject: Final Program -- Mobile Computing Day at Rutgers
Date: 23 Mar 93 16:06:01 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


Mobile Computing Day  -- Final Program

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,
telecommunications, 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  Integrated Networks of the Future - D.Goodman   (Rutgers WINLAB)

10:45 Coffee Break

11:00  Public Network Support for Nomadic Personal Communications Applications
       -  R. Woolf    (Bellcore)

11:45 Lunch

1:00  Data on the Air - Broadcasting Databases to Mobile Users
      T.Imielinski (Rutgers CS & WINLAB)

1:45  Transparent File Prefetching for Low Bandwidth Links
      D. Duchamp  (Columbia)

2:30  Panel "Is Mobile Computing a New Research Area?"
      Moderator: B.R. Badrinath (Rutgers CS & WINLAB)

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

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 07:38 EST
From: Robert M. Hamer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Disconnect After Prolonged Ringing


> 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.)

While I was stuck in the snow March 13-15 in Boston, I tried
repeatedly to get through to USAir's 800- reservations and information
telephone number.  So were many other people.  Although it was
continuously busy (so busy I think that even a demon dialer would not
have helped all that much) I was able to get a ringing signal after
perhaps ten minutes of calling at such hours as 4:30 AM.  I was
terribly displeased when after some minutes of ringing the network
would just dump the call, thus losing me whatever place I had obtained
in the queue.  I'd dial again for 10-15 minutes, finally be rewarded
with a ring, and after some small number of minutes, be disconnected
again.  This behavior is counterproductive and angers the customer
(me).

Several other remarks about telecom effects of the storm: When I was
finally able to get through to a USAIR operator she told me that many
if not most of their reservations centers were in the path of this
storm (she was in Syracuse) and thus only a few of the operators were
able to get in to work.  Thus, at the same time as they had increased
demand for their services (cancelled flights producing a need for new
information and reservations) they had fewer operators at many sites
to handle them.  She said the attempted to shift as much of the
function as possible to centers such as San Diego, but that even with
those working at more than normal capacity it didn't make up for the
people who couldn't come to work in the snow belt.

American Express has several 24-hour emergency numbers for such
situations; they were busy, too, and I couldn't even get a ring on
them until Sunday the 14th.

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 09:51:04 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Evangelos Kontogiannis)
Subject: International Calling Card


Hello,

I was pleased to see the summary/comparison of long distance plans in
the US.  What I am looking for is a calling card/plan that will allow
me to call a US number while overseas. I don't live in the US
currently; my sister does and she has an (international) ATT card, BUT
one is required to go through a local operator; this makes the use of
that card virtually impossible with local service standards.

If this would help, card use will be primarily for four to five
monthly calls from Athens to Boston, 20-35 minutes duration for each
call.  I would like to be able to do this directly, ie. maybe dial a
number, give a number code and then dial my call (no operators!).

The reasoning behind this is (of course) that US prices are MUCH
cheaper than what the (only) telco charges here, ie. I would like to
be billed by a US telco for my international calls (to the US mainly)
and use the card when I travel. But, NO OPERATORS!


Vangelis Kontogiannis ,|INTRACOM S.A. | Athens, Greece

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 06:44:15 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Telephones in the Army in the Korean War


Many readers of the Digest might be addicted to the TV series M*A*S*H
as I am or are familiar with it.

How does this relate to telecom?  Easy.  Calls were made for choppers
to take the wounded farther back from the front lines; they were used
to order supplies; they were used as a means of bringing in the next
handiest general to take a look at the way the camp was run; they were
even used to order ribs and sauce (forgot the coleslaw) from Adam's
Ribs near the Dearborn Street station.  (Pat: Is there an Adam's Ribs
and is/was there a Dearborn Street Station?  I'm somewhat familiar
with Chicago but on a very limited basis having spent some basic
training at Great Lakes Naval Station in 1960.)

The telephones and the switchboard were of that era and I know that a
crank was used to charge the batteries in those units.  The question
is: were there lines installed over the countryside?  I assume that
there were since I seem to remember that someone said the lines were
down once or twice.

If so, maybe someone from that era could enlighten us on telecom
during the Korean War with a perspective of being there at the time.
There are some excellent telecom history files in the archives and
hopefully more can be added.


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


[Moderator's Note: Back in the days when Chicago was a first class
world capitol, thirty years ago, there was a Dearborn Street Station.
This was where the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad originated
its trains to the west coast. There was Miller's Pub, a restaurant
specializing in ribs located on Adams Street which I believe is what
they were alluding to. Coming down to Chicago on weekend passes, you
would have ridden the North Shore Electric Interurban Railroad. It had
a station at the main gate of Great Lakes Naval Training Center. Once
downtown, it ran on the elevated tracks of the Union Loop Company to
the terminal at Wabash and Jackson Streets, a block from Miller's Pub.
Other than Great Lakes and the Union Loop (which was merged into the
Chicago Transit Authority long ago as the Lake Street / Dan Ryan
elevated line) the rest of it is all gone. North Shore went out of
business in 1962; Dearborn Station has been gone 25 years. Nothing
much is left of downtown Chicago any longer; none of the two dozen
movie theatres we had downtown in 1960 are left. Of the dozen trans-
portation terminals downtown, three are left.  I liked M*A*S*H.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 09:56:13 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: '83 Novel Foresaw a Bombing


{Washington (DC) Times, Feb 27}
John Haydon

The explosion at the World Trade Center was an event just waiting to
happen, says Arnaud de Borchgrave, co-author of the 1983 Cold War
novel "Monimbo," in which terrorists blow up six floors of the World
Trade Tower with a bomb left in an elevator shaft.

When Mr. de Borchgrave was doing research for the book, which he wrote
with Robert Moss, he took a suitcase weighing about 60 pounds to
simulate plastic explosives, walked past security at the tower and
left the bag outside a bank of elevators.

"And this was all done under supervision of the New York police
counterterrorist unit, run by Frank Boltz," said Mr. de Borchgrave,
editor at-large of {The Washington Times}. "They showed me the best
place to put a bomb."

He said security never stopped him to search the suitcase, which he
recovered two hours later.

"At the time we were experimenting how 11 terrorists could create
chaos in New York, and the police counterterrorist unit suggested that
a bomb left outside the elevators at the core of the building would do
the most damage."  Mr. de Borchgrave said.  "To hear a police official
on TV today say they never anticipated this is ridiculous."


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 10:00:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phone Items


 From the Washington (DC) Times, 3/11:

MCI Communications Corp of Washington and Cisco Systems Inc. said they
formed a joint marketing alliance to provide data networking solutions
by incorporation Cisco technology with MCI's new HyperStream data
services and private lines.

The companies said their sales forces will work together to offer
coordinated network design and post-sales support.

MCI and Cisco said they also are working together on plans to give
customers the option of receiving troubleshooting support directly
from Cisco through MCI' HyperStream network in the event of a router
problem.

                       ------

GTE offers severance to Virginia employees.

GTE Virginia has offered early retirement for as many as 180 hourly
and salaried employees and voluntary separation for its 400 management
employees in the state.

The Mechanicsville company is the second-largest local telephone
provider in the state behind Chesapeake & Potomac company of Virginia.

A GTE spokeswoman said the company had no target for the number of
positions to be eliminated through the offers.  The action was part of
a national incentive program for 26,000 salaried employees of GTE
Telephone Operations of Dallas.


Paul Robinson   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Subject: Touch-ToneForrE veryone in DC Metro Area
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 00:30:03 -0500 (EST)


Someone mentioned a few weeks back a C&P bill insert detailing a
fairly small rate increase and the dropping of touchtone service as a
seperate item.

This has indeed happened; my parents have never seen a need for
anything other than one rotary-dial phone, but last week when I was
home touch-tone dialing worked where it never did before ...


 Jacob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton (MD) Volunteer Rescue Squad
  -- CWRU Biomedical Engineering - [e-mail] --

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

From: Andrew Luebker <[e-mail]>
Subject: AmeriVox Debit Card
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 00:00:00 GMT


The "AmeriVox" debit calling card is marketed by the World Telecom
Group, a division of the PhoneClub USA corporation.

The card is not actively advertised through the media.  Instead, the
AmeriVox card is sold through a multi-tiered network of representatives
(independent contractors, not employees of either WTG or PhoneClub USA.)
People at higher levels in the marketing pyramid receive additional
incentives based on their success in recruiting, monthly sales, etc.

AmeriVox cards are available in standard denominations, from $10 to
$100, plus a few more expensive sizes for big spenders.  A significant
chunk (about ten-percent) is immediately deducted for "state and
federal taxes," the rest providing calling time at your current
per-minute rate.

The initial base rate is 24.9 cents/minute.  After deducting taxes,
the $20 card would only give 72 minutes of calling time, effectively
costing you $0.28 per minute at the base rate.  Another version of the
AmeriVox card lets you call from the USA to Canada, at somewhat higher
rates.

Since there is no calling card surcharge, you can save money on short
calls during the daytime.  But long evening or night calls might
actually be cheaper with regular calling cards, despite the surcharge.

When you pay for the AmeriVox debit card by check (rather than the
more dangerous automatic renewal on your Visa/Mastercard), it can be
somewhat safer against fraud: If the card is lost or your security
code is stolen, you never lose more than the "face value" of the card,
probably less if you report the problem right away.

There are a few more drawbacks to the card: It bills in full-minute
increments, possibly charging you for unanswered calls if they ring
too long.  Although you can share your security code with other
members of your family, the card only allows one call at a time, not
permitting simultaneous calls to be charged to a single debit card.
The AmeriVox literature also claims that the card will not work for
data transmissions, a drawback for modem and FAX users.


[Moderator's Note: I don't personally trust multi-level-marketing
schemes. A few people get rich, the rest get shafted. This article
mentions 'higher levels in the marketing pyramid ..' and I wonder how
many levels you can have when you are selling telephone calls. These
folks (Amerivox/World Telecom) tried to interest me in selling their
service here to Digest readers; I just couldn't get enthusiastic about
it. It seems there are too many people above and below you each
getting a piece of the action. Also, they have a travel club with
'free' vacation trips and other gimmicks. I stayed out of it.  Yes, I
am biased; the Digest profits from the Orange Calling Card, but
despite my personal involvement, I still think Orange is better.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Healy)
Subject: Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors
Organization: Yale U. - Genetics
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 15:38:17 GMT


Why not just get a couple good cordless phones?


Matt Healy   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Fraud, Abuse, and Politics
Date: 23 Mar 1993 01:44:17 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


Some COCOTs will allow billing a calling card to certain 900 numbers.
The 900 numbers are usually run by whatever company is the AOS for the
COCOT, and often there will be ads for these particular 900 numbers
next to the payphone.  It has to be billed to a card that the AOS can
bill to (such as one issued by an LEC), and since the AOS has the
ability to generate its own "extra page" on the subscriber's local
phone bill, they can put any telecom charges on there they want,
including 900 charges.  It is true that no "real" long distance
company allows calling cards to be used for 900 services.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 16:00:48 CST
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Albrecht)
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.

One can only hope that the local phone company gets it right.  When US
West switched the phone books to this format a couple years ago, my
employer's listing got dropped from both sections, and I knew of other
cases where they also screwed up.


[e-mail]

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

From: bears![e-mail]
Date: 23 Mar 93 21:36:41 GMT
Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?


[e-mail] (Magnus Hedberg) wrote:

> 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 "high voltage" on the telecom network.

Many businesses here user commercial power for their telephone
systems.  When commercial power goes, so does the businesses phone
system.

Telco power and service seems to be much more reliable, so I think
you'd have a hard time selling this idea to subscribers.  Another
problem is keeping the electic mains and the telephone wires
separated.  You don't want to cross the wires.

> Does anyone know if this idea already has been rejected or performed
> somewhere in the world.

ISDN is a 'digital' phone network that runs over regular copper
subscriber lines, but I'm not sure what voltages it uses.  In the US,
the FCC has decreed that the customer provide power for part of the
setup, which is one of the (many) factors that his limited its
widespread adoption here.

For regular analog phone lines, the ring voltage (~90VAC @ 20 Hz in
the US, current limited) is the 'high voltage' that is particularly
bothersome.


Ralph Hyre ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (a.e.mossberg)
Subject: Re: Phone Sex Reaches Out to Girl Scout Callers
Date: 23 Mar 1993 17:18:57 -0500
Organization: Symbiosis Corporation, Miami, Florida  [phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Sharon Crichton) writes:

> An unidentified sex line snapped up the number, which spells out
> 800-BAD-GIRL.

It returns "the 800 number you have dialed has been disconnected. No
further information about this number is available" from Miami. :-(


andrew mossberg  systems specialist   symbiosis corporation
[phone]   fax [phone]   miami, florida 33166-6202
[e-mail]   uunet!symbi1!aem    SPAN: UMIGW::AEM

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #204
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24612;
          24 Mar 93 3:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19135
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 01:24:48 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16756
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 01:24:02 -0600
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 01:24:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #205

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 24 Mar 93 01:24:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 205

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (John Pettitt)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Robert L. Ullmann)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Richard Nash)
    Re: Multiplexing Help Needed (Dale Farmer)
    Re: Cellular Battery Packs (John Pettitt)
    Re: Cellular Carriers vs. IXC's (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (John W. Temples)
    Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Ole J. Jacobsen)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Steve Forrette)
    Re: CNID in St. Louis, MO (John Higdon)
    Re: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted (Bruce Adler)
    Re: Old Telephone Numbers (Roy Smith)
    Re: Washington Times Blows It (Tim Russell)
    Re: Local Telco Requires Landlord's Contact (Howard Gayle)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 00:24:44 GMT


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

> I agree.  Use of a hand held cellphone while driving a car should be
> discouraged.  It is clearly dangerous.
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Why ?  If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while
talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and
at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at
55 controlling a car in two dimensions?

As others have pointed out there are laws to cover bad driving already.

(And yes I do live in California so what about it?)

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert L. Ullmann)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: The World in Boston
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 01:05:31 GMT


[e-mail] (Scott D Fybush) writes:

> That's just what one Massachusetts legislator wants to legislate. [...]
> 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.

Typical misinformed member of our "general court". It is already
illegal to drive without both hands on the wheel when not shifting
gears. Just needs a little enforcement, if you are really serious. But
lots of new laws make for noiser politics. Which is why the enforcement
doesn't work: too many laws.


Robert Ullmann    [e-mail]    [phone] x226

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 18:58:37 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


[e-mail] (Bob Morley) writes:

> 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.

What a wonderful idea!  About time someone made the responsibility of
the driver solely that of driving the car, not communications officer!
How responsible!  Now who in their right mind would oppose such a
concept?  Sorta like requiring you to stop at red lights. (Except in
high car-jacking areas)

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

some comments deleted ... and then he said ...

> (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.)

Perhaps we can allow phone conversations on vehicles that are moving
less than two mph and in a smog density of greater than ten parts per
million? :)


Richard Nash    Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:           [e-mail]
Amateur Radio:  ve6bon.ampr.ab.ca [192.75.200.15]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: Re: Multiplexing Help Needed
Date: 23 Mar 1993 09:37:40 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


Disini SW, Emmanuel Disini,CST ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 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 you look at the full RS-232 pinout you will see a number of
pins that have a (s) at the beginning of the abbrieviations.  These
are for the second data channel.  (pins 12-dcd, 13-cts, 14-td, 16-rd,
19-rts) Many people are not aware of them.  I hope this helps.


Dale Farmer

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

From: [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: Re: Cellular Battery Packs
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 00:47:00 GMT


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

> 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.

What happens is that a whisker of christal grows accross the nicad
during charge / discharge cycles.  Putting reverse current through it
"fuses" the growth and reveives the battery (for a short while).

However: Do it with a high current source like a car battery and you
may end up with a BIG bang and no hands ... I uses to do it with a
current limited bench supply (2A).  This was in the days when I used
to fix calculators for a living (showing my age :-).


John

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 05:27 PST
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Cellular Carriers vs. IXC's


Steve Forrette <[e-mail]> writes:

> 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.

Which sounds like an excellent justification for eliminating
per-minute, per-mile billing.  Why does this happen other than the
fact that the IXCs want more money and think they can get away with
it?  I agree that network transparency is a good and worthy goal, but
not if it means the customer gets screwed in the process.  Flat rate
access for the entire U.S. is the way to go.


Robert L. McMillin | Surf City Software | [e-mail] | Dude!
#include <std.disclaimer.h>

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

From: jwt![e-mail]
Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs
Organization: Private system -- Orlando, FL
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 03:18:05 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Daniel E. Ganek <ganek@
apollo.hp.com> writes:

> 2) Does AT&T want to know about this hotel blocking other LD
> companies? :-)

While staying at a guest house in Key West last year, I tried to make
a long distance call from the credit-card-only public phone (they
didn't have phones in the rooms).  10xxx codes were intercepted, so I
dialed 00 and asked an operator at the AOS for an AT&T operator.  She
put me through, and I explained the situation to the AT&T operator.
The AT&T operator asked me for the number of the phone from which I
was calling, "so we can have that problem corrected."


John W. Temples -- [e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs
Date: 23 Mar 1993 19:07:16 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> Daniel E. Ganek <ganek@
apollo.hp.com> writes:

> We stayed at the Days Inn in DC last weekend. I attempted to make a
> AT&T call.  I first just dialed 8 + 0 + number and heard "BONG Comtel"
> So I hung up and started to dial 10ATT and as soon as I dialed the "0"
> I got some intercept saying "no, no".  So, I dialed 8 + 0 again and
> just entered my AT&T calling card number after the "Comtel" and lo and
> behold I heard "thank you for using AT&T" !

I had a similar thing happen to me a couple of months ago at the
Sheraton San Jose (actually located in Milpitas, CA).  The
instructions in the guest rooms proudly proclaimed that all long
distance calls are handled by AT&T.  But, dialing a 0+ call resulted
in a "*bong* Hotelco" prompt.  I entered my AT&T card number, and then
the fun started.  I could very faintly hear Hotelco's equipment pick
up another line, get dial tone, 0+ the same number I did, get it get
the "*bong* AT&T", then replay my card number.  Then the second line
was bridged at full volume, and I heard the regular "Thank you for
using AT&T."  The line quality left something to be desired, as
Hotelco apparently uses some inferior analog bridging device.  Also,
call completion time was incredibly long.  It took 35 seconds from the
time I dialed the last digit of the called number before I heard
ringback from the called number (this includes the time required me to
enter the card number).  A similar measurement from a Pacific Bell
payphone in the lobby yielded a result of 10 seconds.  Also, about one
in five calls did not complete and was dropped at someplace in the
process.

I confronted the front desk personnel about this, and they of course
knew nothing of it.  I asked for and spoke with the hotel manager, and
he said that it was not under their control, as Hotelco was the local
phone company in that area!  Now, I may have been born in 1967, but
not yesterday!  :-) I of course informed him that this was total
nonsense, that Pacific Bell was the carrier for the area, and the very
name Hotelco indicated that it was a specialty carrier catering to the
hospitality industry.  He did not deny any of this, and countered by
saying that it was not under his control.  He implied that the
decision was made by the owners (it was a francise, and not
corporately owned by Sheraton), that I was not the first one to have
problems or complain, and that I should fill out a comment card.  I
got the impression that as the manager, he would prefer to get rid of
Hotelco so that his guests would be happy, but the owners of course
would not get whatever extra cut Hotelco is giving them.

So, just how is Hotelco getting extra revenue?  Presumably they are
not providing this "service" to hotel guests out of the goodness of
their hearts.  What I am assuming is happening is that the call is
getting routed out of the hotel PBX and into the Hotelco switch via a
local call.  Then, Hotelco collects my card number digits, and places
the real call out from their switch.  So, AT&T sees the call coming
from Hotelco's lines, and not from the hotel itself.  I'm assuming
that Hotelco is some sort of aggregator that gets a special kickback
from AT&T on calling card calls.  Does anyone know for sure?

Also, when staying at the Embassy Suites in Arcadia, CA, I had another
strange calling card experience.  They use AT&T, and thankfully calls
go right into the AT&T network.  I had a need to place a collect call.
So, I 0-plussed it, and said "collect from Steve."  It was the real
AT&T operator, but she replied "Thank you for using AT&T, and enjoy
your stay at Embassy Suites."  I'm sure that this was not the hotel
operator, or some other funky kind -- just the regular AT&T operator.
I guess this is a new service that AT&T offers to hotels in order to
offer "more personalized" service.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 8:08:06 PST
From: Ole J. Jacobsen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93


I got stuck in Washington DC for two days and had similar problems
getting through to United Airlines. I called all the offices listed on
my ticket: Denver, San Francisco, LA, Honolulu, Chicago, Seattle and
Washington, DC to no avail. Finally, I called the London office and no
difficulty re-booking my flight. It was also refreshing to hear the
United promo with a British accent when I was on hold.


Ole J Jacobsen, Editor & Publisher ConneXions--The Interoperability Report
Interop Company, 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100, Mountain View, CA 94040,
Phone: [phone]  FAX: [phone]  Email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93
Date: 23 Mar 1993 18:00:00 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> 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?

AT&T, and possibly other carriers, offers a service whereby the
prompting and routing is handled within the long distance network, and
not at the customer's end.  If AA is using this service, then this
would explain what happened to you -- you got to the AT&T equipment
that provides the auto attendant service, but it could not transfer
your call to its final destination.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 22:15 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: CNID in St. Louis, MO


[e-mail] writes:

> The [Missouri] PSC voted 3-2 that the service "did not violate the public
> interest", inspite of the objections of some interest groups.

Maybe I will take back what I said about the midwest. It sounds as
though the regulators in the state of my birth have a helluva lot more
gumption than the CPUC weenies who cave in to every activist group
that can grunt.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Adler)
Subject: Re: Modems Get Hung; Testing Advice Wanted
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 11:17:06 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> (BARR DOUG) writes:

>> We have some dial in modems that "hang". They require power cycling to
>> reset them. ...

> In many 'Hayes Compatible" modems, in answer mode, any ascii text sent
> from the computer, toward the modem, when no carrier is being
> detected, is run through the 'AT' command decoder. If the user logs
> out, and immediately disconnects (hangs up), the system still sends
> the logout text to the modem and the modem attempts to decode that
> logout text as 'AT' command strings.

I've also seen some Hayes clone modems get wedged by remote users
using the ATH command to hang up their modems. In order to switch
their local modem from data mode to command mode they enter the
(patented) +++ attention sequence and then the ATH command.
Unfortunately the remote (host end) modem also goes into command mode
but it only accepts commands from the host end. Some modems I've used
either have bugs (or incorrect setups) and don't recognize loss of
carrier during command mode and therefore require a power cycle to
reset once they get wedged like this.

If you can't fix the modem configuration (to always recognize the hang
up and reset) then tell everyone not to use +++ATH. I'd really like to
see someone sell a modem that uses a different attention character for
originate and answer modes or have an option that disables the
attention character in answer mode. That would avoid a lot of
potential user confusion.


[Moderator's Note: Well most modems allow you to change the plusses
into something else. For example, I use CHR$(126). Anyone running a
system accepting incoming calls from customers, users, etc should very
definitely change from plusses to three tildes, or carats, or something
unlikely to become confused by the user's plusses.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 09:15:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: Old Telephone Numbers
Organization: New York University, School of Medicine


> 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'.

    There is a sign painted on the side of a building near where I
live advertising a local business.  Judging from the condition of the
paint, I'd guess it must date from the 50's or so.  The phone number
is given as "88-5-xxxx".  It's the only place I've ever seen a phone
number punctuated like that, but it's obviously an artifact of
converting from 2L5D to 7D.


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


[Moderator's Note: If it is '88-5' instead of 'TU-5' then it probably
only goes into the early sixties. I do not think All Number Calling
was around anywhere until 1961-62.  Corrections anyone?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Russell)
Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 14:23:59 GMT


[e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> (Anybody know President Clinton's new email address?)

That address is CLINTONPZ, both on Compuserve and America Online.


Tim Russell    Omaha, NE    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 07:22:32 PST
From: [e-mail] (Howard Gayle)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Local Telco Requires Landlord's Contact
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc., Campbell, California


> [Moderator's Note: If you prefer to put down a security deposit or an
> advance payment for the first month of service, that is your right.

When I got service from Pacific Bell, I chose to pay a security
deposit rather than answer nosey questions.  The interest they paid on
the deposit was much higher than I could get on any other investment
with comparable risk.  I felt like asking them "Are you *sure* $80 is
enough?  Wouldn't you like more?" :-)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #205
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26468;
          24 Mar 93 4:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23086
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 02:32:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21835
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 02:31:20 -0600
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 02:31:20 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #206

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 24 Mar 93 02:31:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 206

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Using the Telecom Archives (R. Kevin Oberman)
    Re: Using the Telecom Archives (Clive Feather)
    Re: Using the Telecom Archives (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Alan T. Furman)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements? (Bob Larribeau)
    Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements? (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: Signs of Desperation? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Automatic Gain Control on Voice Calls? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager (Mike Berger)
    Re: IXO (TAP) Protocol For Pagers (Jim Thompson)
    Re: TDDs and Modem Standards (Jim Haynes)
    Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors (Bob Munck)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Using the Telecom Archives
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 00:50:24 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


> 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.

Sorry, Pat, but this is completely bogus. While you may telnet to the
FTP port on a system, FTP does not in any way "use" telnet. Instead,
both FTP and telnet relay on common underlying protocols so that on
may telnet into the FTP port.

That said, it's is a waste of time to do so because this common
mechanism is only used for FTP commands passing. The data stream is
passed over a separate port that does NOT use this underlying
mechanism. Therefore, to ftp a file, one MUST use FTP. You can't get a
file in any way, shape, or form from an ftp archive using telnet.

I'll be a bit more specific. Port numbers are public information.
Telnet to port 21 at some FTP archive. Enter the command "USER
ANONYMOUS" and then "PASS myname". Type HELP. You should see a bunch
of VERY odd commands. Try one that is obvious. LIST. The command will
be accepted and the message "List started" will come back. Then, the
world fails with some sort of "Can't build data connection: connection
refused" message. Sorry.

That said, there are some versions of what is called telnet that have
FTP functionality built into them. These are not standard on any OS,
so the odds of your hitting one are slim. If it works, fine, but you
are not really using telnet. You are just using FTP that is called
from your local version of telnet.


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

Disclaimer: Being a know-it-all isn't easy. It's especially tough when you
don't know that much. But I'll keep trying. (Both)


[Moderator's Note: You do that; continue trying, I mean. :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Clive Feather)
Subject: Re: Using the Telecom Archives
Organization: IXI Limited
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 18:50:54 GMT


> [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.

Sorry Pat, but that's wrong. 'ftp' and 'telnet' are both programs
which use the TCP/IP communications protocol to talk to a program on
the same or another computer.

> 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.

Indeed it does. The reason is that the 'telnet' program establishes a
connection to the remote end, and then provides transparent access to
that connection (i.e. what you type goes across, and what comes back
appears on your screen). The default port used by the program is one
allocated to a remote login program that expects to talk to the telnet
program, and so can negotiate things like local v remote echo.

> does not allow ftp but does allow telnet ... it will usually work.

You can connect, but you won't be able to transfer files or list
directories, because these are done by setting up a *second* TCP/IP
connection to the FTP server to transfer the data back again.

> 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.

The command to list a directory is LIST, but it will say something
like:

"425 Can't build data connection: Connection refused."


Clive D.W. Feather     | IXI Ltd (an SCO company)
[e-mail]          | Vision Park
Phone: [phone] | Cambridge   CB4 4RZ
Fax:   [phone] | United Kingdom

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 22:43:52 PST
From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Using the Telecom Archives
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA


Patrick,

Never advise people to use commands you haven't actually tried!!  This
suggestion comes from someone who spent endless hours in telephone
support for Internet products.

While mail servers can usually be tickled from a telnet client, this
is not true for FTP servers. FTP servers will not transfer any data or
directory listings over the command channel, but insist on opening a
second connection for the data. Since a telnet client can't open a
connection in passive listening mode, you can't easily prepare for
this without having the proper program.

Besides, the times have changed. In the old days, when a network site
had one shared system attached to the network, site administrators
that wanted to restrict access, usually hid the client programs (or
set them up with protections so only privileged users could execute
them.)  Nowadays, when most sites have a local network with many
workstations, including PCs whose owners may not allow the system
manager to mess with their system setup, the preferred way to enforce
restrictions is to install packet filters in the border router,
trapping packets addresed to the restricted ports. This is why a host
may appear to be "unreachable" to telnet and FTP commands, even though
you can ping it.

I know these things, because I work for a company that makes routers.


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]
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 02:05:26 PST


My friend Charles Curley claims to have started the private-sector
space travel and colonization movement by presenting a conference
paper titled "Would You Want the Post Office to Deliver Your Oxygen?"


Alan T. Furman    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 22:49:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology


Lars Poulsen <[e-mail]> writes in Vol 13, #201:

> I was also amazed at the claim that USPS has no way to trace a
> package, but Fed Ex does: It is just that they don't activate
> this costly tracking unless you ask for it and pay for it up
> front.  It is called registered mail...Few people use it...a
> registered letter costs almost as much as..Federal Express.

Last I heard, a USPS registered letter requiring a signature was
$1.15, versus 29c for a regular letter.  Fedex charges at least $8 for
any package or letter.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: Bob Larribeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements?
Organization: Consultant
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 13:35:18 GMT


> 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?

In the U.S. power is not provided by the network.  There are a couple
of ways that power is delivered to the phone:

1. By a power supply connected directly to the phone.

2. Using PS2 (Pins 7 & 8) on the ISDN line.  Typically the power
supply supports both the NT1 and the TE using PS2.  Power may be
provided by an individual power supply or by some kind of bulk power
supply.  The power supply may have battery back up.

In the U.S. the power and the NT1 are customer responsibility.


Bob Larribeau     San Francisco

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements?
Date: 23 Mar 1993 19:30:48 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


[e-mail] (Magnus Hedberg) writes:

> 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?

Your sources are correct.  In the USA, ISDN sets require local power.
Power is not supplied by the telco.  I took an AT&T ISDN Premise wiring
course a couple of years ago, and power was one of the big concerns.  You
could do at either at the desk, or provide power from the local closet.
This took an extra pair.  There were a couple of advantages to providing
power from the closet.  Less clutter at the desktop, less contention for
what is often congested power outlet space at the desk, and the
availability of centralized power failure batteries (which were hideously
expensive).

Overall the ISDN wiring scheme struck me as very primitive and complex.
There needed to be a better way.  I hope that significant improvements
have been made in the last couple of years since I took the course, but I
don't think so.


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

Dave P     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Signs of Desperation?
Date: 23 Mar 1993 16:56:28 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> 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:

> The very first question it asks is:

> 1. Please continue my subscription to Telephony        Yes    No
> Signature required_________________________________

The magazines that offer a free subscription to qualified people must
get signatures every so often from subscribers.  This is mainly so
that they can pass the subsciber base audit that an independent
auditing company conducts from time to time.  The decisions of
advertisers and the advertising rates are based on the number of
subscribers to the magazine, and the advertisers want to see the
subscription base audited so that they know that the quoted number of
subscribers actually want the magazine, and were not added to the list
unilaterally by the magazine just to "pad" the number of subscribers.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Automatic Gain Control on Voice Calls?
Date: 23 Mar 1993 17:06:03 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> Mike Whitaker <MIKEW@SDL.
UG.EDS.COM> writes:

> 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?

There is this technique that is used that disconnects the end-to-end
call path when there is silence.  This is used mainly on international
circuits.  The purpose of this is so that x calls can be supported on
somewhat less than x trunks, as statistically, a certain percentage of
calls will always be silent at any given time.  This switching is done
independently for each direction of the call.

When most of the transmission systems were analog, this cutout would
result in the receiving end of the silent part of the call hear the
background noise go away, so a "feature" was added which causes the
multiplexing equipment to put in "false" static, which supposedly
matches what's naturally on the circuit, so that the caller doesn't
think the line went dead.  Apparently, this is still done even if the
circuit is fully digital.  There is a person in Hong Kong that I talk
to from time to time, and this effect is usually on the line.  When
he's talking, I hear him perfectly clear, just as if he was next door.
Since there's no static or delay, I'm assuming that the call is being
carried by trans-oceanic fiber.  But, as soon as he stops talking, a
steady hiss of static comes on the line.  It seems quite silly.

If the interational carrier is going to use this multiplexing method,
at least they could turn of the artificial static generator when the
call is being carried on a digital circuit.  But, overall, this is
still much better than the occasional time when we get an analog
circuit with a bad echo canceller.  Then, I get to hear a muffled
reflection of my voice at what seems almost a second later.  It
usually takes me a couple of minutes before I force myself to ignore
it -- before then, I always stop talking, thinking the other end is
interrupting me!


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Berger)
Subject: Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 20:48:13 GMT
Organization: U of Il. School of Life Sciences


In article <[e-mail]>, Steven Warner <sgw@boy.
com> wrote:

> Android Rubin writes:

>> 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).

The copy of the spec that I have is vague about using fields 1 and 2
for anything but ID and message respectively.  And before you ask, I
got my protocol spec under a non-disclosure agreement, so I can't post
or send a copy.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Thompson)
Subject: Re: IXO (TAP) Protocol For Pagers
Date: 23 Mar 1993 21:18:04 GMT
Organization: Tadpole Technology, Inc., Austin, TX
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Yea.  Its an expect script.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 15:11:02 -0800
Subject: Re: TDDs and Modem Standards
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz


No, 'taint.  The originator of TDD was the late Bob Weitbrecht, W6NRM,
who was very active in ham RTTY.  In fact I believe he was the one who
petitioned the FCC to allow FSK rather than make-and-break keying for
amateur RTTY on HF.

Well in the early 1960s Bob became friends with another deaf man,
Pasadena orthodontist Jim Marsters.  They worked on a ham license for
Jim; but he wasn't able to copy Morse code well enough.  (Bob could
copy code quite well using an old pair of headphones - I never did
understand if he had just enough hearing at some frequency for it to
work or if he felt the vibrations on his head.)

So they started experimenting over the phone.  The first experiments
were done with a single tone on the space signal, using about 1400 Hz
because that's right in the middle of the telephone passband.  The
reason for using a single tone on space is so that they can have an
interactive conversation without needing a send-receive switch.  When
one person stops sending the line is quiet and the other person can
send.  And if you want to interrupt the talker you can start pounding
keys and both of you will get gibberish and realize that the listener
wants to interrupt.

Single tones worked OK around town, but on long-distance connections
there was trouble with echoes causing garbles.  So Bob added the
second tone (1800 Hz more or less) on the mark frequency to suppress
the echoes (by being a lot louder than they are).  To preserve the
interactive conversational ability he had the mark tone go quiet after
a few milliseconds of no sending; thus the receiver can break in
unless the sender is typing away at full speed.

Bob was working for SRI at the time, but quit and formed a company to
manufacture the modems using the trade name "Phonetype"; the company
name was Applied Communication Corp. or Apcom and was located in
Redwood City or San Mateo or somewhere around there.  A fellow named
Andy Saks was involved, and I believe Jim Marsters was part of the
company too, tho he continued to live in Pasadena practicing
orthodontics.  The Phonetype modem used acoustic coupling as this was
before Carterfone, and used 60WPM Baudot Teletype machines because
that was about the only kind of terminal that was affordable by
ordinary people.  Western Union and some of the Bell companies donated
castoff Teletype machines for the deaf people to use.  There was an
organization "Teletypewriters for the Deaf, Inc." which worked to
acquire and distribute machines.

Bob was concerned about introducing a modem and code that were
incompatible with the way the industry was going; but you have to
remember this was when the Bell modems (101-type) were huge and hugely
costly; the only ASCII terminals were new Teletype machines at $1000
or more.  There was a good supply of old Baudot Teletypes, 60WPM was
faster than most of the users could type anyway, and the Phonetype
model sold for something lke $150 and was something a small company
could produce from readily available parts.

There were active groups of deaf TTY users in various places; I
remember St. Louis had such a group, and they had something like a BBS
except that in those days it used paper tape.  Don't remember how they
handled making the modem auto-answer pre-Carterfone.

Thinking of Jim Marsters reminds me of another item of interest to
Telcom readers.  He really went all-out to live a normal life in spite
of his deafness.  For instance he would periodically take training
with a speech coach, so that his speech, while a little mechanical
sounding, was a lot better than the average deaf person's.  He loved
to talk to people on the telephone; I remember doing a double take
when I was visiting a friend in Pasadena and the phone rang and he
handed it to me and it was Jim Marsters.  I learned his trick: he had
a secretary who would listen on the phone and mouth the words she
heard.  Jim was a superb lip-reader and would get the words by
watching her, and then speak into the phone himself.

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 12:53:56 EST
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Seth B
Rothenberg) writes:

> 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. ...

> [Moderator's Note:  ...  burying the wire  ... cordless phone
> ... steal a couple of idle pairs from the telco ... PAT]

I can't believe that you didn't warn him about the REALLY DANGEROUS
thing he's doing!!

      "buying a house two doors down from my in-laws"

Now if it were "two time-zones" ...


Bob Munck

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #206
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11910;
          24 Mar 93 12:28 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31908
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 09:39:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30113
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 24 Mar 1993 09:38:33 -0600
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 09:38:33 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #207

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 24 Mar 93 09:38:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 207

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Brendan Jones)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Joe Bergstein)
    Re: International Calling Card (Jan Steinman)
    Re: International Calling Card (Bryan Montgomery)
    Re: International Calling Card (Aled Morris)
    Re: Internet Talk Radio (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: 152 & 156 MHz Pagers Needed (Marshal Perlman)
    Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (John Higdon)
    Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (T.A. Cooper"
    Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: ATM Networks (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps (Bill Garfield)
    Re: CNID in St. Louis, MO (Jeff Sicherman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brendan Jones)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 18:14:44 +1000 (EST)


In most, if not all, states of Australia it is illegal to use a
cellphone in a car whilst you are moving, *unless* it is in handsfree
mode.  This law has been around for a few years.

Is the law actually enforced?  It sure is.  I recall a story in the
local newspaper last year that indicated over 700 people had been
fined for this offence in the previous year in my home state (NSW).

People still do it, but a $135 fine and two demerit points on their
license probably makes them think twice before doing it again.

The argument wrt to CBs is a strawman.  You don't have to hold a CB
mic up to your head 100% of the time to use it.  It's nowhere near as
inhibiting as a cellphone handset.


Brendan Jones (PhD Student) | Email: [e-mail] | Any similarity
Electronics Department      | Voice: [phone]         | to Andrew Denton
School of MPC&E             | Fax  : [phone]         | is purely
Macquarie University        | Snail: +NSW 2109 AUSTRALIA    | coincidental

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

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 09:11:31 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


In TELECOM Digest V13 #205 [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
writes:

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

>> I agree.  Use of a hand held cellphone while driving a car should be
>> discouraged.  It is clearly dangerous.
>                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> Why?  If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while
> talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and
> at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at
> 55 controlling a car in two dimensions?

It would depend on the airplane and the number of people qualified to
fly it and have their hands on the controls almost all of the time.

A privately owned plane probably wouldn't have two qualified pilots on
board, nor would it have autopilot nor a headset (although I could be
mistaken on the latter two).

A commercially owned plane would and therefore one or the other of the
pilots and the engineer would be able to do some talking over the air
without compromising safety.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Bergstein)
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 23:20:15 -0500
Subject: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


What's all the fuss about use of cellphones in cars?  Why not let our
wonderful free market system handle this problem?  If it's really so
dangerous to use a cellphone while driving, why haven't insurance
companies raised auto rates for cellular users?  Does the insurance
industry sponsored Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) have any data on
this?

Several years ago, I was of the opinion that cellular use should be
banned while driving.  When I inquired about the insurance issues, I
was told that the demographics of typical cellular users (upper middle
class, and wealthy suburbanites) were such that their driving habits
as a group were quite safe, and that no demonstrated increase in
accidents or claims had been shown for that class of autos equipped
with cellphones.

Is it possible that this has changed over the last one or two years as
the cost of cellphones has plumeted and millions more are now in use?

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths)
Subject: Re: International Calling Card
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ascom Hasler AG
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 11:52:59 GMT


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

> ...What I am looking for is a calling card/plan that will allow
> me to call a US number while overseas [without going] through a
> local operator ...

This is exactly what my ATT MasterCard/calling card does, in
Switzerland and about 50 other countries (according to their
literature). I call a local number, the US number, and my calling card
number, and I'm there!

That is the sole feature that made me choose ATT over the others,
since I auto-dial most of my overseas calls, and going through an
operator (no matter *what* language they speak!) was unacceptable.
("Duh, excuse me, m'am, but do you speak DTMF?")


Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths           [e-mail]
2002 Parkside Court, West Linn, OR 97068-2767 USA   [phone]
Friedlistrasse 19, CH-3006, Bern, Switzerland        [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 09:03:37 GMT
From: Bryan Montgomery <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: International Calling Card
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: IBM Havant UK


In a previous message [e-mail] (Evangelos Kontogiannis) wrote:

> What I am looking for is a calling card/plan that will allow
> me to call a US number while overseas. I don't live in the US
> currently; my sister does and she has an (international) ATT card, BUT
> one is required to go through a local operator; this makes the use of
> that card virtually impossible with local service standards.

The local access number for MCI in Greece is 00-800-1211 according to
the card in my wallet, perhaps if you can get through to this number
you could then ask them for a calling card, if you're lucky and you
get accepted the first time, you should receive the card in a few weeks.
It did take me three attempts at calling MCI (and about the same for AT&T)
to finally get mine about two years ago.


Good luck,

Bryan Montgomery, Portsmouth, GREAT Britain!

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 23:16:28 PST
From: [e-mail] (Aled Morris)
Subject: Re: International Calling Card


> What I am looking for is a calling card/plan that will allow
> me to call a US number while overseas.  I don't live in the US
> currently; my sister does and she has an (international) ATT card, BUT
> one is required to go through a local operator; this makes the use of
> that card virtually impossible with local service standards.

According to the little leaflet that came with my AT&T card, you
should be able to make a call directly to the US from Greece by
dialling 00-800-1311, a free call, keying in your card number and the
US number you want to call (or was it the other way round?)

In fact, if you just dial this number and hold on, you should get an
AT&T operator, which should be better than the local service.

> I would like to be able to do this directly, ie. maybe dial a
> number, give a number code and then dial my call (no operators!).

Sounds like what you want!  Did you try this already?  Do you have a
touchtone phone?  This works for me when I use my AT&T card in the UK
(access code 0-800-890011).


Aled

[e-mail]    Network Computing Devices Inc.
[phone]    350 North Bernardo Avenue, Mountain View, CA 94043

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Internet Talk Radio
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 21:15:29 GMT


    Just a quick note that {Broadcasting & Cable Magazine} has
devoted a little over a page to Internet Talk Radio.  See page 27 of
the 22 March issue.


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] (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: Re: 152 & 156 MHz Pagers Needed
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 02:07:47 GMT


[e-mail] (Simoun S. Ung) writes:

> 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.

Florida uses 152.XXX MHZ.


Marshal Perlman          Internet: [e-mail]
Florida Institute of Technology           IRC: Squawk
Melbourne, Florida                Private Pilot, ASEL
407/768-8000 x8435         Goodyear Blimp Club Member

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 14:39 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada


Terry (T.A.) Cooper <[e-mail]> writes:

> 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.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Are you saying that all
telephone service in Canada works 100% of the time with zero failures?
If so, that is remarkable. Or, are you saying that US telephone
service is less reliable than in Canada? If so, could you please
furnish data and the source for that data?

I have said it before: the US phone system can be compared favorably
against any in the world for price, reliability, feature offerings,
and universal coverage. That includes Canada.


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

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

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 12:47:31 +0000
From: Terry (T.A.) Cooper <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada


John Higdon responded to me:

> Terry (T.A.) Cooper <[e-mail]> writes:

>> 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.

> What the hell is that supposed to mean? Are you saying that all
> telephone service in Canada works 100% of the time with zero failures?
> If so, that is remarkable. Or, are you saying that US telephone service is
> less reliable than in Canada? If so, could you please furnish data and
> the source for that data?

> I have said it before: the US phone system can be compared favorably
> against any in the world for price, reliability, feature offerings, and
> universal coverage. That includes Canada.

No it is not up 100% of the time, more like 99.9%.  I can count on one
hand the number of times that I have lost dialtone on my phone.  Each
of these outages was as a result of "an act of god" or a drunk driver.
Lightning has killed my service a couple of times and a wind storm
ripped out the cables once.  Drunk drivers tend to have the same
effect as wind storms, they take out phone poles and cables.

It is interesting that the first point on your list of comparing the
US phone system is price.  In my book price is a consideration but
reliability far outweighs it as a factor in determining the quality of
a phone system.  I live far enough from "civilization" that I consider
my phone a very important safety item.  I'll pay a bit extra to know
that my phone will work when I pick it up.

I'd like to provide you with data to would highlight my opinion, but
any data that I have is confidential information that cannot be
published.  Besides, as the disclaimer says it's just my opinion.


Terry Cooper     Northern Telecom   Ottawa, Ontario
Opinions expressed are personal and are not those of Northern Telecom.

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Completing All-Digital Network
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 03:54:24 GMT


On Mar 16 at 16:46, TELECOM Moderator writes:

(just getting around to a belated contribution to a Higdon-PAT
dialogue!)

> [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.

Well, that's a good question, but it again has zilch to do with
Divestiture!  It's the result of the FCC's 1983 "impure 1 1/2" (it was
a watered down "Pure 2" option, in their original proposal) decision,
which in turn was a 1979-ish docket to replace the old rules for
Separations and Settlements.  It was put in place coincident with
Divestiture, since the two went together like brown on rice, but the
reasons are different.

What Pure 2 proposed was that non-traffic-sensitive costs of local
plant be born by fixed, not traffic-sensitive, charges.  Since Smith
vs. Illinois Bell (1927), some share of local telephone plant was in
the interstate (FCC) jurisdiction.  The percentage had risen to over
30% by 1982, providing a subsidy.  The FCC got all of its share from
interstate toll.  What Pure 2 did was take this fixed cost (local
exchange wires, mostly) off the toll usage bill and onto the fixed
monthly bill.

THe proper name for the $2-6 charge is "customer access line charge"
(CALC).  That's the charge a customer pays for an "access line" (any
local phone line).  It is often misabbreviated "access charge", as if
it were for access _to_ toll, but it's not -- without CALC subsidies,
many local charges would be higher!

Separations and settlements are a very confusing part of telecom ...


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


[Moderator's Note: Well I think the old way was a better way of handling
this. The monthly 'customer access line charge' just keeps going up.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 22:50:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ATM Networks


Brad Hicks of Master Card talks about his company's "Maestro" network
for access to ATM cards by merchants.  I suspect his comments about
Maestro becoming used everywhere is a little premature unless MC
starts buying up some of the smaller networks.

In the Washington, DC regional area, two years ago First American
Bank, which had its own Money Exchange network, threw in the towel and
became the *final* holdout to switch to the MOST ATM network.
(Probably the Arabs who owned BCCI didn't want to pay for another
network for this bank. :) ) This now gave MOST 100% penetration in ALL
banks, S&Ls, credit unions and ATMs in the Washington, DC area, and
for some banks, as far south as Tennessee.

Now, the Maryland Department of Social Services has eliminated the
distribution of food stamps.  Instead, a food stamp client is issued
an ATM card on the MOST network.  All stores that take food stamps
have to have a swipe reader for this reason.  The store gets the
amount of purchase and the card is debited by the amount of the
transaction.  This could only occur once every bank was on the MOST
network.  Also, it now reduces theft (except for merchants creating
fraudulent transactions and paying the Food Stamp client to sell part
of their allocation) and makes it impossible for someone to sell their
excess food stamps since they'd have to give away their PIN code AND
card to someone, which makes it difficult if the person doesn't bring
it back, to explain how come their account is being accessed.

Safeway and Giant Food stores in this area all take Visa, Mastercard
and MOST ATM cards for purchases, and they have ATM machines that will
issue cash. (And they were slow: Magruders' Grocery was taking Visa
and MC two years before Safeway or Giant).  And they all still take
checks.  In my opinion, however, I'm better off using my VISA card for
paying for groceries (or else using a check) than using an ATM card:

  1.  I get at least 30 days interest-free to pay it on Visa/MC; if
      the merchant's processor is slow, I may even get 60 days,
      or in rare circumstances, forever; (see #4)
  2.  An ATM card usage carries from 50c-$2.00 usage charge;
      groceries purchased on VISA/MC are simple transactions
      and have no surcharge; (Typical MOST charge is 75c; Cirrus is $1)
  3.  A check has no surcharge and you get at least 2-3 days
      float.
  4.  If the merchant loses the VISA/MC transaction (it happens),
      your purchase is *free*!

So when people look at the difference in cost between an ATM
transaction and a VISA/MC credit card, my suspicion is that they will
"Go for the Gold (credit card)".

Here's a couple of additional points.  My mother has a Sears card that
looks exactly like a Master Card, in that it has a 16 digit number
starting with 5.  It has operated some systems that don't correctly
verify MC card numbers.  I tried it and we didn't get a bill from
Sears for its use, either.  Correctly verifying machines reject it as
an invalid MC number.

And the ATM card for my bank has a 'VISA Like' number on it, where it
consists of a 16 digit number starting with 4, and an expiration date
on it.  It does not have the VISA logo on it, and I've never tried to
use it as if it really were a VISA card, but it might be interesting
to find out.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I understand the US Government is going to start
sending the welfare money each month to people receiving SSI by using
an ATM or Debit Card.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Phase Noise Causing Garbage at 9600 bps
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 93 20:50:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


In article <[e-mail]> Graham Toal <gtoal@gtoal.
com> writes:

> [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.

While proving it to your local telco can be difficult, I recently went
through a similar experience with 100% success.  The big problem was
getting past the teledroid who answers the repair service lines.

Using a standard 2500 (tone-dial desk phone) I placed repeated VOICE
calls to a number across town in the same place as a BBS where we
could simply NOT get connected.  With the VOICE party answering, he
and I would take turns "swapping tones" with each other by depressing
the 9 and # keys simultaneously to generate a single (1477 hz) tone
and simply listen to the tone coming from the far end.  Whenever we
would land on a trunk in the defective trunk group, the received
1477hz tone would pulsate, "ka-bling, ka-bling, ka-bling, etc".  The
trunks sounded _absolutely_ flawless for regular speech, even music
sounded ok, but the slips or density errors stuck out like a sore
thumb with a steady tone on the channel.

We noted also that the higher in frequency the test tone, the more
noticeable the "ka-blings" became.  Using * and 0 (941hz) the problem
was barely noticeable.  Tone level (loudness) made no difference.

Armed with this "evidence", we dialed up another call and attached a
Halcyon test tone generator across the transmitter leads, set the tone
frequency at 1800hz (coincidentally center frequency of 9600 and
14,400 bps modems) and reduced the output to -20.  Then we called
repair service from another phone and requested a supervisor to call
back.

The "ka-blinging" call was left up whilst Ma Bell's interoffice
folks did an internal trace between central offices. "Find the
'Ka-Bling' and you've found the problem" I told the supervisor.

The ensuing process took the better part of the afternoon but ended in
success when the tone suddenly came clear.  The SWBT supervisor called
us back about 20 minutes later and explained that they had found a
"mated system in loopback causing pulse density errors."

Since that day in December 1992, high speed modem and fax calls
between Houston's downtown and "Galleria" areas have been absolutely
flawless.  We fought this thing for eight months and got it fixed in a
little over three hours once we finally had some proof of our own.


Ye Olde Bailey BBS   713-520-1569 (V.32bis) 713-520-9566 (V.32bis)
  Houston,Texas          yob.sccsi.com       Home of alt.cosuard

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

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 00:12:16 -0800
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: CNID in St. Louis, MO
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


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

> [e-mail] writes:

>> The [Missouri] PSC voted 3-2 that the service "did not violate the public
>> interest", inspite of the objections of some interest groups.

> Maybe I will take back what I said about the midwest. It sounds as
> though the regulators in the state of my birth have a helluva lot more
> gumption than the CPUC weenies who cave in to every activist group
> that can grunt.

   Does John Higdon have some special posting channel or privilege that
makes everything he hays to say always end up in the Digest? I'd hate
to see him leave and lose the technical expertise, historical background,
and frequent cumudgeonness ... but I'm getting a little tired of his
*incessant* whining about a subject that he, heaven forbid, ended up
being on the losing side (temporarily, at least). I thought that posts
were supposed to contribute something *new* to a thread, not just reflect
to emotional involvement of a particular, apparently favored, party.


Jeff Sicherman


[Moderator's Note: Actually instead of 'favoritism', it is volume of
submissions sent which brings John into the Digest almost daily. You
only see about half of what John sends in. And unlike some reader/writers
here, he has never said a thing to me about stuff of his which wound
up in the bit bucket unused. You should have seen enough disagreements
between John and I here in the past to realize that if I were to 'play
favorites' I could find others more aligned to my points of view with
whom to do so.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #207
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13690;
          25 Mar 93 2:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09872
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 00:24:00 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01036
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 00:23:07 -0600
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 00:23:07 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #208

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 25 Mar 93 00:23:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 208

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Comparison of Pricing (Paul Robinson)
    Caller Identification Catches Kidnapper (Clarinet via Stewart M. Clamen)
    New Use For a 900 Line (Harold Hallikainen)
    Florida's Cellular/Pager Coverage (Marshal Perlman)
    ESN Codes in Cell Phones (Laurence Chiu)
    Replacement Ringers (Andy Behrens)
    Help Wanted Setting Up Leased Line - SCOPE-8 (Jerry Krulewicz)
    MUX Multiple T1's Onto Private Fiber Cheaply? (Ken Stone)
    Integretel and G. Gordon Liddy (Michael Rosen)
    Descrambler Plans (Randy Gellens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 22:29:22 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Comparison of Pricing


I mentioned earlier I upgaded my home phone service from two to four
lines.  I just got the phone bill so I can give an example for Telecom
Digest readers outside the U.S. how much phone service costs.

The following sample is used to compare prices for telephone service
in the U.S. so that people can see the effective cost of phone service
here if they are outside the U.S.

Robert A. Heinlein said you can judge the basic wealth of a country by
determining two things (1) how much is a loaf of standard bread, and
(2) how many hours would a journeyman carpenter have to work to earn
enough to buy one.

A standard loaf of bread in the Washington DC area ranges from $0.55
to $1.20 depending on whether you want special bread or plain white or
wheat.  Let me call one 16 ounce loaf of bread to be $0.75.  A
journeyman carpenter makes about $22.00 an hour, which means it takes
him about 2 1/2 minutes.

The "minimum wage" which is the floor set by law as the smallest
amount an employer can legally pay someone is $4.25 per hour (and
State Governments can set this higher.)  For the average worker, taxes
and payroll contributions eat about 30% of whatever they make.  I make
aproximately three times this amount.

Now, on to the telecom stuff.

If someone is in a household in the District of Columbia (Nation's
Capital) and doesn't make much money, ($9,000 per year for 1 person,
and slightly more for each person in the household, if I remember the
ads correctly) they can obtain telephone service for $1 a month.  One
line only is all a household is allowed to have, and you have to apply
for the special rate (I'm certain it's subsidized).  This particular
service offers unlimited local calling.

There are some people that have different (lower) rates because their
service is "grandfathered" which means they have an older service
which was tariffed when they had the service installed, but isn't
available now, but the local authorities require the telco to continue
to offer the service to those who had it.

For ordinary people, here are the rates in the Maryland Suburbs of DC
for residential phone service.  A basic line where all outgoing calls
are either charged at 9c each or timed at 3c per call and 1.3c per
minute, is $5.86 per month.  A line with 65 call allotments or $5.90
worth of timed calls, is $8.85 a month.  Unlimited residential
telephone service is $17.01 a month.  C&P Telephone eliminated the
surcharge for Touch Tone in its last tariff filing so you get it
automatically.

A second telephone number (Distinctive Ring), Call Waiting, Three-Way
Calling, Speed Calling 8, Speed Calling 30, Call Forwarding, "ultra"
Call Forwarding are all extra and range from $1.50 to $6.00 a month,
with discounts for taking multiple services.  Call Waiting and Three
Way costs $5.50, for example.  Caller ID (CNID) is $6.50 a month, you
buy your own display unit.  Included with CNID is "Anonymous Call
Rejection" (ACR) where if someone dials *67 to not display their
telephone number on a caller-id box, you may optionally tell the
switch to reject the call without it ringing your called phone.  ACR
is available without Caller ID for $3 a month.

There are additional taxes and surcharges.  Federal and local sales
taxes, 911 emergency service and a "subscriber line charge" of $3.50
per line in addition to the regular service rates.

Here is what I have at home, and what it costs me (this is
transcribed from my phone bill):

1 Residence Line Main-Unlimited calling        $17.01
1 Custom Calling - Call Waiting/3Way Calling     5.50
1 Residence Line addl-Unlimited calling         17.01
1 Custom Calling - Ultra Forward                 4.50
1 Residence Line addl-Unlimited calling         17.01
1 Residence Line addl-Unlimited calling         17.01
1 Identa Ring-First Dependent number-Residence   4.50
Charge for 3 weeks service (2 lines)            30.35
1/3 of $68.00 for installation of addl lines    22.66
Federal Subscriber Line Charge                  14.00
911 Fee: State .10; Local .50                     .60
Universal Service Fee                             .68
Local Surcharge                                  4.86
Calling Card Calls - C&P                         1.54
Taxes: Federal 4.00; State .88                   4.88

Total C&P Telephone                            162.11


Local Surcharge is obviously a county sales tax.  I'm guessing the
"universal service fee" is to pay for the deaf tty relay for the
overhead costs.  So $53.00 of this charge is due to switching from two
phone lines to four lines and would not normally be recurring.  But
what it essentially means is that four phone lines cost roughly $109 a
month even if I never send 10c of business to AT&T.  But based on the
fact that I have an 'extra number' and Call Waiting/3 Way, I have the
equivalent of five 'circuits' and five phone numbers.  Four regular
circuits and one which is createable on request.

For those who think that we have poor service here, these are standard
POTS dial lines, I can run a modem across them (that's how I'm posting
this message).  This is not Subscriber Carrier.

For those who wanted to know what U.S. phone service costs, well, now
you know.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: Stewart M. Clamen <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 12:59:49 EST
Subject: Caller Identification Catches Kidnapper
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University


A recent ClariNet feed carries the following interesting story

(redistributed with permission):


   From: [e-mail] ((Hyatt/CJAD/Standard Broadcast News))
   Newsgroups: clari.canada.law
   Keywords: canadian broadcast, police, legal
   Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

(MIRABEL, Quebec) A Quebec man who allegedly molested his ex-wife and
kidnapped his two-year-old daughter last night was found hours later
with the help of a new Bell Canada service. Police say the man from
Mirabel, northwest of Montreal, called his ex-wife, NOT knowing she
had a telephone that displayed the number he was calling from. The
woman quickly called police with the number, who found the
corresponding address, and proceeded to arrest the man.

       --

This, and all articles in this news hierarchy are Copyright 1993 by
the wire service or information provider and licenced to Clarinet
Communications Corp.  for distribution.  Except for free samples, only
paid subscribers may access these articles.  Any unauthorized access,
reproduction or transmission is strictly prohibited.  We will reward
the first provider of information that helps us stop violators of this
copyright.  Send reports to [e-mail].  (Note that while we
do like to know about people who do the odd reposting to USENET
without permission, rewards are not always provided for reports on
that, since's it's usually obvious.)

           --

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: New Use for a 900 Line
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 19:31:56 GMT


     A local AM station has a new format and a new use for 900- lines.
The station is calling itself "Radio Home Shopping" and running ads 24
hours per day.  I seem to recall hearing of a McLendon station (I
think they used the call KADS) doing something similar in the 1960s.
What's unique about this station is that it's all automated.  A member
of the public calls a 900 number and reads his/her ad into the system.
Various ad classifications are available, which determines how the ads
are grouped on the air (a little like classified ads, but the
classifications seem rather broad).  Each ad runs a bunch of times.  I
imagine the system automatically times out the ads after they've run
for so many hours or so, but I don't know.  I listened to it for a
while last night.  Most of the ads were individuals buying or selling
garage sale type items, but there were a few business advertising
their products and services, a few employment ads (an alarm company
looking for an installer, someone looking for a diesel mechanic,
someone looking for a job posted his "radio resume").

     The ads run $3.00 for the first minute and $2.00 for each
additional minute.

     The station is the first commercial station I worked for, back in
1970.  They are still running the Bauer 707 transmitter that we built
as a kit.  I spoke with the owner of the station (who I've known since
the early 70's) yesterday.  He describes it as "a different kind of
radio" where you have to get used to a little dead air and some clicks
and pops.  Actually, the system seemed to do real well.  Listening to
the station is a little like getting home and pressing the playback
button on your answering machine, except that you've got hours of
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


[Moderator's Note: Some questions: What do they do about the crackpots
who call in with obscene and/or libelous messages? Doesn't anyone
screen it at all?  How are station ID's handled? Are they on a cart
which just kicks in once an hour or so and gives the station name?
What happens when there are slow periods in the incoming phone calls,
such as three or four in the morning?  Do they just play the ones they
have more often to keep from having dead air; do they have dead air
when traffic is very slow or do they have other filler stuff to play,
or music perhaps?  Speaking of crackpots and pranksters, what prevents
a person from calling in with the recorded audio from some other
station or recorded music, etc.  Sounds nice, but they must have
someone there to keep the listener/participants under control.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: Florida's Cellular/Pager Coverage
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 02:04:07 GMT


I was looking for a pager today, and was curious if anyone knows of a
company in Florida that covered a large area for paging?

I looked at a few today, and the coverage area was joke ... just a few
big cities and that was it!!!! IT WAS SAD! The south end of the
coverage area is where I live! So if I go a mile south, I'm a goner!
HOW CAN THEY DO THIS?

I don't expect coverage in the Everglades, but when I lived in
California, I had coverage from Tijuana Mexico to Catalina Island to
the Hoover Dam to Sacramento ... how can Florida's coverage be so BAD!

I know less people are here, but we are still here!!

HELP!


Marshal Perlman                  Internet: [e-mail]
Florida Institute of Technology                   IRC: Squawk
Melbourne, Florida                        Private Pilot, ASEL
407/768-8000 x8435                 Goodyear Blimp Club Member

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: ESN Codes in Cell Phones
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 03:35:45 GMT


I just read something which worried me a bit. Basically what was said
was, a cell phone designed to be used in one country cannot be used in
another, even if the other country has the same system (AMPS. E-TACS
GSM etc.).  This is because the ESN has a country code designator in
it (the third couple of numbers in the ESN).

Is this true? Can anyone shed any light on this? I am worried since I
was planning to use a cell phone from another country in the US (same
system).  Note I wasn't plan to roam (which I have been told is
possible) but to setup a new account completely with a SF Bay Area
provider.


Thanks,

Laurence Chiu     [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 11:59:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Andy Behrens <[e-mail]>
Subject: Replacement Ringers


I work in an office with lots of telephones, and sometimes it's hard
to tell whose phone is ringing.  I've tried swapping bells, and that
helps -- but not enough.

The Graybar catalog has chimes and buzzers.  Those would work, but I
wonder if there's anything more interesting available.  (I once saw a
phone that quacked like a duck when a call came in.  That's the sort
of thing I'm looking for).

Our phone system uses ordinary (90 volt) ringing.


Andy

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

From: wireworks![e-mail]
Subject: Help Needed Setting Up Leased Line - SCOPE-8
Date: 24 Mar 93 19:27:04 GMT
Organization: Wireworks Corporation


Help, I am looking for a recomendation regarding a leased line.

The situation is that I need a line from area code 908-686 exchange to
908-730 exchange for data use.  The 686 end is in NJ Bell territory
but the 730 end is in "United Territory" (a Sprint Company.)

Previously, I had an OSNA circuit which tied into electronic key
system on the 686 end.  United had a problem because the location was,
I think, 7.5mi from the CO and they had to do some four wire stuff and
then put equipment on site to convert the four wire back to two.  The
circuit worked OK for voice, as long as it didn't rain, but was a
disaster with a modem.  Sometimes OK for 2400 baud but never for 9600.
United absolutely refused to improve the line.  They said, "Hay, voice
grade.  Can you hear the person on the other end?"  So I had it taken
out.

Now, I need to put something in that will do 9600 baud and I guess
I'll forget about voice.  The NJ Bell sales rep is talking about a
SCOPE 8 line, 2 wire, full duplex, wants to know if I need C1, C2, C4
or D1 conditioning.  I'm planing on using ZyXEL U-1496E Modems.

Is this the best way to do this?  Is this the least expensive way to
do this?  Is there any way to get a good circuit from United Telephone?


Thanks,

Jerry Krulewicz

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

Subject: MUX Multiple T1's Onto Private Fiber Cheaply?
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 20:49:16 -0800
From: Ken Stone <[e-mail]>


Well, in my last query I learned a lot about how the LEC's deliver T3.
Thanks to all who helped out ... bottom line is that there is no
really realistic way to buy T3 other than at the electrical interface
or at least not from PacBell.  They will sell at the optical interface
but the only way you can unbundle the signal off the fiber is to buy
whatever MUX equipment they spec ... what a mess.  The concept of
single CO T3 or greater bandwidth at a reasonable price just hasn't
arrived around here yet.

Next subject ... I'm looking for suggestions on MUX'ing several (6-10)
T1's onto private fiber to run across the street.  Since I can spec
the fiber and its mine (ie dark), I'm looking at running FDDI for high
speed data but I still need several loops for an NT RPE unit.  I've so
far seen devices from ADC and Laurus? that put a single T1 onto a pair
of fibers but that seems rather silly ... these devices all seem
oriented at long distance as they are single mode whereas what I'm
looking for would just MUX 10 or so full T1's with no compression or
tricks or whatever onto a pair of either multi-mode or single mode
fibers and be done with it.

Any ideas ?


Ken Stone

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Integretel and G. Gordon Liddy
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 04:51:10 GMT


Today while listening to the G. Gordon Liddy show I heard a woman call
up describing a situation where her son called an 800 number where
they then called back collect and she found a 12 minute phone call for
$60 on her bill.  She said the company was Integretel.  I know I've
read about them on TELECOM Digest before I just don't remember the
details.  What scams have they been involved in before?  I'd like to
become more informed before trying to address this on his show.

By the way, I called on Monday and got the number to Liddy's BBS in
Virginia.  It is 703/620-9881.


Mike


[Moderator's Note: Integretel is a company which bills for a large
number of small-time information providers with a variety of topics to
discuss, including but not limited to sex-talk with strangers on the
long distance phone late at night. Some operate on 900 lines, some
operate on 800 lines with collect callbacks. Integretel also does the
billing and provides the (alternate) operator services for many COCOT
services. As an interexchange carrier, they send billing tapes to the
local telcos which is how people get charged for Integretel services
on the long distance portion of their monthly bill from the local
telco. They do not use the AT&T/Sprint/MCI/local telco data base for
billed number screening but they do maintain their own and will add
anyone to it on request by calling their office: 800-736-7500.  PAT]

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

From: <MPA15AB![e-mail]>
Date: 24 MAR 93 02:13
Subject: Descrambler Plans


I realize this may be a bit off the usual topic, but the readers of
this list are my best bet at answering this question, I think.

A friend of mine is (dis)served by a cable company which insists on
scrambling non-premium channels (such as Nick).  They supply a box,
but it exhibits obnoxious engineering, such as not passing any signal
when off (instead of letting the full cable pass through) and refusing
to work for even short periods of time without its authorization
signal.  Because of this, the box must be placed before the VCR, and
must be on in order to view anything.  This makes it impossible to
view one show and tape another without an A/B switch, which is a
hassle.  It also makes it annoying to use.

What my friend would like is either a remote A/B switch, or a
descrambler for non-premium channels (not fraud, because he is paying
for them).  If anyone can send information on where to get, or how to
build such devices, he would very much appreciate it.

Please send all replies to me alone, so as not to annoy Pat or the
readership.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #208
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17504;
          25 Mar 93 4:56 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07271
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 02:24:53 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26743
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 02:24:01 -0600
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 02:24:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #209

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 25 Mar 93 02:24:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 209

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    National Telecom Newgroups (Nigel Allen)
    Seeking Test Standards-Hearing Aid Compatible Phones (Paul Cook)
    Hearing Aid Compatible Handsets (Lee Sweet)
    GTE Mobilnet Switch Cut (John Higdon)
    Intra-LATA, Inter-State Regulation (Steve Forrette)
    Cellular Demonstrator Device ([e-mail])
    Caller-Pays Numbers and Exchanges (Dan Borkowski)
    Telephone Handset Speaker (Anton Mitchell)
    Experiences in Telecommuting Redefined (Bill Gough)
    Re: MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good? (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good? (Robert Eden)
    Orange Card Advertisements (Joshua E. Muskovitz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: National Telecom Newgroups
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


A while ago I posted a message wondering about national
telecommunications-related newsgroups. I don't want anyone to stop
reading the TELECOM Digest, but I thought it would be interesting to
see some telecommunications-related discussions that weren't intended
to be distributed worldwide.

The United Kingdom has uk.telecom. Australia has aus.comms.  The
messages I saw in aus.comms included several on the pagers-in-schools
thread that started here, as well as a directory of people active in
telecommunications research in Australia and New Zealand.

As well, any country's *.misc or *.general newsgroup can be expected
to have a certain amount of complaining about the local telecommun-
ications carriers. Canada's can.general and can.politics have had
vigorous discussions about various Bell Canada initiatives and the
Quebec Yellow Pages controversy that we have discussed here.

Even if you don't live in Australia or the United Kingdom, your site
may receive these newsgroups, or may easily be able to obtain a feed.
I read aus.comms on a site in Toronto.


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada    [e-mail]
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario  416-629-7000/629-7044

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

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 23:28 GMT
From: Proctor & Associates <[e-mail]>
Subject: Seeking Test Standards-Hearing Aid Compatible Phones


Can anyone recommend a source for test standards for hearing aid
compatible phones?  Do Bellcore, EIA or FCC publish these?


Paul Cook                        206-881-7000
Proctor & Associates        MCI Mail 399-1080
15050 NE 36th St.           fax: [phone]
Redmond, WA  98052-5378   [e-mail]


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

From: decrsc![e-mail] (Lee Sweet)
Subject: Hearing Aid Compatible Handsets
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 10:17:15 -0500 (EST)


We've received several memos from our PBX vendor (Rolm) saging that
_all_ handsets in use by corporations with more than 20 employees
_must_ be hearing aid compatible by May 1, 1993 [under 20 employees
have until May 1, 1994].

This is an FCC regulation. (I've seen the text; the relevant part is
about ten words that says the above.)  Does this supersede/override
ADA requirements?  The Americans with Disabilities Act (exact name?)
says (to quote our legal counsel) that all that is needed is to have
"public" areas phones and phones used by hearing-impaired people to be
so equipped. So, my management feels no need to convert every set,
being covered by legal opinion.

But:

Rolm (and NATA) seem to be very concerned that we know we are
'supposed' to have all handsets converted by 5/1.  Part of this may be
to relieve themselves of any liability if customers are found to be in
non-compliance.  (Of course, they also want to sell hundreds of HAC
handsets ;-)

Anybody have the straight legal scoop?  Anybody have any comments on
the implementation of this?  For example, we have almost zero contact
with the off-the -street public, being a software VAR.  We do have
clients taking training classes in-house, and will have no problem
with the two "public" phones that they use.  But, 200 handsets for
desks that do not have hearing-impaired people? At $40/each (or so),
that's big bucks!

I also have no problem with keeping a few extras around and swapping
out a handset if/when we hire a person that wants such a HAC handset.
That's only natural.

BTW, I, myself, am the only person we employ who could be classified
as hearing-impaired: I wear hearing aids, but find no benefit from HAC
handsets, which are magnetically coupled to some hearing aids, FYI.
Rolm, for one vendor, always equips _every_ phone with incoming volume
controls, which I find very acceptable and preferable to magnetic
coupling in a computer (EMF) noisy environment (:-)!  Obviously,
having system-wide volume controls makes all of this even less
logical.

What is everybody doing about this?

(And, for the non-USA folks, this applies to USA only.  I don't know
what your countries have done/plan to do; might be interesting to find
out.)


Lee Sweet                       Internet - [e-mail]
Chief Systems Consultant              Phone - 703-968-4661
Datatel, Inc.                           FAX - 703-968-4625
4375 Fair Lakes Court              uucp - uunet!decrsc!lee
Fairfax, Virginia  22033  USA

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

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 18:19 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: GTE Mobilnet Switch Cut


On April 2 (Friday night), GTE Mobilnet San Francisco will be retiring
its Motorola switch. As you will recall, some years ago after
experiencing problem after problem, failure after failure, GTE told
Motorola to shape up or ship out.

The new At&T switch is replacing the Motorola units system wide and
has already been turned up in some areas. As a result of this cut,
many dozens of channel banks will be pulled from service, as the AT&T
switch will utilize the digital cell site interconnections directly.

The schedule calls for a flash cut on Friday night, giving crews the
entire weekend to iron out any problems before Monday peak business
traffic.


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

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

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 18:47:26 -0800
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: Intra-LATA, Inter-State Regulation


WDoes anyone know who regulates the tariffs for intra-LATA,
inter-state calling?  Is it the FCC or the local PUCs?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 09:23 EST
Subject: Cellular Demonstrator Device


I have an old AT&T cellular demostrator unit, KS-23141-L1. The unit is
a grey box that is placed below a sales booth and allows an old
AMPS-style cellular (the ones with the IEEE-488 connector) to connect
to a POTS line. A POTS line plugs into an RJ-11 on the box, and the
AMPS cellular telephone connects to an IEEE-488 connector.  The sales
person could then demo the cellular handset in markets where there
wasn't any cellular service.

I am particularly interested in obtaining any promotional material,
BSPs, etc.

I can be reached vial E-MAIL at: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Borkowski)
Subject: Caller-Pays Numbers and Exchanges
Date: 24 Mar 93 14:23:51 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories


New England Telephone just announced their CIRCUIT9 service, which
appears to be an attempt to add more caller-pays numbers and to
separate business info services from adult info services (is that what
we're calling them these days?).  They've added the 920 and 554
exchanges to the list of caller-pays exchanges.  NET claims that a
caller must be informed if the minimum charge for the call exceeds $1
or if the charge for any minute is over $1.

 From the information I have, the following exchanges are classified
as caller pays in the NET area: adult - 976, 940, 554; group talk -
550, business - 920.  Of course, 900-xxx-xxxx numbers are here as
well.

Is each telco free to set up their own caller-pays exchanges?  Does
Bellcore make recommendations in this area?  Does the FCC regulate
this practice?  I recall hearing of a problem several years ago when
976 numbers were becoming popular; NY Tel assigned 956 instead, and
there was plenty of exploitation.  Are there any national requirements
regarding notification of charges?


Dan Borkowski   GTE Laboratories Incorporated    [e-mail]

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

Organization: City University of New York
Date: Wednesday, 24 Mar 1993 02:57:49 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telephone Handset Speaker


I have a question about the telephone handset speaker. What I would
like to know is what is the varistor (?) for which is bridged across
the terminals of the speaker in the handset? Also does anyone have any
recomendations for any books on designing telecom equipment? Thanks.


Anton Mitchell


[Moderator's Note: That thing across the earpiece terminals helps keep
obnoxious popping, crackling and other noises as a minimum. You can
remove it and see if you like the sound better. Gently cut one side
leaving room to reconnect it, then gently push it out of the way. I
don't think you will like the way the phone sounds, and you will soon
get annoyed hearing the loud 'pop' each time you depress the hook.
When you have decided it was better the way it was, gently push the
thing back in place and make certain the two parts of the leg which
you clipped are touching each other. Drop a tiny bit of solder there
if you wish to keep it in place.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Experiences in Telecommuting Redefined
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 11:35:53 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, I write:

> 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.

I have had a couple of replies, so far; thanks to those who did
respond.  However, I have been asked for clarification of definitions.
Here goes ...

Telecommuting: "home office" concept, i.e. dialing in and doing work
at home, for at least part of the day. An example would be a
technician who dials in first thing in the morning to check what
service calls he/she needs to attend to, and leaves from home instead
of going to work and learning of the day's schedule.

Distributed workplace: Using links to communicate with and share work
between individuals in different buildings. Basically, a business that
spans more than one building or geographic location.

Distance education: Teaching by CAI **over a distance**, teleconferencing,
etc. We have a district ed centre here, and I have checked other
newsgroups for information, so there is no need to direct me to other
sources. What I am looking for here is maybe a training department
organized a course that was taught to several sites simultaneously.

Another suggestion was to ask the opinions of those who use distance
technology in any way in their daily lives, working or leisure, so I
am. I hope this clears things up.


Thanks,

Bill Gough ([e-mail])
Faculty of Business Administration
Memorial University of Newfoundland
St. John's, NF     Canada

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good?
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 04:29:26 GMT


In a article to comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] had the following
to say about MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good?:

> 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?

> [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.

I have just been through this whole exercise. I had AT&T as ny 1+
carrier but found MCI had better rates, especially with F&F to
international destinations (I make very few domestic LD calls). So I
signed up with MCI and their F&F plan plus their Friends Around the
World (I think it was called that) but via 10222, not changing my 1+
carrier. The good thing about F&F internationally is you don't have to
worry about your friends being hassled by MCI to become subscribers --
clearly they cannot.

MCI was quite happy to bill me directly and now I can get additional
20% discounts on calls to two international destinations.
Interestingly I received $20 worth of vouchers from MCI recently in
the form of cheques which I could use to pay some of my bill. There
were three cheques for $5, $5 and $10 to be used on three consecutive
bills. Trouble was they required endorsement on the back authorising
the local Telco to switch me over to MCI completely. I called to
complain and the MCI operator just credited my account for $20.


Laurence Chiu    Walnut Creek, CA    [e-mail]

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

From: Robert Eden [phone] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI Friends-and-Family: Is it Any Good?
Date: 24 Mar 93 08:47:23 CST
Organization: Texas Utilities, Glen Rose TX


In article <[e-mail]>, Richard Pauls <pauls@ll.
mit.edu> writes:

> I would like to know what people think about MCI's Friends and Family
> program.

I'm pretty happy with it.  Combined with their one-hour minimum
calling plan, I pay around .08 a minute for out of state calls.  Best
rate I've found.  When you add someone to your circle, ask them not to
solicit them and MCI will oblidge.  They're pretty sensitve to that
with all the bad publicity.  (Friends who were called in the past
didn't say MCI gave them too hard a sell)

F&F will work even with MCI set up as an alternate carrier (they set
up a special billing account (forgot the name)) A friend of mine has
this set up at her parents house.  Her parents don't want to switch
from AT&T, but she wants F&F rates calling home.  In addition she can
make LD calls from there and have the bill come directly to her.


Robert Eden    817-897-0491                                 Glen Rose, TX
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station            [e-mail]
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ politicese for a nuke plant

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

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 14:49:17 EST
From: Joshua E. Muskovitz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Orange Card Advertisements


Not to harp on this, but it is getting a little tiring seeing all of
Pat's adverts for the "Telecom Digest Long Distance Company".  I hope
this doesn't become like public radio, where there are lots of
pseudo-ads from the sponsors/supporters...

While I like the idea of funneling off some profits into TD, I don't
see any kind of accountability except the public perception of our
Esteemed Moderator.


Josh


[Moderator's Note: A few days ago, a fellow from the Annenberg/CPB
Foundation wrote an article elsewhere on my new endeavors and his
conclusion was there should be a fund raising drive, ala public radio.
As he put it, I could not/should not expect people to believe I was
impartial as long as I sold telecom-related products and services. I
replied asking him if we were to assume National Public Radio was
always impartial or if programming decisions had *never, ever* been
made on the basis of reactions from the most deep-pocketed patrons of
NPR or the direction the stink from Capitol Hill was blowing from one
day to the next. He did not choose to answer that question, instead
saying he was sorry if I was offended by his comments. I told him I
hear Annenberg's name so often on NPR it would never occur to me that
they did not have some influence over the programming. NPR staffers
have to eat, and so do I, so what was his beef?

I think what some of the Usenet-Gods are disturbed about is not so much
what I am doing, but the fact that *I said publicly what I am doing*.
Any number of other Moderators are subsidized by their employer to one
extent or another: they use their employer's equipment and telephone
lines, or perhaps their employer specifically gives them time each day
to work on their Digest. I never had that luxury. Any number of
Moderators' .signatures include mention of their place of employment.
Are we to assume they are impartial?  I don't know, simply because I
don't evaluate the work of other Moderators. I assume they are doing
what they believe is in their best interest while maintaining their
ethical standards, the same as myself. I assume their readers tell
them what they think, as telecom readers tell me.

If I were to conduct a 'fund raising drive' ala National Public Radio
and beg for donations in exchange for T-shirts, coffee mugs, and
luncheon dates with members of the Lyric Opera (doesn't NPR feel their
programming merits the help in its own right without having to give
away all those premiums to bribe people?) then I would feel quite
guilty and want to make an accounting of the money received. I choose
instead to sell things I believe to be of value while keeping TELECOM
Digest *as nearly as possible* editorially independent. Totally inde-
pendent?  Of course not ... don't be silly. If I can't pay the phone
bill and buy my $2.99 Value Meal every day, then the Digest is as good
as dead anyway. I'm not using the Digest to sell my services, I am
selling the services in order to keep the Digest alive and well.
Would the Usenet-Gods have liked it better had I done the whole thing
on the sneak and kept quiet about it?  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #209
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19626;
          25 Mar 93 19:56 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28542
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:06:20 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12455
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:04:59 -0600
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:04:59 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #211

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 25 Mar 93 17:05:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 211

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Second Line Installation (Steven King)
    Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (John Higdon)
    Re: Washington Times Blows It (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Washington Times Blows It (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Washington Times Blows It (Greg Andrews)
    Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (David Lesher)
    Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager (Samuelson S. Rehman)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Scott Coleman)
    Re: 152 & 156 MHz Pagers Needed (Scott Coleman)
    Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: ATM Networks (was Telecom and the Blizzard of '93) (Toby Nixon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: Second Line Installation
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 20:19:17 GMT


[e-mail] (Bob Snyder) publicly declared:

> 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.

How much *should* it cost, or how much *does* it cost?  Two very
different questions, I think.  I'll try to answer the latter and leave
the former to the Telco Philosophers.

A few years back, here in Illinois Bell territory, I requested that a
second line be installed to my apartment.  The service call was a flat
$50.  (I think an additional $30 would have been added if I wanted the
second line to have a separate bill sent, instead of both lines on the
same bill.)  For the $50 installation Illinois Bell brought dialtone
to the point of demarcation in the building.

The demarc is what separates the physical wiring that you (or your
apartment managers) own from the physical wiring the telco owns.
Anything goes wrong on their side of the demarc, they fix it.
Anything goes wrong on your side, you fix it or pay them top dollar to
have them do it.  Some (or all?) telcos will be glad to sell you an
insurance policy that will get you free service on your side of the
demarc if anything goes wrong.  Illinois Bell calls this plan
"Linebacker" and charges about $8/month for it.

All Illinois Bell really delivers for this $50 a pair of wires with
dialtone to your your premises.  The installer had a little time on
his hands that day and went beyond the call of duty to ensure that one
of the spare pairs at the demarc actually terminated at one the spare
pairs behind my wall plate.  To make a long story short, none did.  We
came to the conclusion that they had all been cut somewhere within the
walls.  Since this was on my side of the demarc the service man
(rightly) told me that he could fix it for $35/half-hour, or that I
should get my apartment manager to fix it.  I opted for the latter, of
course.

My apartment manager figured since it was phone wires it was telco's
problem.  Naturally, he wouldn't let me pull cable through his walls
myself.  Telco said that since it was inside the building and wasn't
covered by Linebacker it was my manager's problem.  Neither relented,
and I cancelled the second line.  I did so fully expecting to have to
eat the $50 service charge.  After all, the man did come out and bring
dialtone to the demarc.  But when I called, the service rep noticed
that the line had never been used.  I explained what had happened, and
she scratched the $50 installation fee!  Illinois Bell's marketing/pricing
department is extortionist, but I've never had bad service from them.

> 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.

All this is the long way around to say that New Jersey Bell's quoted
figures are probably in line.  The $45 is probably to bring dialtone
to the demarc, and the $16/15 minutes is to bring it the rest of the
way to your phone.  If you can do that work yourself, do it!  If you
can convince your apartment manager to do it, better still.  If not,
think about just how much you really want that second line compared to
how much it'd cost to move to a different apartment complex ...


Steven King, Motorola Cellular  ([e-mail])

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

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 12:45 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada


Terry (T.A.) Cooper <[e-mail]> writes:

> It is interesting that the first point on your list of comparing the
> US phone system is price.  In my book price is a consideration but
> reliability far outweighs it as a factor in determining the quality of
> a phone system.

Reliability is assumed. Why bring it up when it is not an issue? I
challenge anyone to provide any valid, authenticated data that even
hints that telephone service is anything less than world-class
reliable in the United States. Or that reliability has suffered as a
result of divestiture.

 From my vantage point, just the opposite is true. Systems are MORE
reliable and they are easier to fix if necessary.

> I live far enough from "civilization" that I consider my phone a
> very important safety item.  I'll pay a bit extra to know that my
> phone will work when I pick it up.

But in the US, you get that kind of reliablity without paying "a bit
extra". Are you now saying that US telephone service is so bad that
you cannot even depend on the telephone to summon emergency aid? This
is nonsense.

> I'd like to provide you with data to would highlight my opinion, but
> any data that I have is confidential information that cannot be
> published.  Besides, as the disclaimer says it's just my opinion.

Considering the propaganda that I have seen from up north, your
opinion is understandable. But I would suggest that you question very
seriously any data that appears to support the premise that the US
telephone network has somehow gone down the drain since divestiture.
Particularly note that most of it comes from Bell Canada itself and
from the union.  These are hardly unimpeachable sources when it comes
to matters that would upset the status quo.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 04:53:13 GMT


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

>> 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].

I thought Friends and Family had to be residential listings?  If
business listings are fair game, I have a slew of numbers I want to
try; including some that I just want to dump some telemarketing on.

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> Which reminds me, I heard on NPR's Morning Edition that
> Clinton has an email account.  It sounded like a Compuserve number,
> but I was not awake enough to write it down.  Anyone know the email
> address?

Yes and no. The campaign was wired both coming and going, and they
have left that infrastructure up. Mostly the campaign volunteers know
how to get to that. After inauguration, they have intended to set up
"public input" mailboxes, but I think they were totally unprepared for
the response. The one I remember was "[e-mail]". There is
also one on compuserve, but you know how un-memorable the C$ addresses
are.

Anyway, whatever comes in is eventually dumped in hardcopy and routed
the same way as incoming papermail, so you must include a postal
address in your message.

Meanwhile, there are several NetWare workgroups in the White House,
and some more of those plus a PROFS system in the EOB. The new team is
trying to bring TCP/IP technology in, so they can send email to
HOUSE.GOV at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

We had an animated visit by a White House team to our booth at InterOp
East; they wanted to see our NetHoppers. We woulk LOVE to sell them a
bunch. But the big problem is figuring out how to process thousands of
email messages in a meaningful way. They are working hard at figuring
it out, but it will take time. Note that even though the house has
been on the internet for three years, you still can't get Leon Panetta's
email address... (He used to be the representative from SLO, I'm
told.)


Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer    Internet
E-mail: [e-mail]
MC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l    Telephone: [phone]
Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083        TeleFAX:   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It
Date: 25 Mar 93 16:33:07 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tim
Russell) writes:

> [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) writes:

>> (Anybody know President Clinton's new email address?)

> That address is CLINTONPZ, both on Compuserve and America Online.

CLINTONPZ is not a valid Compuserve address.  I think the address
quoted in an earlier message was correct for Compuserve.

Disclaimer:  I haven't sent a message to any of Clinton's email addresses.
(I don't think he'd listen to me, anyway.  I voted for Marou.)


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Andrews)
Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 23:57:41 GMT


[e-mail] (Tim Russell) writes:

> [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) writes:

>> (Anybody know President Clinton's new email address?)

> That address is CLINTONPZ, both on Compuserve and America Online.

Perhaps it is on America Online, but Compuserve uses strictly numeric
User IDs.  They're two octal numbers separated by a comma.  Mine, for
example, is 76004,1647.

(There is a gateway for exchanging e-mail between the Internet and
Compuserve.  The domain is "@compuserve.com", and the comma should be
changed to a period to form the Internet address.  I.e. 76004.1647@
compuserve.com would reach my mailbox from the internet.  The
gateway's software swaps the comma and period as necessary.)


Greg Andrews - [e-mail] - [e-mail]

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 19:32:19 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


Dan said:

> I first just dialed 8 + 0 + number and heard "BONG Comtel" So I hung
> up and started to dial 10ATT and as soon as I dialed the "0" I got
> some intercept saying "no, no".  So, I dialed 8 + 0 again and just
> entered my AT&T calling card number after the "Comtel" and lo and
> behold I heard "thank you for using AT&T" !

I've also run into AOS's that when presented with a non-ATT card,
would route the call via Sleeze-Carrier. But then, if you entered an
ATT card, it bounced you to the DeathStar Gong.

I guess the trick:

a) avoids calls abandoned by those smart enough to use a DeathStar
card.

b) In doing so, also avoids training customers to 10xxx-dial; thus
giving a chance to rip off anyone using another card.


[e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Samuelson S. Rehman)
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:38:19 -0800
Subject: Re: IXO (TAP) With Motorola ADVISOR Pager


[e-mail] (Mike Berger) wrote:

>> In article <[e-mail]>, Steven Warner <sgw@boy.
>> com> wrote:

>> Android Rubin writes:

>>> 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).

First of all, I guess you are trying to send a page to an address in
POCSAG but you don't want the pager to beep, but just store the page.

You can usually do this by setting the function bits (A-D, also know
as the tone) in the address codeword. Most pagers uses this set of
sub-addresses for diffrerent operation modes. For example, some pagers
use tone A for numeric only, B for numeric but no beep, C for tone
only and D for alphanumeric. But some other pagers uses one of the
four tones as maildrop addresses. As you can see, it is very
inconsistent.

For an Advisor, the tones can be programmed by software. According to
this manual "Motolora Radio Service Software" I am reading now, you
can set a tone or any one of the 16 addresses to beep or not, or even
beep at a different tone. As far as I know, by default all addresses
beeps. This software is only for paging system developers and paging
service providers. You might wanna try to call you service provider
and see if that would program the pagers for you.

>> The copy of the spec that I have is vague about using fields 1 and 2
>> for anything but ID and message respectively.  And before you ask, I
>> got my protocol spec under a non-disclosure agreement, so I can't post
>> or send a copy.

I don't think the ID field would help. According to the latest
Glenyare Telocator Alphanumeric input Protocol spec, you simply cannot
modify the tone, the paging terminal forces a mapping from the the
customer database, using the RIC code as the key. You will need a
direct TNPP or other protocol to specify the page tone.

I think the easiest way to do this, if you have to use Advisors, is to
program an address just for "silent pages". If you tell me your paging
service provider's name, I might be able to tell you if they can or
even will program it for you.


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]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Coleman)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 11:53:11 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


[e-mail] (Les Bartel) writes:

> 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.

Here are my criteria:

* Should use two full-sized cassettes - microcassettes are more
fragile and have lower sound quality, and two tapes means the machine
can switch quickly from outgoing message (OGM) to recording the
incoming message (ICM); with a 1-tape machine it has to fast-forward
past the other ICMs on the tape before it can record the new ICM,
which may be a long pause if you get lots of messages.

* Should have DTMF "beeperless" remote control of most if not all
functions.

* Should have a decent user-changeable security passcode of at least
two digits and preferably three. The machines with a single digit code
preset at the factory would take at most ten tries before some
telecracker could access your phone messages. The code should be
changeable in case it is ever compromised, i.e. someone sees you punch
it in (a process which I believe is known as "shoulder surfing") or
your roommate moves out and you no longer want him to be able to
retrieve messages from your machine.

* Should have a sensor which can detect that an extension phone has
been taken off-hook, so if you pick up while the machine is handling
an incoming call it will instantly drop the line instead of blindly
playing the OGM into your ear and then recording your subsequent
conversation.

* Toll Saver is a must (although our Moderator probably disagrees with
this! ;-)

* Time and Date Stamping of ICMs - it's always nice to know WHEN a
message came in, and you can't always count upon the caller to tell
you in their message.

As for which machines have these features, my Panasonic KX-T1470 has
them all and more, and I paid just over $100 for it a couple of years
ago. It's been rock-steady reliable as long as I've owned it.


Scott Coleman     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area
where the tariffs were concerned. What is the difference between
saving on tolls by not answering the phone for a certain number of
rings as a way to pass a message to the caller and not answering the
phone for a certain number of rings until you are in a position to
talk to the caller, ala Larry King? What is the difference between
saving on tolls in this way or saving on tolls by passing coded
messages in the form of bogus collect phone calls to/from non-existent
names?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Coleman)
Subject: Re: 152 & 156 MHz Pagers Needed
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 11:56:53 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


[e-mail] (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) writes:

> [e-mail] (Simoun S. Ung) writes:

>> I am looking for 152Mhz and 156 MHz pagers.  I have been told that
>> only China uses these frequencies.

> Florida uses 152.XXX MHZ.

As does Urbana-Champaign, Illinois.

Motorola does have an office of some sort here -- you might wish to
contact them.


Scott Coleman   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted
Date: 25 Mar 93 21:51:26 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon


> "B carriers are obligated to let you pick which long-distance
> carrier you use, while the A's are not."

GTE Mobilnet, the B carrier in Portland Oregon, offers only AT&T as
default LD carrier.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Toby Nixon)
Subject: Re: ATM Networks (was Telecom and the Blizzard of '93)
Date: 25 Mar 93 21:22:05 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA


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

> [Moderator's Note: Actually, we who are customers of First National
> Bank of Chicago have had debit cards available to us for about five
> years now. Our debit cards are called 'Banking Cards' and they work
> like cash station cards but they also have a Master Card logo on
> them and work that way also. I use mine all over town, and in cases
> where I ordered something through the mail where a credit card was
> requested, I've given my Master Card debit card number instead. It has
> always worked fine.

A word of caution.  My understanding is that the federal laws which
require banks to credit you for disputed charges on credit cards DO
NOT APPLY to debit cards.  If you order something over the phone and
give them your debit card number, and the charge shows up on your bank
statement but the merchandise never shows up at your door, the bank is
under no obligation to credit your account and investigate the charge,
as they would be with a credit card.  Perhaps Brad Hicks can confirm
this.  I always use my "real" Visa card when placing phone orders, and
use by debit card only when I have the merchandise in hand (like at
the grocery store).


Toby

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #211
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19704;
          25 Mar 93 19:58 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28904
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:02:25 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17275
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:01:43 -0600
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 17:01:43 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #210

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 25 Mar 93 17:01:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 210

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (Jason Hunsaker)
    Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs (John Higdon)
    Re: Touch-Tone For Everyone in DC Metro Area (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: No 900 in Louisiana? (William Bryant Faust, IV)
    Re: AmeriVox Debit Card (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Telephones in the Army in the Korean War (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Fraud, Abuse, and Politics (John R. Levine)
    Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (John Gilbert)
    Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (Matt Healy)
    Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (Alan Boritz)
    Re: '83 Novel Foresaw a Bombing (Ben Cox)
    Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements? (Bob Blackshaw)
    Re: Old Telephone Numbers (Jim Kresse)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jason Hunsaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs
Date: 25 Mar 93 11:17:17 MDT
Organization: Utah State University


In article <[e-mail]>, Daniel E. Ganek <ganek@
apollo.hp.com> writes:

> This may be two questions but I'll just tell the story.  We stayed at
> the Days Inn in DC last weekend. I attempted to make a AT&T call.

> I first just dialed 8 + 0 + number and heard "BONG Comtel" So I hung
> up and started to dial 10ATT and as soon as I dialed the "0" I got
> some intercept saying "no, no".  So, I dialed 8 + 0 again and just
> entered my AT&T calling card number after the "Comtel" and lo and
> behold I heard "thank you for using AT&T" !

> 1) Is Comtel AT&T?

I don't know about Comtel, but Contel is an local service provider
like U S West.

Here in Cache County, Utah the local service provider is U S West.  In
Box Elder County, Utah (one county west) the local service provider is
Contel.

Most local service providers I have dealt with will accept my AT&T
card number for intra-LATA long distance.

> 2) Does AT&T want to know about this hotel blocking other LD
> companies? :-)

I'd like to know, because it's a real pain not to be able to bypass
the hotel's/motel's LD carrier and get AT&T.


Jason Hunsaker  -|-  Logan, Utah  -|-  Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 10:59 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: 10-ATT-0 and COCOTs


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> I entered my AT&T card number, and then the fun started.

Assuming this is an "AT&T-only" number ...

> So, just how is Hotelco getting extra revenue?

Probably by routing all those calls made with "embedded number" cards
through the AOS. I have stayed at a number of hotels where using my
Pac*Bell card resulted in charges from an AOS, but presenting my AT&T
card forced the call through AT&T. I know this is the case on many
COCOTs.

Much better, PR-wise, to complete those AT&T calls gratis than to have
them fail and call attention to the fact AT&T is not really the call
handler. There are enough of those embedded number cards around to
allow revenue to the slimeballs. MCI and Sprint are even promoting
them as if they are a New Thing.


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: Touch-ToneForrE veryone in DC Metro Area
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 14:50:43 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jacob
DeGlopper) writes:

> Someone mentioned a few weeks back a C&P bill insert detailing a
> fairly small rate increase and the dropping of touchtone service as a
> seperate item.

> This has indeed happened; my parents have never seen a need for
> anything other than one rotary-dial phone, but last week when I was
> home touch-tone dialing worked where it never did before ...

I recommended this (the stop-charging-extra-for-touch-tone, not the
small rate increase) in a {Wall Street Journal} op-ed piece five years
ago.  The argument is that it actually costs the telco more, not less,
to serve a rotary-dial customer, because the digit receivers are tied
up for a longer time.  And, the ratio of off-hook time to billed time
is worse (for the telco) for rotary calls than for tone calls.  Thus,
I argued, the charge-extra-for-touch-tone regulatory policies actually
guide people toward inefficient use of the PSTN.

At the time I wrote the article, Utah was the only state that had done
what I thought everyone should do.  After that, California and Oregon
followed suit.  Now, apparently, C&P in DC has done so ...

I would be very curious to hear from readers of this group, which
states now do not charge extra for touch-tone line treatment ...

What disappoints me a little is that the regulators in DC apparently
decided to let the telco raise rates "in return" for this change in
service for customers.

The explanation for the longevity of the extra-charge-for-tone in most
states is that the regulators figure it is a "painless" way to raise
money to help subsidize local rates.  Of course it is not painless
because it encourages inefficient use of the network.

Fifteen years ago now, New York Telephone had asked the state
regulator for permission to phase out the surcharge for tone -- and
the regulator would not let them do it.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza   New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

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

Date: Thu 25 Mar 93 11:50 CST
From: Wm. Bryant Faust, IV <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: No 900 in Louisiana?


> 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?

No, there is no law banning all 900 service, although such a law would
be popular with just about everyone but the broadcasters and the cable
operators.  There is a state law that has strict requirements on how
the cost of the call must be presented in the advertisement.  There
are also laws against operating a lottery.  Most of the promotions to
call in and possibly win prize are prohibited unless they also alow
mail in entry.  I don't have any specifics on the laws available, but
I could try to locate them, if there is interest.  I think the weather
line in question probably does not meet the requirements for informing
the consumer of the cost of the call.


Wm. Bryant Faust, IV                            [e-mail]
Department of Pharmacology                        [e-mail]
Louisiana State University Medical Center         voice: [phone]
New Orleans, Louisiana  70112-1393                  fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: AmeriVox Debit Card
Date: 25 Mar 1993 18:49:41 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> Andrew Luebker <aahvdl@eye.
psych.umn.edu> writes:

> The "AmeriVox" debit calling card is marketed by the World Telecom
> Group, a division of the PhoneClub USA corporation.

> AmeriVox cards are available in standard denominations, from $10 to
> $100, plus a few more expensive sizes for big spenders.  A significant
> chunk (about ten-percent) is immediately deducted for "state and
> federal taxes," the rest providing calling time at your current
> per-minute rate.

> The initial base rate is 24.9 cents/minute.  After deducting taxes,
> the $20 card would only give 72 minutes of calling time, effectively
> costing you $0.28 per minute at the base rate.  Another version of the
> AmeriVox card lets you call from the USA to Canada, at somewhat higher
> rates.

When looking at the per-minute rate, you need to compare apples to
apples.  The rates that all of the regular carriers quote you are
before taxes as well.  10% sounds like a bargain to me - I now pay
around 14% of tax on all of my telephone calls, which includes
federal, two kinds of state, and local taxes.  When I lived within the
Seattle city limits, it was 18.5%!  But I guess that's what I get for
living in a state with no state income tax.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Telephones in the Army in the Korean War
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 19:01:40 GMT


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

> The telephones and the switchboard were of that era and I know that a
> crank was used to charge the batteries in those units.  The question
> is: were there lines installed over the countryside?  I assume that
> there were since I seem to remember that someone said the lines were
> down once or twice.

I believe that the cranks were used to spin magnetos to provide
ringing voltage (jingle juice) rather than to charge batteries.

I also understand that the Signal Corps is quite adept at equipping a
war zone with telephones of various kinds, although they may use more
radio these days.


Edward W. Greenberg  | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
1600 Stokes St. #24  | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95126  | Fax:  [phone] | Ham Radio: KM6CG

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

Subject: Re: Fraud, Abuse, and Politics
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 25 Mar 93 14:09:14 EST (Thu)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> It is true that no "real" long distance company allows calling cards
> to be used for 900 services.

Not any more.  AT&T lets you bill a few of its 900 numbers to calling
cards.  The pocket Airline Guide had an ad a few months ago for
"flight call", a 900 service that provides real-time updates on
airline flight operations, and encouraged users to put the call on an
AT&T card.  I tried it; it works.

At 75 cents/minute, though, and nothing available but boring
information about flight delays and cancellations, the chances for
fraud in this particular case seem low.


Regards,

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


[Moderator's Note: I wonder if I should put TELECOM Digest *exclusively*
on a computer with a modem attached to a 900 number and let people
download it that way :) ha ha ... of course there would be an 800
number to upload messages to me.   <evil grin, as brain begins juggling
this new idea ...>   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?
Organization: Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 14:58:17 GMT


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

>... The Pac*Bell rep told me they were not allowed
> to offer residential ISDN service because the CPUC mandates that all
> residential lines have to be able to dial 911 during an emergency,
> since ISDN requires a box that's plugged into the electric system if
> an emergency cut out the power system the line wouldn't work and I
> wouldn't be able to dial 911 on my ISDN line.

> This means that all ISDN lines have to be at business rates ...

Does this mean that with a UPS or backup generator at your house you
could meet the requirements and keep a residential rate?  I would
check the wording of the tariff and see if Pac*Bell is really trying
to comply with the tariff or just using it as an excuse to charge you
the business rate.


John Gilbert   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Healy)
Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?
Organization: Yale University--Genetics
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 01:59:43 GMT


The reason why telephones are powered directly off the phone lines is
simple: greater reliability with just one point of failure.  If a tree
knocks down your phone line, you cannot phone anyway even if the phone
uses external power.  If the phone has external power then a tree
knocking down either utility wire cuts you off.

PS: During a recent blackout, one local radio station said they could
call out ONLY.  They had backup power for essential equipment, but the
little lights on their phones ran off ordinary outlets!  The bells,
which would have worked, had to be switched off while they were on the
air ...


Matt Healy    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Lots of radio stations have the bell on the phone
in the studio wired parallel to a 'beehive lamp' and in serial through
the microphone used by the announcer. Whenever the announcer's micro-
phone is on the air, the phone bell is cut off. As soon as the ammouncer
is cut out of the line (i.e. he starts playing a record or a tape or
whatever) the phone bell is alive again.  The 'beehive lamp' illuminates
in synch with the voltage to ring the bell in either event. This is a
common arrangemn small stations where the announcer has to answer allr
the phones and do the office work as well as talk on the radio.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 18:46:31 EST
From: [e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?


In an article written 3/20/93 [e-mail] (Magnus Hedberg)
writes:

> 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.

That concept has been in use for many years in rural areas.  Just
about at the time when the City of New York was deciding whether or
not they had to provide a conventional AC power outlet for New York
Tel's fiber mux's (when they didn't request it), I discovered that one
of my friends who used to live in rural northwest Ohio (now Chicago)
had a phantom power unit on his home telephone line (think his parents
still have the same arrangement now).

That's not necessarily a good arrangement, except for the local telco.
One distinct disadvantage of telco-installed fiber is the inability to
use it any time there is an AC power failure at the subscriber side of
the cable.


Alan Boritz  [e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Subject: Re: '83 Novel Foresaw a Bombing
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 15:07:06 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Organization: Ancient Illuminated Sears of Bavaria


[e-mail] (Paul Robinson) writes:

> The explosion at the World Trade Center was an event just waiting to
> happen, says Arnaud de Borchgrave, co-author of the 1983 Cold War
> novel "Monimbo," in which terrorists blow up six floors of the World
> Trade Tower with a bomb left in an elevator shaft.

A comic strip in the local student-run newspaper ran a strip featuring
terrorists bombing the WTC on the morning that it happened.

Imagine the sinking feeling the artist must have had when he saw the
news ...


Ben Cox     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Blackshaw)
Subject: Re: ISDN Phones - Power Supply Requirements?
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 15:06:08 GMT


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

> [e-mail] (Magnus Hedberg) writes:

>> 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?

> Your sources are correct.  In the USA, ISDN sets require local
> power.  Power is not supplied by the telco.  I took an AT&T ISDN
> Premise wiring course a couple of years ago, and power was one of the
> big concerns.  You could do at either at the desk, or provide power
> from the local closet.  This took an extra pair.  There were a couple
> of advantages to providing power from the closet.  Less clutter at the
> desktop, less contention for what is often congested power outlet
> space at the desk, and the availability of centralized power failure
> batteries (which were hideously expensive).

A while back, I asked vendors in comp.dcom.isdn what the maximum
voltage they require was. It seems that +12v and -12v (if it is a TA
with an RS232 interface) will do the trick. Now, we come to the
problem of the standard. Power Source 1 is between 34 and 56 volts, so
that is no go.  Power Source 2 must not exceed 56 volts. Aha! no
minimum specified.  Power Source 3 has been pretty much left to others
to define.

I can buy gelled acid batteries of 4AH, 12 volts for $25. Greater
capacities come higher, its just that this size was fine for our
burglar alarm system.

Call this creative interpretation of the standards if you wish, but
having participated in the development, I feel that there was no 'evil
plan' to price ISDN out of sight. Go for it.

> Overall the ISDN wiring scheme struck me as very primitive and complex.
> There needed to be a better way.  I hope that significant improvements
> have been made in the last couple of years since I took the course, but I
> don't think so.

Well, for a synchronous full-duplex point-to-multipoint arrangement
that works, I don't think it's all that bad. The only 'improvements'
that I am aware of is the statement (at least in the ANSI T1 standard)
that "any wiring arrangement that works" meets the standard.

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

I'm not opinionated, I'm American :-)


Bob

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Kresse)
Subject: Re: Old Telephone Numbers
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Panasonic ATVL
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 14:52:29 GMT


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

> [Moderator's Note: If it is '88-5' instead of 'TU-5' then it probably
> only goes into the early sixties. I do not think All Number Calling
> was around anywhere until 1961-62.  Corrections anyone?   PAT]

I remember when I was growing up in Evergreen Park (SW suburb of
Chicago) learning that my phone number was GArden 4 - xxxx.  I don't
remember All Number Calling until about '63, I think.


Jim Kresse   [e-mail]    Standard disclaimers apply

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #210
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04777;
          26 Mar 93 4:11 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22072
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 26 Mar 1993 01:45:11 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11953
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 26 Mar 1993 01:44:15 -0600
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 01:44:15 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #212

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 26 Mar 93 01:44:15 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 212

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Earthquake in 503? (Michael Rosen)
    Virtual Reality Conference Update (Tom Caudell)
    Hotels That Charge For Specific 1-800 Calls (ie to LD Carriers) (Phydeaux)
    Re: International Calling Card (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: International Calling Card (Scott Marshall)
    One-Digit Phone Numbers in Siwa (Paul Eggert)
    How Does One Call These Places? (Douglas W. Martin)
    Mitel PBX Mailing List Wanted (Dave Johnston)
    Can a CO Hunt Group Include a DID Number? (Jeff Wasilko)
    PacBell's ISDN Tariff (was Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?) (A. Blau)
    Re: Country Code Listings (Mike McNally)
    How Can I Decode CLID Data From A Digitized Sample? (Scott Coleman)
    A Marketing Breakthrough! (Glen Ecklund)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Earthquake in 503?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 05:36:29 GMT


I'm too lazy to go looking up the area code ... but was there an
earthwuake in the 503 area code?  I tried to dial a phone number there
(Intel's BBS - 503/645-6275) and got an intercept message telling me
that due to an earthquake my call could not go through.


Mike


[Moderator's Note: There was an earthquake in Oregon Thursday morning.
I've not gotten details from anyone there yet except a (503) Directory
Assistance operator who confirmed it and said calls were 'getting back
to normal'. The Intel BBS is reachable as of this writing.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Caudell 206-865-3763)
Subject: Virtual Reality Conference Update
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Boeing Computer Services
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:14:54 GMT


====================================================================
= THIS SUMMER, PLAN ON ATTENDING THE FIRST ANNUAL IEEE CONFERENCE  =
=               ON VIRTUAL REALITY TECHNOLOGY                      =
=                -- ANNOUNCING TUTORIALS --                        =
====================================================================

 "IEEE VRAIS-93: Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium"
                    18-22 September, 1993
                       Seattle, WA, USA

       I   E   E   E  -  V  R   A   I   S  -  1   9   9   3

                    S   E   A   T   T   L   E

Sponsored by the IEEE Neural Networks Council's Virtual Reality
Technology Committee with constituent societies:

IEEE Circuits and Systems Society    IEEE Communications Society
IEEE Computer Society                IEEE Controls Society
IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society
IEEE Industrial Electronics Society  IEEE Industry Applications Society
IEEE Information Theory Society      IEEE Lasers and EO Society
IEEE Oceanic Engineering Society     IEEE Power Engineering SOciety
IEEE Robotics and Automation Society IEEE Signal Processing Society
IEEE Systems, Man & Cybernetics Society

in colloboration with:
SPIE - the International Society for Optical Engineering

====================================================================
>>>>>>>>>>> Announcing the 1993 VRAIS Tutorial Program <<<<<<<<<<<<
====================================================================

Organizer(s)                    Title
 ------------------             ---------------------------------------
Steve Bryson                  Introduction to Virtual Reality Implementation
NASA Ames Research Center

Stephen R.  Ellis             Design and Calibration of Men and Machines in
NASA Ames Research Center     Virtual Environments

Chris  Esposito               User Interface Issues for Virtual Systems
Boeing Computer Services

Mark  Green                   Techniques for Geometrical Modeling and Anima-
University of Alberta         tion in Virtual Reality

Edward Colgate                Force Reflecting Interfaces to Teleoperators and
Northwestern University       Virtual Environments
Blake Hannaford
U. of Washington

Reza  Jalili                  Virtual Reality Architecture for Distributed,
IBM T.J. Watson Center        Multi-User Environments

Hans Jense                    Applying Virtual Environment Technology for
Fysisch en Elektronisch       Training and Simulation
Laboratorium TNO

Thomas P.  Piantanida         Basic Phenomena of Vision
SRI International

Henry A. Sowizral             Introduction to Virtual Reality
Boeing Computer Services

Lawrence W.  Stark, M.D.      Virtual Environments, Display
Univ. of California, Berkeley  Enahncements, and Top-Down Vision
Won S. Kim
Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Arden  Strasser               Head-Mounted Display Engineering
Virtual Reality, Inc.

Elizabeth M.  Wenzel          Psychophysics and Technology
NASA Ames Research Center     of Virtual Acoustic Displays


=============================================================
=   #####################################################   =
=   #       FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:       #   =
=   #            IEEE VRAIS-93                          #   =
=   #            Meeting Management                     #   =
=   #            5665 Oberlin Drive, Suite 110          #   =
=   #            San Diego, CA 92121                    #   =
=   #            Tel. [phone]                    #   =
=   #            FAX [phone]                     #   =
=   #####################################################   =
=============================================================

                 >>> CALL FOR EXHIBITS <<<

A limited amount of space is still available for vendors, companies,
and publishers to display and demonstrate their latest innovations in
Virtual Reality technology. Potential exhibitors are encouraged to
contact the Exhibits Chair for more information:

Dr. Chris Esposito
Boeing Computer Services
[phone]
[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 18:25:50 PST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Hotels That Charge For Specific 1-800 Calls (ie to LD Carriers)


Hi!

I was wondering what people's thoughts were on hotels that charge to
connect you to the LD carrier of your choice -- even though you may
connect via a 1-800 number.  These hotels let other 1-800 calls go
through.  IMHO it's fine to charge for *all* calls (1-800 or not)
because they are providing a service of a telephone in your room. BUT
when they decide to pick only *certain* numbers to charge you for I
become irate.

What's the legality of this, and how do they decide which numbers to
charge for?  The other day, PBX at the Hilton in San Francisco decided
to charge me for a 1-800 calls to United Airlines! (I complained and
got the charges removed) You'd think that a fancy hotel wouldn't try
to nickle and dime you.


reb

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: International Calling Card
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:59:43 GMT


In a article to Comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] had the following
to say about International Calling Cards:

> I was pleased to see the summary/comparison of long distance plans in
> the US.  What I am looking for is a calling card/plan that will allow
> me to call a US number while overseas. I don't live in the US
> currently; my sister does and she has an (international) ATT card, BUT
> one is required to go through a local operator; this makes the use of
> that card virtually impossible with local service standards.

> If this would help, card use will be primarily for four to five
> monthly calls from Athens to Boston, 20-35 minutes duration for each
> call.  I would like to be able to do this directly, ie. maybe dial a
> number, give a number code and then dial my call (no operators!).

> The reasoning behind this is (of course) that US prices are MUCH
> cheaper than what the (only) telco charges here, ie. I would like to
> be billed by a US telco for my international calls (to the US mainly)
> and use the card when I travel. But, NO OPERATORS!

I went through this about six months ago before I moved to the US and
ended up getting both a AT&T and MCI calling card to be used in New
Zealand.  I just called them using their respective USA Direct (tm)
numbers and waited to get an operator who would transfer me to the
right department.  For comparison, AT&T would not take an application
over the phone but sent one in the mail to me. MCI took details
including credit card information over the phone and sent cards out a
few weeks later.

My prime motivation was not so much to get cheaper calling (in fact it
was usually more expensive to use their cards given their surcharges
of $2 I think per call) but to be able to call 800 numbers. There were
some differences also in the way it was serviced.

1. AT&T had their service automated -- you dialled the USA Direct
Number, heard the AT&T jingle, dialled the number you wanted (without
the one first), listened for the boing and then your calling card
number and then heard "Thank you for using AT&T". Very nice. Only
trouble was you could not call any 800 number not provided by AT&T but
the message received (all circuits are busy) was a little misleading.

2. MCI was not automated but had no restriction on which 800 number you
wanted to call.


Laurence Chiu   Walnut Creek, CA    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: International Calling Card
From: [e-mail] (Scott Marshall)
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 22:25:27 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX


> call.  I would like to be able to do this directly, ie. maybe dial a
> number, give a number code and then dial my call (no operators!).

I dont know about Rome but are you sure your using the right way to
call AT&T? In Australia you just dialed 0014-800-811 , and then got an
Automated AT&T PBX type deal. "Please enter the number you are
calling" and you punch it in ... then "Please enter your calling card
number and pin" and then it connected straight through.


Cheers,

TIE

[e-mail] (Scott Marshall)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, [phone]
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Eggert)
Subject: One-Digit Phone Numbers in Siwa
Organization: Twin Sun Inc, El Segundo, CA, USA
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:48:57 GMT


Last month I was in Siwa, an oasis in Egypt about 300 km from anywhere
else.  No paved roads led to Siwa until about ten years ago, and it's
still relatively unspoiled.  At the check-in desk to the Hotel
Cleopatra in Siwa, I saw a list of some Siwish phone numbers: two or
three one-digit numbers (police, Chamber of Commerce), and a few other
numbers ranging in size to three digits.

I had thought that short public phone numbers were a thing of the
past.  I'm curious: is Siwa unusual, or are there other places like it
even now?


[Moderator's Note: The police and Chamber of Commerce phones would not
be 'public' (in the sense of walk up to the phone, feed money and use
it.) Both those organizations would be subscribers with private (but
business, if they have that distinction in Egypt) lines. If there are
only a few dozen or perhaps a couple hundred telephone susbcribers in
Siwa and the system is still manually operated, then single digit or
double digit numbers would not be that uncommon, especially if you
consider that when phones were first installed in Siwa, the police and
Chamber of Commerce were probably among the first to subscribe, and if
the numbering started out 1,2,3,4,5, etc then yes, the police, as a
long time (maybe charter) subscriber would have a single digit.

An exhibit at the Chicago Historical Society had a photo from about
1900 of the Chicago Fire Department 'south side fire alarm office'.
The picture showed some horses which were hitched up to a wagon with a
barrel of water on it and some kind of pumping apparatus. A man seated
at a table nearby was using one of the old 'candlestick' (one piece
held up tp mouth, a separate piece held up to ear) telephones and a
sign on the wall said 'Englewood Fire Alarm Office, <the address>,
Telephone Englewood 2'.  When that office was finally merged into the
911 system here several years ago, their phone number had just barely
changed: 312-364-0002. Generally in the old manual systems it was
sufficient to ask the operator for the police or fire department
without having to ask by number.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 15:32:49 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Douglas W. Martin)
Subject: How Does One Call These Places?


I'm looking for info on how to call the following places:

Midway Island: (I assume via the operator in Honolulu, but how is it
done?  Is it like calling a toll sttation?

Wake Island:

Easter Island: (I think this is geographically part of Chile, but does
not have a Chilean area code.)

Tristan Dacunha:

St. Helena (listed as country code 290, but not dialable):

Pitcairn Island:

Any help on these is appreciated.


Doug Martin       [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: In the case of Wake, Easter and Pitcairn Islands
you dial 10288-0 (or 00 if you default to AT&T) and tell the operator
the number you wish to call on those islands. She will most likely
connect to the International Center in Pitts, PA and they will
complete the connection to an operator on those islands who will then
extend your call to the desired number. According to my notes, Saint
Helena is dialable as 011 + 290 + four digits. I don't know about
Tristan Dacunha.  Wake and Midway are going to be part of area 808
rather soon and in fact it may be possible to dial them already as
808-xxx-xxxx. I don't know why they would be taken in with 808 while
Guam is considered 'international' (011+671+).

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

From: Dave Johnston <[e-mail]>
Organization: Santa Rosa Junior College
Date: 25 Mar 93 10:53:30 PST
Subject: Mitel PBX Mailing List Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Greetings:

I'm interested in hearing from anyone who knows of a internet mailing
list pertaining to Mitel PBXs.  I'm not aware of any and was
considering starting one, but didn't want to reinvent the wheel.

My thoughts are that the list would provide a resource for users of
Mitel's products to compare notes on new software or hardware
releases, bugs, feature implementations, etc.  Hopefully, if there was
enough interest, we could get Mitel staff to participate.

If anyone is interested in participating in such a list, I'd
appreciate a note.


Thanks,

Dave Johnston, WD6AOE             Santa Rosa Junior College
Supervisor, Campus Data/Telecom         1501 Mendocino Ave.
[e-mail]                 Santa Rosa, CA  95401
Voice [phone]                   Fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Subject: Can a CO Hunt Group Include a DID Number?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 20:47:34 EST
Organization: Air Age Publishing, Wilton CT USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I'm trying to find out if a CO hunt group can include a seven digit
DID number.

Our CO (a #2ESS, with the 2E4 generic) doesn't seem to have
call-forward-busy available. We'd like to have an existing CO trunk
forward to one of our DID lines (served by the same switch). Is this
possible on this switch?

I've called our service rep at SNET, but he hasn't called me back
in over a week ...

Thanks,


Jeff
Jeff's Oasis at Home.   Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                                         [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 20:17:22 -0500
From: Andrew Blau <[e-mail]>
Subject: PacBell's ISDN Tariff (was Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?)


In TELECOM Digest, Vol13, #211, [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
writes:

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

>> ... The Pac*Bell rep told me they were not allowed
>> to offer residential ISDN service because the CPUC mandates that all
>> residential lines have to be able to dial 911 during an emergency,
>> since ISDN requires a box that's plugged into the electric system if
>> an emergency cut out the power system the line wouldn't work and I
>> wouldn't be able to dial 911 on my ISDN line.

>> This means that all ISDN lines have to be at business rates ...

> Does this mean that with a UPS or backup generator at your house you
> could meet the requirements and keep a residential rate?  I would
> check the wording of the tariff and see if Pac*Bell is really trying
> to comply with the tariff or just using it as an excuse to charge you
> the business rate.

In fact, the tariff is clear: SDS IS (as it's called) is not available
to customers with Residence Service.  Thus, even if you supplied your
own power source (which the tariff also considers), it's a business
tariff.


Andrew Blau                Electronic Frontier Foundation   202-544-9237(v)
Associate for              666 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E.      202-547-5481(f)
Telecommunications Policy  Washington, DC  20003            [e-mail]

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

From: vail![e-mail] (Mike McNally)
Subject: Country Code Listings
Date: 25 Mar 93 21:00:52 GMT


If I recall correctly -- and I'm sure someone who still lives there
can confirm -- the PacBell phone books I had in San Jose included a
listing of country codes.  Here in my new Austin home, I just noticed
that the Southwestern Bell White Pages include the comment:

        To get international country and city codes,
        phone numbers, or to call countries that cannot
        be dialed direct:

        Dial 00 for operator assistance.
        (Charges may apply.)

Oh boy.

They do of course see fit to include ten pages of highly useful
advertisements for various services.

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Coleman)
Subject: How Can I Decode CLID Data From A Digitized Sample?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 13:53:50 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


Apologies if this topic was recently covered; I checked the FAQ and
all the postings still alive on my site but saw nothing relevant.

I'm looking for an algorithm which I could use to decode Caller*ID
data based on a digitized sample of the sound sent by the phone
company between the first and second rings. My (admittedly limited at
this point) understanding of CLID is that it is FSK data, similar to
1200bps modem data (but of course incompatible with standard 1200bps
dial-up modems). As a start, how can I determine which portions of the
sample contain the MARK frequency and which contain the SPACE? If I
could somehow take the raw sampled signal and transform it into a
series of 1s and 0s where 1s represent samples containing MARK and 0s
represent samples containing SPACE, the rest of the decoding process
would be a piece of cake. I'm no DSP expert, nor am I a telephony
whiz, so I need your help.

If you know how I can approach this problem, please drop me a note.
Also, if you know where I can obtain the specs for Caller*ID (i.e. the
format of the data, the MARK frequency, the SPACE frequency, etc.)
please drop me a note also. I'll post a summary of responses as well
as the completed algorithm at a later date. Thanks in advance for your
kind assistance.

For the curious, my application is to add CLID capability to my
BigmOuth PC Voice Mail card. The card is capable of sampling the phone
line even when on-hook (in fact, this is how it implements
ring-detect), so adding CLID capability should also be possible.

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen Ecklund)
Subject: A Marketing Breakthrough!
Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 20:36:54 GMT


The following ad is so amazing that I'm sure some of you will enjoy
it, and please pass it along to other appropriate newgroups.

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

_Throw_away_your_old_TV_rod_antenna!_ The RGX-2000 looks like the latest
outdoor satellite "dish," but works _indoors_ like ordinary "rabbit ears."
_No_wiring_or_installation!_  Legal in all 50 states.
_You_pay_NO_cable_fees_because_you're_NOT_getting_cable!!!_
_You_pay_NO_satellite_fees_because_you're_NOT_using_satellite_technology_
_or_service!!!_
Works entirely via proven "RF" technology -- actually pulls signals
_right_out_of_the_air._
Instantly locks into every local VHF and UHF channel from 2 to 83 to bring
you their movies, sports and special events _just_like_an_ordinary_pair_of_
"_rabbit_ears._"
No cable box or special attachments needed!
Enhances color and claritrey, helps pull in weak signals.
Compatible with all TVs from 3-inch portables to giant 7-footers.
Sits on any TV top in less that 4 linear inches of space!
Guaranteed not to utilize, replicate, transmit or interfere with any satellite
signal.  Complies with all applicable federal regulations.
Not technical razzle-dazzle but the sheer aesthetic superiority of its
elegant mesh design make the RGX-2000 a_marketing_breakthrough!_

Copyright Raffoler, Ltd.

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

It appears (from the pictures) to be a typical combination of rabbit
ears and a bow tie antenna, with a (plastic?) mesh dish, so that it
looks a bit like a satellite antenna.

(In case anyone is snowed by this, the ad basically claims that this
product is no different than a regular antenna, except in appearance.)


Glen Ecklund     [e-mail]   [phone] Office, 262-1204 Dept. Sec'y
Department of Computer Sciences        1210 W. Dayton St., Room 3355
University of Wisconsin, Madison       Madison, Wis. 53706  U.S.A.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #212
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05810;
          26 Mar 93 4:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15798
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:31:50 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18538
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:31:02 -0600
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:31:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #213

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 26 Mar 93 02:31:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 213

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (John D. Gretzinger)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Mark Cheeseman)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone In Your Car!?!?!? (Ron Bean)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Steve Gaarder)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Brian Zimmerman)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Richard J. Pauls)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Adam Gorman)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!? (Paul Barnett)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Robert Woodhead)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology? (Nigel Allen)
    Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Alan Boritz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: 25 Mar 93 13:56:50-0500
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


>> Why?  If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while
>> talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and
>> at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at
>> 55 controlling a car in two dimensions?

> It would depend on the airplane and the number of people qualified to
> fly it and have their hands on the controls almost all of the time.

> A privately owned plane probably wouldn't have two qualified pilots on
> board, nor would it have autopilot nor a headset (although I could be
> mistaken on the latter two).

Sorry Dave, but you clearly are not a pilot.

Virtually all airplanes in use today (with the exception of some
classics that have been restored to original condition without modern
avionics) can use headphones and a PTT switch so the pilot does not
need to remove his hands from the controls.  Most pilots who fly
multiple airplanes have a set they take with them from plane to plane
so they *can* keep both hands on the controls (not just the wheel) and
talk at the same time.  The headphone plugs into the mike jack, and
the activator switch is securred with a velcro strap to the control
yoke.  There are other configurations, but you get the idea.

Additionally, once you get used to it, you really have a lot more room
for one handed driving than is typically found on the freeways around
Los Angeles, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, Atlanta, Baltimore, or
Washington, D.C. (the ones with which I am most familiar).


John D. Gretzinger
Internet: [e-mail] / SprintMail: j.gretzinger
US Sprint, Costa Mesa, CA +01-714-435-3200 x407
Standard disclaimers apply.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Cheeseman)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Organization: Your Computer Magazine, Sydney, Australia
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 11:56:55 GMT


Parts of Australia have also made it illegal to use a hand-held phone
while driving a motor vehicle. Here (New South Wales) is one such
state, as is Victoria, where using a hand-help microphone of any sort
is illegal (I wonder how the cops call for backup during a chase --
pull over to the side of the road?).

Not that it seems to bother cell phone users much. But all mobile
phones sold here carry hands-free as a standard feature.

(Brief diversion -- Kenwood sold a remote controller for some of its
mobile ham rigs, which had a handset, just like a cell phone. I wonder
what the boys in blue would have done if they pulled somebody over for
using one of those while driving: "Honest officer, it's not a phone.
It's a ham radio!")


Mark Cheeseman, Your Computer. [e-mail]  Fido: 3:712/412.0
Phn: [phone]  Fax: [phone]  AMPRnet: coming RSN!

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

Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone In Your Car?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 19:21:35 -0600 (CST)
From: Ron Bean <nicmad!madnix![e-mail]>


[e-mail] (John Pettitt) writes:

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

>> I agree.  Use of a hand held cellphone while driving a car should be
>> discouraged.  It is clearly dangerous.
>                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> Why ?  If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while
> talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and
> at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at
> 55 controlling a car in two dimensions?

   I'll bet you're not too worried about rear-ending anyone up there.
Or running off the road :-).

Could you do it while flying in close formation?


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

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

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 02:12:29 -0500
From: anarres![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


Q:  What is the first thing you should do after you rear-end someone?

A:  Hang up the phone!


Steve Gaarder   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Zimmerman)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Date: 25 Mar 1993 07:04:08 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


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

>> I agree.  Use of a hand held cellphone while driving a car should be
>> discouraged.  It is clearly dangerous.
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> Why?  If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while
> talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and
> at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at
> 55 controlling a car in two dimensions?

Please note that a trimmed plane flying at cruise speed requires *NO*
hands or feet on the controls, only the constant attention to the
outside and scan of the instruments.  And, on final approach, the
controller will invariably say that you need not respond (beyond
double-clicking on the transmit button many times located on the
yoke).

It has nothing to do with dimensions or speed, only proximity TO THE
GROUND!  A car is much more draining and demanding on reaction speed
than flying, something only matched by landing a plane.

So, pull safely off the road and talk.


Brian Zimmerman [[e-mail]]   Pulse Communications Inc., a division
of Hubbell (not the telescope).    All opinions are my own, none other

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard J. Pauls)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Date: 25 Mar 93 16:07:22 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


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

> Why ?  If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while
> talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and
> at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at
> 55 controlling a car in two dimensions?

Because it is more dangerous to drive on the highway than fly.  If you
were flying your plan with hundreds of other planes only a few feet
away and crossing your path then it would be a more even comparison.
Alone on the road with a car phone would not be much of a problem.
I'm more concerned with other people on the road that might get hit.
Why not just use a hands-off feature?  Then it would be just like
talking to a passenger.


Rich

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

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 13:16:44 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Adam Gorman)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bob
Morley) writes:

> Its already law in the UK.

and

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Jon P. Knight) writes:

> This is already law in the UK, ...

This is not strictly true !

The new Highway code says: (reproduced without permission Crown
Copyright 1993)

    Car telephones and microphones:

    43. You MUST exercise proper control of your vehicle
    at all times. Do not use a hand-held telephone or
    microphone while you are driving. Find a safe place to
    stop first. Do not speak into a hands-free microphone if it
    will hake your mind off the road. You MUST NOT stop on
    the hard shoulder of a motorway to answer or make a
    call, except in an emergency.

The MUSTs and MUST NOTs emphasise the aspects of the code backed up by
the law.

Failing to observe the rest of code is not an offense but the failures
may be relied upon by any party to civil or criminal proceedings to
establish or negate any liability in question in these proceedings.

What this means is:

1) You could be nicked for exercising proper control of your vehicle
if you don't pay attention while nattering on the ole mobile.

2) If you are involved in an accident while on the phone then your
failure to observe the code may leave you liable to the blame.

3) Using a cell-phone while driving isn't in itself against the law
but wizzing past the boys in blue waving the dog-n-bone possibly isn't
a good idea.

I used to have a phone in my car and wondered how I'd cope when I
ditched it in favour of a big BMW bike. Now the hand-held sits in the
pannier, switched off, and my journeys are mercyfully hastle free from
that point.


Adam Gorman Solstice Systems Ltd   [e-mail]

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

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: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 20:02:34 GMT


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

> A privately owned plane probably wouldn't have two qualified pilots on
> board, nor would it have autopilot nor a headset (although I could be
> mistaken on the latter two).

On the few occasions that I have been in a private plane, the pilots
all had headsets and had the push-to-talk button mounted on the wheel.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
                    Previous play (obselete): [e-mail]
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Barnett)
Subject: Re: Don't Use Your Cellphone in Your Car!?!?!?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 13:21:00 CST


In a previous message, Dave Niebuhr wrote:

> In TELECOM Digest V13 #205 [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
> writes:

>> Why?  If I can fly a plane, controlling in three dimensions while
>> talking on the radio (required by the Federal Government no less) and
>> at speeds close to 180 miles an hour, why can I talk on the phone at
                                             ^^^  "can't", I think...
>> 55 controlling a car in two dimensions?

> It would depend on the airplane and the number of people qualified to
> fly it and have their hands on the controls almost all of the time.

> A privately owned plane probably wouldn't have two qualified pilots on
> board, nor would it have autopilot nor a headset (although I could be
> mistaken on the latter two).

Instrument flying requires reading a map and one or more other publi-
cations, listening for and writing down amended clearances, adjusting
a half-dozen radios and various other knobs and controls, all while
keeping the aircraft on course and at the assigned altitude in moderate
turbulence, solely by reference to the instruments (without looking
out the window).

Even if you are clear of the clouds, you still have to watch for
traffic that may be coming from ANY direction, and look for the
airport, navigation landmarks, etc.

A headset or autopilot is not required.  Headsets are relatively
inexpensive, and therefore more common.  Autopilots aren't.  Most
instructors won't let you use the autopilot anyway, since they have a
nasty habit of failing at the worst possible time.  A properly trimmed
plane will fly straight and level for a few moments hands-off, and
will certainly fly indefinitely with one hand on the stick, leaving
the other for everything else.

It's a real juggling act.  It requires a microscopic version of time
management, and careful moment to moment planning.  The trick is to
FLY THE AIRPLANE first and foremost, and do the other stuff as you
have the time and opportunity.  Successfully doing all of this takes
training and practice.  If you can't do it, you don't pass the
checkride.

What's my point?  When you are driving, don't use your cellular phone,
eat lunch, put on makeup, talk on your CB/amateur radio, argue with
your significant other, yell at the kids in the back seat, or do
anything else but DRIVE THE CAR unless you are sure that you can do so
safely.  For some people, that means pulling over to the side of the
road and stopping.  Others can handle an additional workload and still
drive safely under most conditions.  And since I think I belong to the
latter group, I don't appreciate being penalized by the irresponsible
behavior of the people in the former group.

Unsafe driving is dangerous, regardless of the cause.  We have plenty
of laws that prohibit and penalize it.  We don't need another one.

> A commercially owned plane would and therefore one or the other of the
> pilots and the engineer would be able to do some talking over the air
> without compromising safety.

Large (and not necessarily commercial) airplanes have a significant
amount of inertia and require careful attention, since an unexpected
deviation may take a long time to correct.  Two pilots are generally
the rule for planes in excess of 12,500 pounds (gross).

But since you brought up commercial planes, I will point out that
somewhere in the depths of FAA regulations or Northwest Airlines'
corporate policies is a prohibition against extraneous discussions
below an altitude of 10,000 feet.  FAR 91.117 further restricts planes
to speeds under 250 knots below 10,000 feet.

If I were follow the popular rationale for banning phone cellular
usage while driving to its logical conclusion, then all radios, CD,
and tape players should also be disabled when the ignition is on, and
passengers should be bound and gagged while in transit.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 12:30:30 GMT


[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> Then they, like you, obviously have had no real experience in
> international shipping. I have shipped countless items to Japan, from
> small disk drives to complete computer systems. I have used FedEx,
> DHL, Nippon, and several other carriers. None had the slightest
> problem with customs. And we were shipping "restricted" items --
> material that was forbidden to be shipped to specific areas of the
> world. I would suggest that you "try it before you knock it".

Although my experience with FedEx has been good, I have had numerous
bad experiences with DHL and customs clearance here in Japan, most
especially for videotapes and computer software; once it took them a
week and 5 faxes from me explaining the contents in excruciating
detail (in addition to the complete invoice on the package).  My
conclusion is that DHL Japan is really screwed up.

On the other hand, I have never had a problem with the normal Post
Office, either in sending or recieving goods.  For example, I send D2
digital master tapes to the USA a couple of times a month via the
Japan PO's EMS service; 3-4 days to any location in the USA, my 8lb
tapes cost about $40 to send, and they've never had either a loss or a
customs problem.

The mail is more expensive here in Japan, but they _deliver_.

[e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas) writes:

> 2) there was a case of a Boy Scout troop being sued or otherwise
> pursued by the USPS for placing their flyers in people's mailboxes.
> As Pat said, the USPS has EXCLUSIVE USE of your mailbox.

In Japan, this is not the case, and every day, ad fliers get stuffed
into my mailbox, many of them with interesting ads for expensive
massage services.


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]
AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?
Date: 25 Mar 1993 19:26:13 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> Last I heard, a USPS registered letter requiring a signature was
> $1.15, versus 29c for a regular letter.  Fedex charges at least $8 for
> any package or letter.

That's for a certified letter.  A registered letter is in the
neighborhood of $5.  A registered letter is what you are supposed to
use if send "bearer instruments," such as cash, bonds, stock
certificates, etc., such that mere possession of the item is what
makes it valuable (unlike a check which is valuable only to the
specified payee).  Each time a registered item changes hands, a log
book is signed.  This way, if the item is lost or pilfered, they can
start from the originating post office, and trace its complete route,
including each employee who handled it.  I had the occasion to send a
registered letter last year, and when the postal clerk took it from
me, he did not put it in the regular mail bin, but instead took out
his key and put it in a locked drawer, in addition to filling out the
paperwork.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1993 14:35:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology?
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


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

> [e-mail] (Dave Levenson) wrote:

>> There was a time when neither snow nor hail ... would stop the mail.

> These were, undoubtedly, in the era before labor unions.

Quite right. A Greek writer (Herodotus?) wrote those words about the
royal messengers of Persia.

More recently, performance artist Laurie Anderson quoted the line
"Neither snow nor rain nor gloom of night/ Shall stay these couriers/
From the swift completion/ Of their appointed rounds" in her song
"OSuperman (For Massenet)".


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada    [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 19:49:27 EST
From: [e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology?


In an article written March 10, 1993, [e-mail] (Michael
Rosen) writes:

> 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 ...

They may not have a fax machine, but if you send them your address
records on disk (fixed-length format, 100 records minimum) they can
add the zip+4 and the carrier route codes, perform minor address
corrections, and return the data files to you with status and error
codes (for the ones they couldn't find). Using their "address
cleaning" service could also qualify you for a postage discount.  Not
bad for a group without fax terminals. ;)


Alan Boritz   [e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #213
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05137;
          27 Mar 93 13:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00407
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 27 Mar 1993 10:21:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20013
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 27 Mar 1993 10:20:32 -0600
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 10:20:32 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #214

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 27 Mar 93 10:20:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 214

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Help Solve Our Tele/Modem/Computer/LAN Problem! (Marshal Perlman)
    I Wear Hearing Aids Too! (Matt Healy)
    TV Show on British Telecom (Linc Madison)
    Caller ID Privacy Block in New Jersey? (Alan Boritz)
    Does Anyone Remember Who Makes the Distintive Ring Box? (Greg Youngblood)
    700 Access From Other Carriers ([e-mail])
    Experiences Calling the South Pacific (Douglas W. Martin)
    3606 Field Trials (Fred Gillette)
    Wiring Standards Book? (Mike Harpe)
    Calling in Canada (Nigel Roberts)
    Motorola Mobile Phone Connector Pinout Wanted (Clyde Smith-Stubbs)
    If They Mention Flying Saucers, They're Out to Get You (Mark Boolootian)
    ATM's Slowly Returning (Greg Abbott)
    AT&T AnyHour Saver Lowers Rates (Monty Solomon)
    New Sleaze From The Psychic Line (Bob Frankston)
    Use of #77 in Cellular Service (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: Help Solve Our Tele/Modem/Computer/LAN Problem!
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 17:06:28 GMT


Hi. A pal of mine and myself are in need of some help with a pair of
Novell systems we are working on (v2.2).

Currently, we have two independent systems, each with a NFS and 3
terminals hooked up.  There is location "A" and location "B".

All the data at "A" and all the data at "B" are totally independent of
each other [but both NFS's have the same software running].  "A" is 20
miles from "B"... and this is what we'd like to do:

We would like make "A" the NFS (it's a 486/66 etc...) for both
locations.  WITHOUT USING A LEASED LINE how could one do this?  This
is a totally hypothetical idea (maybe?) but please take a look at it
and see how I could do this:


CURRENT SETUP:

       +Terminal 1
     |-|
(NFS)|A+Terminal 2
     |-|
       +Terminal 3
    2
    0

    M
    I
    L
    E
    S
       +Terminal 1
     |-|
(NFS)|B+Terminal 2
     |-|
       +Terminal 3

(Note: Each system is 100% independent of the other)

THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO DO:

       +Terminal 1
     |-|
(NFS)|A+Terminal 2
     |-|
     | +Terminal 3
     |
    2|
    0|M?
     |O?
    M|D?
    I|E?
    L|M?
    E|S?
    S|
     |
     +Terminal 1
     +Terminal 2
     +Terminal 3


Basically, it would be LIKE having an extra long ethernet cable over
the 20 mile segment ... we know this can be done with bridges, routers,
repeaters, etc ... but can it be done with modems?  Speed is not
important at all (9,600 or 14,400 would be MORE then fine). Can his be
done? If so, how? How much will it cost and what is the CHEAPEST WAY?
We are a couple of college students, not a big company, so our cash is
limited as you can presume ...

Please get back to us as soon as possible (VIA E-MAIL IF AT ALL
POSSIBLE).

We thank-you in advance!


Marshal Perlman                    Internet: [e-mail]
Florida Institute of Technology                     IRC: Squawk
Melbourne, Florida                          Private Pilot, ASEL
407/768-8000 x8435                   Goodyear Blimp Club Member

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Healy)
Subject: I Wear Hearing Aids Too!
Organization: Yale U. - Genetics
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 15:54:07 GMT


Some comments on hearing-aid compatible handsets, from one who has
worn hearing aids since age 6.  I have about 45 dB of loss in the
middle of the speech frequency range; more at high frequencies -- this
is classified as a "moderate to severe" sensorineural loss.

I used to wear behind-the-ear aids with telephone pick-up coils
(inductive pickup).  Flipping a little switch cut out the regular mike
and activated the coil.  With the old dynamic phones this worked fine.
However, many newer phones produced much lower electromagnetic field
strengths and could not be picked up.  My hearing aid dealer offered
to sell me a gadget for about 25 bucks that clamped over any earpiece
which generated the required e-m field.  It was basically just an
amplifier but with a coil instead of a speaker.

However, at about this time I switched to in-the-ear aids.  Until
about ten years ago, I could not use in-the-ear aids because of
feedback problems with the amount of gain I needed.  Behind-the-ear
aids have much more acoustic isolation between microphone and the ear
canal.  Now, though, the amplifiers have been improved enough that
feedback is greatly reduced.  However, very few in-the-ear hearing
aids have telephone coils!  Two steps forward, one step back!  I can
use the hearing aid with a standard phone but I have to hold the
earpiece in exactly one position to avoid feedback problems.  In
practice I usually do without the hearing aid.  About 1/4 of the time
I then have difficulty hearing the other end, but I can usually solve
that problem by saying "please speak up; I have a bad connection," not
mentioning that the bad connection is inside my head ...

The big advantage of the telephone coil was not that it made the phone
louder (that can be done in other ways), but that I _only_ heard the
phone.  It also proved handy for troubleshooting wiring: the telephone
coil picked up the 60Hz hum from any live wire quite nicely.  It also
was able to pick up music from most stereo cables, etc.

On the whole I still prefer my in-the-ear aids over the clunky old
behind-the-ear types.


Matt Healy    [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 23:50:17 GMT
From: Linc Madison <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TV Show on British Telecom


I saw a show last week on Channel Four (one of Britain's commercial TV
networks) called "The Goldring Audit."  This terribly boring woman is
going around looking at the nationalised industries that are being
privatised, and last week's installment was about British Telecom.

She went into the history of the privatisation and the efforts at
bringing competition into the field.  She covered all the major bases,
including BT going after big business contracts at the expense of
residential service, improvements in customer service responsiveness,
cable companies proposing to offer telephone service, cellular
competition with landlines, the state of payphones and the push
towards cardphones instead of coin phones, and Mercury.

One bit I found particularly interesting, in view of a recent comment
in the Digest, is that one of the BT representatives they had on said
that BT had studied going to flat-rate dialling nationwide -- a call
from one end of the country to the other would cost the same as a call
across the street -- but that there was no way they could do that
because it would instantly torpedo any competitors.

As it stands, there are only three distance-based charge bands in the
UK, not counting premium services.  Local, a, and b/b1.  Zone a is up
to 35 miles; Zone b is beyond 35 miles, and b1 is over "low-cost
routes," at a discount.

Then again, where I work at the moment, we have phone lines with a
most unusual tariff: for UK#1,395.00 per annum, we get line rental
plus unlimited, unmeasured local, national, and international calling.
Not a bad deal!  Of course, the blurb from our telecoms supplier says
that they will begin charging for individual calls as soon as they
install the necessary equipment to begin doing so, but for now we can
call the world at no marginal cost.  Don't bother trying to sign up,
though, 'cause they only provide service to our corporate office
locations, which unfortunately does not include my flat.



Linc Madison  ==  [e-mail]  ==  [e-mail]
59 Stourcliffe Close, London W1H 5AR  U.K., Tel. [phone]

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

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 07:45:11 EST
From: [e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Subject: Caller ID Privacy Block in New Jersey?


My Continental Data Systems caller ID box had the privilege of hanging
up on a "privacy-blocked" caller the other day (answers the phone,
plays a digitized message about calls not accepted from your number,
and hangs up).  I'm a little puzzeled, though, since NJ Bell tells
everyone who asks that that feature is not available within their
territory.  Is NJ Bell only providing caller ID privacy block for some
without having a tarrif for the service?


Alan Boritz  [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Does Anyone Remember Who Makes the Distintive Ring Box?
From: tcscs![e-mail] (Gregory Youngblood)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 01:49:57 CST
Organization: TCS Consulting Services


I've recently come across a situation where one of those boxes that
recognizes the different incoming ring signals that some telcos can
provide would be ideal.

Unfortunately I don't remember the name of the company or anything
else.

All I remember was that you could program it to recognize different
ringing signals (long, short short, short long short, etc. etc) and
make it go to different ports.  Kind of like those fax switches, but
this doesnt have to pickup the phone to work.

If anyone can help me out, please send the message to me via email
(it's bad enough I ahve to ask this again).

Thanks in advance.


Greg

  TCS Consulting Services   P.O. Box 600008   St. Paul, MN  55106-0008
    Specializing in high-end, high performance 486 computer systems
****** PLEASE REPLY VIA E-MAIL as my news feed is temporarily down ******
  [e-mail]        or       [e-mail]

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

Subject: 700 Access From Other Carriers
From: [e-mail] (WayneL)
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 15:37:00 EST
Organization: WALL/WKOJ


I've been following this group on and off for a couple of years now,
so correct me if I'm wrong, but I came across something I consider
interesting.

 From what I understand, if someone has a 700 number, say,
700-123-4567, with AT&T, that number is not accessable from MCI
without dialing 10288+1 first, and the same would apply to any other
long-distance company.

What I find interesting is that the FCC has at least one 700 number of
its own.  The one I know of is for emergency use by broadcast
stations.  Now in an emergency, I'm not going to want to dial 10288,
10333, 10xxx, one at a time, trying to find which carrier they're on.
So, is it possible for a 700 number to be universally accepted by all
phone companies?  This may seem a strange question, but we don't have
equal access at all in this area (950, or 10xxx), so there's really no
way for me to verify on my own, and even if I did, I'm sure they don't
need me ringing their bells unnecessarily.


WayneL  <[e-mail]>


[Moderator's Note: The way the 700 number space is set up is that each
carrier has completely independent use of the entire 700 spectrum. Not
only that, but within a single carrier, 1+700 can and often times does
produce different results than 0+700. The only way to identify for
telco *whose* (which carrier's) 700 number you want is by prepending
the access code 10xxx to what you dial, else you get by default the
700 numbers (if any) of your own 1+ carrier. I always thought it was
silly and confusing that 700 was given such a radical departure from
the normal way of numbering and processing (0+ or 1+) calls. If you
have no equal access yet in your area, then you probably have AT&T as
your long distance carrier, meaning 0-700 would send you to Easy Reach
and 1+700 would send you to stuff like Alliance Teleconferencing, both
AT&T products. If you could dial other carrier 700's it would not only
be you 'ringing their bells unnecessarily' it would also be you paying
for a bunch of odd-ball calls in the process of figuring out who was
where. I'm curious: what does the FCC have going in 700?   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 07:26:57 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Douglas W. Martin)
Subject: Experiences Calling the South Pacific


     Last evening, in search of some rare coins, I had occasion to
call Tonga (676), Kiribati (686) and the Solomon Islands (677).  These
were calls to either the "Central Bank of ..." or the treasury
department.  All were five-digit numbers.  Kiribati and the Solomon
Islands connected me through what sounded like sxx switches (just like
the ones in Toronto).  In all three cases, I was put on hold, twice
with music.  In fact, the "music on hold" for the Tongan number was an
electronically synthesized version of "Home on the Range"!  And I
thought buffalo only rome in Italy.

     On several of my attempted calls, it appeared to connect, but
then I got several minutes of static.  I hung up, tried again, and the
calls went right through.


Doug Martin      [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: When you say you were put on hold, do you mean by
the business places you called while they were fetching someone to the
phone to speak with you, or do you mean by the telcos involved when
you called their information service to get the bank's number?  Lots
of places in Hong Kong and other far east countries seem to be very
fond of those little 'music on hold' gimmicks in the DAK (and similar)
catalogs which you insert between the phone and the plug coming from
the wall. Tap a button on the little box and it starts playing its
simple-minded melody over and over. Some telcom administrations also
play Looney Tunes to the international callers to their Directory
Enquiry service or the Inward Operator when there is a backlog. France
has a particularly awful ten or fifteen second recording which
consists of five bars of music, title unknown, followed by a gentleman's
voice with a crisp British accent saying "Tel-eee-kom Services! We're
trying to extend your call ... please stand by." If it takes two
minutes to get the operator, then you hear this message six or seven
times. If it takes five minutes to reach the operator, then you hear
it 15-20 times. I've gotten the same man and same music on calls to
directory in Saudi Arabia. AT&T operators processing calls to
directory in those places just sit there very stoically through the
endless repetitions.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Gillette)
Subject: 3606 Field Trials
Organization: Newbridge Networks Corporation
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 16:08:03 GMT


Newbridge is currently looking for Beta trial sites for its smallest
Bandwidth manager. (The 3606) This unit has a V.35 aggregate output
with four RS232 (V.24) data inputs and one module position. The module
can be two voice lines or a selection of data lines. The main new
feature being tested is Fax relay. This means that voice lines will
detect fax calls and connect them to an internal fax modem so that
they may be passed digitally thorugh a network. A fax modem chip at
the far end will re-create the original analog signal.


For additional information contact:

Fred Gillette    Manager America's Field Trials
[phone] ex3713    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Harpe)
Subject: Wiring Standards Book?
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 16:27:15 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville


I would like to learn more about wiring standards for telecom
applications.  I want know what RJ-11, RJ-14, RJ-45 and all these
other standards actually say.  I don't mind buying these either.

Can someone send me some references as a sort of required reading
list?


Michael Harpe, Programmer/Analyst      Information Technology, Ormsby Bldg.
[e-mail]            University of Louisville
[phone]                          Louisville, Ky. 40292

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

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 07:00:08 GMT
From: SVHDEV![e-mail]
Subject: Calling in Canada
Reply-To: svhdev![e-mail]


I live in England but will be visiting Canada towards the end of next
month. As well as my BT Chargecard (which I can use with UK Direct), I
do have a couple of US calling cards -- though I've been told that I
can't use the US cards in Canada except for calling the US.

Any suggestions on the best way to make calls, both local and
international while in Canada? (I do have a Canadian address, but
obviously, no phone service there).

Any else to watch out for telecom-wise while I'm there??


Regards,

Nigel Roberts                       |  Tel.   [phone]
[e-mail]         |  Fax    [phone]
svhdev![e-mail] |  Mobile [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Clyde Smith-Stubbs)
Subject: Motorola Mobile Phone Connector Pinout Wanted
Organization: HI-TECH Software, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 04:02:04 GMT


I have as Motorola mobile phone with a 25 pin 'D' type connector on
the end. Can anyone tell me the pinout of this connector?  E-mail
preferred. Thanks.


Clyde Smith-Stubbs       | HI-TECH Software,       | Voice: [phone]
[e-mail]      | P.O. Box 103, Alderley, | Fax:   [phone]
 ..!nwnexus!hitech!clyde | QLD, 4051, AUSTRALIA.   | BBS:   [phone]
HI-TECH Software: C Compilers for all manner of machines

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: If They Mention Flying Saucers, They're Out to Get You
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 14:46:50 -0800 (PST)


Passed along from the shortwave radio group --

  From [e-mail] Thu Mar 25 10:20:37 1993
  Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
  Subject: if they mention flying saucers, they're out to get you
  From: Derek Cooper <[e-mail]>

 From the London Times today (I did check that it's not April 1st!)-

`Officers in Warrington Cheshire fed up with people listening in to
their messages, broadcast that a flying saucer had crash-landed in a
field & gave details of where to find it.

Radio messages about a huge glowing spacecraft were broadcast with the
warning "Do not approach.  It may be radioactive."  The warning was
followed by directions to the field in Appleton.  The eavesdroppers
arrived within minutes, expecting to see little green men.  They were
arrested instead.

Police said that five people had been reported to the Crown
Prosecution Service for telecommunications offences.  Scanning devices
that can pick up police radio messages are widely available but using
them to listen to police transmissions is an offence.

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

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 01:09:43 CST
From: Greg Abbott <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: ATM's Slowly Returning


I was at my bank today and noticed that for the first time in two
weeks the ATM outside was functioning.  All of the other ATM's in town
which I passed by still had the giant notices pasted over all of the
control surfaces saying that they didn't know when the network would
be back in service.  My bank happens to be one of, if not the,
controlling bank (or something) for this area, so I wonder if they
were able to link to some other network.

Just my $.02 worth.


GREG ABBOTT         E-MAIL: [e-mail]
COMPUSERVE MAIL: 76046,3107    VOICE: 217/333-4348
METCAD                         FAX:   [phone]
1905 E. MAIN ST.               PAGER: 800/222-6651
URBANA, IL  61801                       PIN # 9541

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

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 03:32:09 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T AnyHour Saver Lowers Rates


As of April 1, 1993, additional minutes on AT&T's AnyHour Saver plan
will be $0.16/min M-F 8-5 and $0.09/minute any other time.

The current rates are $0.20/min and $0.10/min.

The monthly charge will still be $10 and includes your 60 most
expensive minutes.


Monty

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: New Sleaze From the Psychic Line
Date: Sat 27 Mar 1993 00:50 -0400


I got a cold call from one of psychic lines services to my phone line.
After the initial spiel, it said that if I answer "yes", it would
continue the call (and tell me whatever) and would bill me $1.xx a
minute as a collect call.  Would I get charged if I coughed?


[Moderator's Note: Either someone was playing a joke on you by using
three-way calling to patch you and the psychic's 800 line together or
perhaps for some odd reason, the psychic line was in the process of
returning a call made to its 800 number to begin a reading with what
it believed to be its customer but the number was misdialed/misconnected.
If this was Mystic Marketing or any of the folks in Reno, Nevada, I
really doubt they are doing cold calls. It would be a waste of time, and
generate much ill-will. They have a very active phone room just from
the incoming calls they receive; they don't have to solicit.    PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 9:40:50 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Use of #77 in Cellular Phones


Now posted on southbound I-95 at Havre de Grace, Maryland: call #77
(that is pound sign, not asterisk) to report disabled vehicles.  Same
sign shows telephone keypad with nothing on the buttons except for the
7 and # keys.  # in many other applications signifies time-out, right?

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #214
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07450;
          27 Mar 93 14:20 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21848
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 27 Mar 1993 12:03:02 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32211
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 27 Mar 1993 12:02:16 -0600
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 12:02:16 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #215

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 27 Mar 93 12:02:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 215

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Silicon Valley CEO Testifies Against Clinton's Technology Policy (A Furman)
    Telecom Statement on NREN, etc. (Curtis E. Reid)
    Stupid Telco (Ken Levitt)
    Guess What Was on my Phone Bill This Month (John Castaldi)
    AT&T Blacklisting? (Deniz Utku)
    Machinery - January, 1905 (Tony Harminc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Silicon Valley CEO Testifies Against Clinton's Technology Policy
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 04:12:24 PST


  WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE) via First! -- In a testimony before the
U.S.  House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, T.J. Rodgers,
president and chief executive officer of Cypress Semiconductor
testified against President Clinton's recently unveiled high-technology
policy, including the "data superhighway" initiative.

  The testimony challenges the perception that all high-technology
CEOs are in accord with the Clinton Administration's technology
policy, citing supportive comments from other prominent high-technology
leaders.

  Rodgers' testimony was part of a Congressional Subcommittee hearing
on high performance computing.

  Rodgers told members of the Subcommittee: "The (Clinton)
administration would have us believe that the business leaders of
Silicon Valley stand unanimously behind its program.  The image of
John Scully, CEO of Apple Computer, sitting beside the First Lady and
applauding the State of the Union address has been beamed far and wide
by White House political operatives.

  "I am here today in strong opposition to the administration's
economic program in general and its technology agenda in particular.
I am not alone."

  Rodgers used his own company as one example of a successful company
that will be hurt by Clinton's economic program.  He pointed out that
Cypress generated more than $1 billion in cumulative revenue, $160
million in profits (of which $60 million was paid in taxes), 1,500
jobs, and paid cumulative salaries of nearly $500 million (of which
employees paid taxes of nearly $150 million).

  "If that is an `excess of the 1980s' let's have more," Rodgers said.
"As an entrepreneur, I should not have to apologize for my success and
that of the company.  I am offended by the administration's divisive
rhetoric.

  "As we debate the virtues of raising taxes on individuals and
corporations, let's not debate abstractions.  Let's debate the
realities of who pays and the impact of raising taxes on those people
and companies."

  Following are comments from high technology leaders Rodgers cited in
his testimony:

  -- Joe Zemke, chief executive officer, Amdahl Corp. -- "Whether it
is sugar subsidies or `investments' in high performance computing, the
Clinton program represents the same logic: siphoning dollars from
individuals and corporations and allocating them through a process
that is terribly inefficient -- a process that is responsive not to
market requirements, but to bureaucratic empires and political
payoffs."

  -- Don Valentine, founding venture capitalist and director, Apple
Computer; director, Cisco Systems -- "Don't assume that the Pepsi-Cola
kid (John Scully) speaks for Silicon Valley.  We do not need pretenders
who speak for us.  We have visionaries who are rare, important and
doers."

  -- Finis Conner, founder and chief executive officer, Conner
Peripherals -- "The development of all technologies and products
involves risks and rewards.  The government should not be in the
business of speculating with taxpayers' money on which of those risks
will be winners and which will be losers."

  -- Scott McNealy, chief executive officer, Sun Microsystems -- "In
the current economic climate, the proposed increase in the corporate
tax rate does not encourage job growth, business investment, or global
competitiveness.  Rather, it penalizes profits and will result in
further loss of jobs."

  Other high technology leaders cited in Rodgers' testimony include:
Gil Amelio, chief executive officer, National Semiconductor; Wilf
Corrigan, chief executive officer, LSI Logic; Pierre Lamond, founder,
National Semiconductor; L.J. Sevin, chairman, Cyrix; John Adler, chief
executive officer, Adaptec; Scott McNealy, chief executive officer,
Sun Microsystems; and Roger Emerick, chief executive officer, Lam
Research.

  Rodgers continued: "I still have most of the wealth associated with
my Cypress shares.  What have I done with my wealth?  I invested it.
In fact, I invested it in precisely the kinds of companies on which
the administration wants to shower taxpayer subsidies -- the world's
most advanced competitors in fields such as semiconductors,
biotechnology, software, networking, environmental sciences and health
care.  Every incremental dollar that Washington takes from me comes
directly out of my investments in these companies.

  "Essentially, the administration is arguing that by taking my money
in the form of higher taxes and `investing' it in subsidies, it can
make better investments -- create more jobs and wealth -- than the
venture-capital firms with which I invest -- firms that are the envy
of Japan and Europe.  That logic defies common sense."

  While approving of the administration's move toward a high
technology vision, Rodgers criticized its plan to spend billions in
taxpayer money to fund technology programs.  He argued that these
programs, such as the "data superhighway" initiative, could be funded
by the free market without any cost to the taxpayers.

  "Multiple, competing highways are being built day-by-day across the
United States.  MCI, AT&T and Sprint already have three independent,
coast-to- coast, fiber-based long-haul networks.  The real issue is
extending those networks into the home.  The role for government is to
untangle the morass of bureaucracy and regulations that prevents
private companies from hooking up the `last mile' of fiber to the
home," Rodgers said.

  Rodgers offered the following examples to underscore his position on
the administration's "data superhighway" initiative.

  -- "The regional Bell operating companies would gladly hook fiber
optics from the long-haul network to the home.  But they are prevented
from doing so by regulations that make the huge capital investments
uneconomical."

  -- "Cable operators are already hooked into 60 percent of American
homes.  They too could make the connection with existing long-haul
data superhighways, but they are prevented by regulations that declare
them a `natural monopoly' and restrict them to television and movie
business."

  -- "The long-haul superhighway could be hooked into the home through
wireless circuits.  But the frequencies required are currently being
held up by the Federal Communications Commission."

  Rodgers called for the administration to make further cuts in
government spending.  He pointed out that while a successful American
company like Boeing had to cut 20 percent of its workforce to survive,
Clinton's plan to eliminate 100,000 federal jobs only accounts for
only five percent of the total government workforce.

  "The opportunities for cuts go way beyond headcount," Rodgers said.
"We could spend hours listing wasteful and unnecessary programs --
programs that made sense 30 or 40 years ago, when they were created,
but that make no sense today."

  Rodgers' overall recommendation: "Washington should stay away from
the intricacies of high-tech competition -- whether the issue is the
data superhighway, high-performance computing or advanced
manufacturing.  It should focus instead on the infrastructure of
competition -- those factors of production that help all companies
equally.  President Kennedy said it best: `A rising tide lifts all
boats.'"

  Rodgers concluded his testimony with the following: "America's
entepreneurial companies have the guts, brains and drive to beat the
best the world has to offer.  All we need from Washington is the
confidence to let us fight it out."

  Rodgers founded Cypress Semiconductor in 1983.  Cypress
Semiconductor Corp., a $300 million international semiconductor
supplier, supplies 252 products in seven different product areas.
Cypress exports 27 percent of its sales.  The company's SPARC
microprocessor chipset has been designed into 72 high-performance
computer systems, including Sun Microsystems' newest SPARCserver 600
system, the most advanced multiprocessing system available.

  Note to Editors: A copy of T.J. Rodgers' testimony is available.
Please call Ben Gibson at 408/287-1700.

  CONTACT: Cypress Semiconductor | John Hamburger, 408/943-2902 | or |
PR | Ben Gibson, 408/287-1700

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

Alan T. Furman  [e-mail]
(with thanx to Paul Barnett who posted it on Usenet)


[Moderator's Note: And thank you, Alan, for passing it along to us.  PAT]

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

Date: 26 Mar 1993 21:03:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Curtis E. Reid <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecom statement on NREN, etc.


This may be of interest to some of you.  Enjoy.

Curtis

From: IN%"[e-mail]"  "Jim Conklin" 26-MAR-1993 19:48:06.26
To: IN%"[e-mail]"  "Multiple recipients of list BITNEWS"
Subj: Telecomm statement on NREN, etc.

This may be of general interest to those of you wondering what's
coming (and why) with the NSFNET and NREN.  / Jim

            ---------Original message-------

Finally a clear statement of what they want and why the NSF is
planning changes to the backbone funding and usage.


For Release: March 23, 1993


LEADING TELCO CEOs JOINTLY SUPPORT CLINTON-GORE TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

The Chief Executive Officers of the nation's leading local and
long-distance telecommunications companies today announced that they
have signed a landmark public policy position statement (attached) --
signaling strong industry-wide support for the communications
technology initiatives envisioned by the Clinton-Gore Administration.

The statement was signed by the CEOs of Ameritech, AT&T, Bell
Atlantic, Bellcore, BellSouth, Cincinnati Bell, Inc., GTE, MCI, NYNEX,
Pacific Telesis, Southern New England Telephone Company, Southwestern
Bell Corp., Sprint, U S WEST.

The policy statement provides a set of principles consistent with the
Administration's initiative, "Technology for America's Economic
Growth, A New Direction to Build Economic Strength," and articulates
the roles government and industry should play.

The CEOs suggest the Administration and Congress adopt these
principles as a framework for cooperation among federal, state and
local governments, key users communities -- such as schools, libraries
and health care providers -- and the private sector (including
telecommunications, computer, information, and related industries.)

In addition, the set of principles recommends that government support
research on applications and services that benefit schools, health
care, and industries crucial for U.S. competitiveness, as well as
research that will make it easier for people to connect to, and use,
information networks.

Benefits to come from following these principles would include:

* Increased private sector investment in, and continued development
of, a national information infrastructure as a result of government
serving as a catalyst.

Partnerships among government, academia, industry and key user
communities will focus on development of experimental technologies
that leverage limited government funds.

Transferring experimental technologies to commercial (production)
networks will provide new capabilities to users, meet their
expanding needs, and increase industry's investment in the
infrastructure.

* Alternative visions of the national information infrastructure can
be integrated into a common vision which provides interactive
multi-media and other advanced networking capabilities to all
Americans.

* Industry's incentive to invest in the infrastructure will remain
strong because the government will not subsidize commercial networks
and because commercial services will not be provided on government-
supported experimental networks.

* Selected user communities will be provided support for access to,
and use of, networks and information through government funding.

Supporting these communities represents a shift of emphasis from
government's direct support of networks.  These funds, predominantly
grants, would be carefully targeted by the government to meet urgent
societal needs by communities which otherwise could not afford to take
advantage of the benefits that the infrastructure can provide -- for
example, innovative math and science programs for children in public
schools with limited budgets and resources.

* Alternative network suppliers will be able to interconnect
seamlessly with each other, resulting in a wide array of competitive
choices that will spur innovation and result in competitive prices to
users.

According to George Heilmeier, President and CEO of Bellcore, "The
telecommunications industry looks forward to the challenge of evolving
information networks to meet urgent societal needs, spur economic
growth, and strengthen America's competitive position in the global
economy."

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

Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 16:37:40 EST
From: [e-mail] (Ken Levitt)
Subject: Stupid Telco


Here's another tidbit in the annals of Telco incompetence.

New England Telephone (Nynex) has been running ads on radio and
television telling people that as of May 1 you can switch your 800
number to them.  I decided to call and ask what the rates were.  I was
told that they didn't have that information yet.

And so it goes ...


Ken Levitt - On FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390     UUCP: zorro9!levitt
INTERNET: [e-mail] or [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, you can switch your 800 number to me as of
May 1 also (I am sending out the forms already), and I *do* have the
rates for this affinity program whose residuals will benefit the Digest.
Rates are from 17 to 23 cents per minute depending on volume. There is
no installation fee and no monthly service charge. If you don't have an
800 number (or don't care about the one you have) I can give you one
now under the above rates and conditions, or you can ask to have your
existing 800 numbers put on our program in about a month. For more
information on this and the other telephone affinity programs including
1+ dialing and calling cards, write [e-mail].    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Castaldi)
Subject: Guess What Was on my Phone Bill This Month
Organization: Rowan College of New Jersey
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 21:25:38 GMT


This month's phone bill had several collect calls to my pilot number
(that is answered only by auto attendant) from information(city) CA.
After calling Integretel (grrrr...) I found out that they were collect
call backs from a tele-sleeze company ... needless to say, they
imediately removed the charges.


[Moderator's Note: As you may have discovered, Integretel is not that
bad of an organization ... all they're out there doing is servicing a
part of the telecom industry a lot of people would rather keep in the
closet -- the late night long distance calls between adults who are
otherwise strangers whispering sweet nothings and talking dirty. I
think the Integretal organization fully understands there is a great
deal of fraud -- in both directions; customers try to stiff their IP's
far more than the other way around -- and they keep their own list of
people who do not wish to be called.  When they removed the charges
 from your line, they added you to their negative-listing at the same
time, and I doubt you will receive any more charges billed through
them by their clients.  In fairness to Integretel, a rep there once
said to me she understood how 'misunderstandings' could happen once to
any telephone subscriber; but several days in a row, all in one
billing cycle; never before and never since ?? If you want your phones
to be screened against collect charges from Integretel's many information
providers (many, because as 'they' say, there are different strokes
for different folks), call them at 800-736-7500. Its no skin off their
nose and saves them hassles with billing later on.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (DENIZ UTKU)
Subject: AT&T Blacklisting?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 01:45:10 GMT


I heard that AT&T has started to blacklist numbers which are receiving
high amounts of fraudulent calls, especially calls made with stolen
calling cards. Those blacklisted numbers are usually BBS'es. Some
local sysops informed me about the problem. They mention that their
users calling with calling cards are having problems. Cards are
getting cancelled immediatly after the call is placed. It brings many
hassles.

It is impossible for a sysop to track fraudulent calls being placed to
the BBS. It is not sysop's responsibility at all. Because of a few
phreak's fraudulent calls those boards getting big problems and their
legitimate users are getting affected.  I called AT&T regarding this
problem, but couldn't find any person that could help. I know that
this blacklisting action is not official. AT&T has been doing the same
blacklisting for Alliance Conferancing for years. It is not mentioned
officially. So here are the questions:

1: Is it legit to blacklist a number when it is RECEIVING fraudulent
calls?

2: Does AT&T think that they can prevent phone fraud by blacklisting?

3: How AT&T will payback the customers who got their card cancelled and
are having hassles? (ie. when outside the states, using local phone company
card on AT&T USA direct, call a blacklisted number, then your card is
cancelled!. It brings so many problems as you can't reach local telco's
as they have mostly 800 numbers (which can't be called outside the states)
or they ask for call-back etc.

A friend of mine in the 612 area, had a call from AT&T security saying
his BBS was receiving a large amount of fraudulent calls, and if he
doesn't cooperate and give them his user data, they will make him to
pay the bill!  Well I don't know why AT&T is doing such inofficial
fake threats and blacklisting instead of improving their security to
deal with phone fraud.


[Moderator's Note: It is correct your friend cannot be forced to pay
for calls he did not originate or agree to pay for, however if it is
believed that your friend is aware of these calls and doing nothing to
prevent them -- in fact perhaps encouraging them -- then he can be
subpoened by a federal grand jury and *forced* to produce his call log
records.  If he is not involved in, or actively encouraging the fraud,
then it would behoove him to offer his cooperation by (a) first notifying
the users in a public message on the system -- in his hello banner
perhaps -- that AT&T was making inquiries; that he was assisting
the Company and did not approve of toll fraud, and (b) offering a
compromise with AT&T where if the Company would tell him the time(s)
fraud calls were made to his system, he would supply them with the
user record(s) for the specific call. Surely he has a log of who
called the system at what times, etc?  I think everyone involved in
the 'instant information industry' should at least be socially respon-
sible enough to cooperate in an effort to reduce toll fraud by the
people who call them.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 08:45:12 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Machinery - January, 1905
Reply-To: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>


I came across the January, 1905 issue of a US magazine called
Machinery.  My dad had saved it, perhaps because that was the year of
his birth.

It is full of ads for lathes, milling machines, and so on, and has a
fairly small editorial and feature section with articles on
engineering practice in various industries.  Two things struck me: of
the several hundred US ads not one has a telephone number.  In a short
list of "foreign representatives", several in London have numbers,
e.g.  "Buck and Hickman, Ltd. Telephone nos. 844, 845 and 867 Avenue",
and "George Hatch, Ltd. Phone, 5085, 5096 Bank".  Cable addresses and
which codes (e.g. ABC, Lieber's, Ambition-Dresden) were used are also
frequent.

And the following short article:

A dispatch from Boston says that two fifteen-year-old boys of that
city have established a wireless telegraph connection between their
homes, half a mile apart.  This recalls the fact that thirty days
after the appearance of the first published accounts of Bell's
invention of the telephone, two New York boys had built and were
successfully operating an experimental telephone system of their own.
These two boys have since achieved distinction in the electrical
field, and have for many years been allied in business.  They are
Prof. Frank B. Crocker, of Columbia University, and Dr. Schuyler
Skaats Wheeler.

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

Tony Harminc

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #215
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23108;
          29 Mar 93 2:15 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09537
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 28 Mar 1993 23:47:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01324
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 28 Mar 1993 23:47:05 -0600
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 23:47:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #216

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 28 Mar 93 23:47:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 216

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Hardshell Shock-Proof Case For Motorola Flip Phone Wanted (Paul Gauthier)
    Source Code For X.25 Program Interface (Chang Chen Hsien)
    AT&T Rate Reduction is Temporary (Phillip Dampier)
    Cell One/Boston Rates in NYC (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Alliance 1-700 Access (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Springtime for Swope in America (Alan Furman)
    Telegraphics Addresses (John Pettitt)
    Funny Digits on Calling Card Mag Stripes (John R. Levine)
    Predictive Dialing (leroy Casterline)
    Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature (Dan Danz)
    Ah ... Contel! (John Higdon)
    Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine (Justin Leavens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paul Gauthier)
Subject: Hardshell Shock-Proof Case For Morotola Flip Phone Wanted
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 21:11:11 -0400


I have one of those nifty little Motorola flip phone jobbies. If you
examine my signature you might notice I engage in a number of
activities which could result in serious damage to that expensive toy.
Mainly I'm concerned about carrying it while cycling and rock
climbing. So far, through care, I've managed not to fly off the bike
and land on it or drop it from 80' above ground onto the rocks. But I
don't really want to have to count on good luck.

I'm looking for pointers to a source of a hardshell shock-proof
carrying case that would hold the phone. I called the local cellular
service center and they had nothing for me. I then went to the local
camera shop, thinking that photographers must have to carry their gear
into strange situations as well. And I was right. Unfortunately, the
cases were a little on the large side. Smallest was 12"x10"x4" or so.

I'd like to find something that is close to the size of the phone (ie,
6"x4"x2" internal dimensions). I have limited carrying space both in
the backpack I bring climbing, and on the bike. Weight isn't too much
of an issue. A hard shell is a must, so that the phone is protected if
I happen to sit down on the backpack or lean up against a rock with it
in the middle of the sandwich. And some sort of serious shock
protection is a must. High density foam or somesuch. Hopefull this
would go a long way towards saving the phone if it takes a fall from a
50' clifftop (hopefully inside of the backpack, not just the case
alone, but you never know) or onto the road from my speeding bike.

The other issues are water-tightness and the ability to hear the ring
through it. I'm not too concerned with water-tightness, since I can
wrap the phone/case in plastic if I plan to be in a wet environ.  I
would really like to be able to have a reasonable chance of hearing
the ring through the shell. I'd be willing to perhaps drill a hole or
three through the hardshell to allow the sound to escape. Any other
ideas?

Any and all suggestions or recommendations are welcome.

Thanks in advance,


                             Paul Gauthier
cyclist, rock climber, skydiver, computer scientist (...in order of danger)
Electronic: [e-mail]  Voice: [phone]  Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chang Chen Hsien)
Subject: Source Code For X.25 Program Interface
Organization: National Computer Board, Singapore
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 05:03:42 GMT


Is anyone out there know where can I get the source code (in C
language) for X.25 protocol program interface?

If you know, please email to [e-mail]. Thanks in advance.

Cheers.

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 14:38:02 -0500
Subject: AT&T Rate Reduction is Temporary


> From: [e-mail] (Monty Solomon)

> As of April 1, 1993, additional minutes on AT&T's AnyHour Saver plan
> will be $0.16/min M-F 8-5 and $0.09/minute any other time.

> The current rates are $0.20/min and $0.10/min.

> The monthly charge will still be $10 and includes your 60 most
> expensive minutes.

People should be aware that this is a TEMPORARY reduction in AT&T
rates covering the period of March 15-May 31st only.  At the end of
the period, the normal rates of .20 and .10 per minute will resume.

In addition, several people have contacted me referencing my post
about long distance plans.  They wrote that MCI will allow you to
receive MCI Friends & Family discounts by establishing secondary
carrier status with the company.  Then, one would take advantage of
MCI rates by prefixing all calls with 10222 or whatever MCI code is
valid in your area.


Customer service numbers are:  AT&T  1-800-222-0300 residence
                               MCI   1-800-444-3333


[Moderator's Note: My thanks to the several people who wrote to point
out the rate decrease on 'Any Hour' was a one time temporary
promotion. It will only apply to the calls you make which would be
billed during your April or May billing cycle. They would not dare
leave those rates in effect all the time ... MCI would have them in
court. In fact it is uncertain now, according to one AT&T spokesperson
whether or not the temporary promotion will go through without consid-
erable protest from MCI on grounds of 'predatory pricing' and complaints
of 'they are trying to drive us out of business again, judge ...'.   PAT]

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

Date: 28-MAR-1993 15:35:03.08
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cell One/Boston Rates in NYC


Cellular One/Boston (SID 00007) has recently implemented "New England
Network" Roaming rates in Cellular One/NY's (00025) system.

Roamers from CO/Boston can now place and receive calls (via the roam
port, no Nationlink Call-Delivery or auto-roaming yet) at $.44
peak/$.29 off-peak.

These rates are better than ANY plan which CO/NY currently offers to
its OWN customers! Typically, CO/NY customers pay between $.50 - $.86
peak, and $.27 - $.60 off peak.

I checked with THREE people at CO/Boston about this seemingly great
deal, and everyone, including the roam coordinator, said they were
correct.

If you go into New Jersey, be careful as you head south of I-78 -
ComCast Cell One/South Jersey takes over there, and you will be billed
$3/day $.99 per minute, PLUS CO/Boston's inane $2 "Roamer
Administration Fee".  I would suggest that if you do roam in NY, see
if your phone can block out SID 00173, and you should avoid this
probem. You may also want to block out the *tiny* Newtown, NJ system,
and the Orange County system (00479?), both of which border the NY
system to the north.

(CT is not a problem, as MOST of SID 00119 has New England Network
rates as well, EXCEPT for Franklin County, Mass. This two-tower system
along I-91 is administered by Metro Mobile, but owned by "Boston
Cellular".  CO/Boston does NOT have a New England Network agreement
with them, so any calls placed or received there will get the full
$3/$.99/$2 charge! And you can't even tell when you are on that
system, as *611/*711 give the generic Metro Mobile recordings,
indicating that it is all one big system. Moreover, since there is
auto-call delivery to Franklin County, CO/Boston (and for that matter
CO/NY) customers who want to get calls in CT and Western Mass have no
way of being sure what rate they will pay!  CO/Boston is working on
this, but the "Boston Cellular" RSA seems to be reluctant to do
anything; after all, each call results in at LEAST $4 per customer per
day :( ).

Overall, though, Boston customers now get a great deal on airtime in
NYC.  I wonder if the CO/Boston Concord, NH "partnership" customers
get the same rates ...


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

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

Date: 28-MAR-1993 15:33:26.23
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Alliance 1-700 Access



> [Moderator's Note: The way the 700 number space is set up is that each
> carrier has completely independent use of the entire 700 spectrum. Not
> only that, but within a single carrier, 1+700 can and often times does
> produce different results than 0+700.... If you have no equal access yet
> in your area, then you probably have AT&T as your long distance carrier,
> meaning 0-700 would send you to Easy Reach and 1+700 would send you to
> stuff like Alliance Teleconferencing, both AT&T products.  PAT]

To my knowledge, AT&T Alliance Teleconferencing Service is accssed via
(10288) 0-700-456-1000/2000. I have never known it to work via a 1-700
access method.

Interestingly, the local LEC switches seem to be able to determine
that 0-700-456-X00X is NOT an EasyReach call. This is useful so COCOTs
can allow (if they are behaved! :) 0-700 ER700 access, and not have to
worry about lots of calls to Alliance. When Alliance 700 first
started, many LEC payphones allowed such calls to go through for free,
and I trust AT&T implemented software to prevent coin Alliance 700
access yet which allows for ER700 access.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Springtime for Swope in America
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 10:51:32 PST


In September of 1931, Gerard Swope, head of General Electric Co.,
proposed a joint administration -- a partnership, if you please -- of
private and governmental leaders to "coordinate production and
consumption."  [Reference: Murray Rothbard, _America's Great
Depression_, New York: Richardson & Snyder, 1983] Henry Harriman, a
business executive and president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce at
the time, proclaimed that "We have left the period of extreme
individualism ... business prosperity and employment will be best
maintained by an intelligently planned business structure."

R.G. Tugwell wrote of Harriman, Swope, and the rest that they
"believed that more organization was needed in American industry, more
planning, more attempt to estimate needs and set production goals.
From this, they argued that ... investments to secure the needed
investment could be encouraged."  The dean of the Harvard Business
School insisted on the necessity of a "general plan for American
Business."  His example of the benefits of such a plan was the Soviet
Union.  (Fifty-four years later, Professor Laura Tyson, writing in a
RAND Corporation report, praised the superior "investment" policies of
the Ceausescu regime in Romania.  She is now Chair of the Council of
Economic Advisors.  Lester Thurow, Dean of MIT's Sloan School of
Business, and endorser of the Clinton candidacy, said in 1989: "Can
economic command significantly compress and accelerate the growth
process?  The remarkable performance of the Soviet Union suggests that
it can.")

Quoting Rothbard: "[President Herbert] Hoover relates that Harriman
warned him that if he persisted in opposing the Swope Plan, the
business world would support Roosevelt for President, because the
latter had agreed to enact the plan.  He also reports that leading
businessmen carried out this threat."

As for Gerard Swope, he went on to help draft the legislation for
Roosevelt's National Recovery Administration.

> The policy statement provides a set of principles consistent with the
> Administration's initiative, "Technology for America's Economic
> Growth, A New Direction to Build Economic Strength," and articulates
> the roles government and industry should play.

[remainder omitted]

Landmark, eh?

It's springtime for Gerard Swope in America.


Alan T. Furman   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: Telegraphics Addresses
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 21:18:04 GMT


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

> Cable addresses and which codes (e.g. ABC, Lieber's, Ambition-Dresden)
> were used are also frequent.

While Tony was talking about 1905, telegraphics addresses still show
up from time to time.  I have in from of me a letter from Barclays
Bank (the largest bank in the UK).  At the bottom is the following:

Telex: 886002 Answerback BBLGRA G
Telegraphics address: Snowbank, London EC3V 0BB

This letter is dated March 1993!  In addition anybody who has had
dealings with the Royal Aircraft Establishment at Farnbrough will have
seen:

Telegrams: Balooning, Farnbrough


John

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

Subject: Funny Digits on Calling Card Mag Stripes
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 16:07:53 EST
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


After months of negotiation with the bank, my Visa/MasterCard merchant
account finally got set up last week and they sent me one of those
cute little terminals with a mag stripe reader.  (Anyone who'd like to
charge a subscription to the Journal of C Language Translation should
feel free to get in touch.)

Not being one to leave well enough alone, I tried running various
cards through the stripe reader to see what it found.  In nearly every
case, there turn out to be more digits on the stripe than are embossed
on the card.  Here's what turned up on my telephone calling cards:

New England Tel    660000 xxx xxx xxxx x -- 100
MCI        660032 xxx xxx xxxx x -- 300
Sprint        660033 xxx xxx xxxx x -- 300
AT&T        8555 xxx xxx xxxx xxxx 17X followed by junk

On the first three cards, the last three digits of the PIN seem not to
be on the stripe, at least not in a format my terminal can read.

My copy of ANSI X4.13-1983, which describes your basic ANSI-standard
credit card, says that identifiers starting with 6 are for retail
merchandising, and those starting with 8 were reserved at that time.
One slightly surprising thing is that the issuer ID is the three
digits after the 6, so MCI, Sprint, and the local telcos are sharing
ID 6600.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 15:17:19 -0700
From: [e-mail] (leroy Casterline)
Subject: Predictive Dialing


I have a client who wants me to research predictive dialing software
for him, so as a first step, I'm trying to gather a list of companies
who produce these programs.  If you know of a company in this
business, I would appreciate a reference.  If you have used such
software yourself, I would also appreciate your opinions of the
software/vendor.

Frank advice and words of wisdom are hereby solicited!  Please reply
by mail, and I will summarize for the net if there is interest.


Thanks in advance,


Leroy Casterline    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Danz)
Subject: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature
Date: 28 Mar 1993 23:47:57 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Since the PUC finally saw the light and Arizona has emerged from the
dark ages of telephony, we now have CallerID available.  So, I thought
I'd pass on some information about a unique CallerID display unit I
stumbled across.

It's a CDT Model 370NS, and its great feature is something called
"Block the Blocker".  Besides the (English or Spanish) display of
name, number, time, number of attempts, whether or not the call was
answered, memory for 70-90 calling numbers, etc., this little sucker
(when enabled) will say "This party will not accept blocked calls" and
disconnect.  It also records the fact that it received and blocked the
call.

The unit appears to be made (in Hong Kong??) by a company called
Colonial Data Technologies (no address given), and repaired by ICLID
Customer Service Center, 80 Pickett District Road, New Milford, CT
06776.

I bought mine from Trans-West Telephone Co, 4120 E. Winslow Ave,
Phoenix AZ 85040.  The Privacy Block feature adds about $25 to the
cost when compared to comparable units without the feature.

While this is great for knocking out the calls from the !#%*#&@*
%*&^*%$$ telemarketeers, I always assumed that legitimate callers
(friends, for example) who had blocked out caller information and
received the rejection would simply unblock and call back.  However,
I've recently discovered that, although USWest implemented CallerID
and offers Line Blocking, if someone foolishly selects line blocking,
they can't selectively unblock the CallerID information on a per call
basis.  USWest says in a flyer in the latest bill that the ability to
temporarily unblock won't be available until October 93.
Arrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!

I don't understand: if they can block on a per-call basis, why can't
they unblock on a per-call basis?  What's different in the software?


L. W. "Dan" Danz         (WA5SKM)  [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 21:21 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Ah ... Contel!


I wanted to see it in black and white before posting, but here is an
example of the kind of customer relations that will go forever into
the past when Contel is finally and completely GTE-ized.

A couple of months ago, calls to our Victorville 800 number were being
intercepted by an "out of service" recording. Somehow, the service had
been disconnected. A call to the business office (still in Victorville
until the Evil Empire takes over) revealed that the disconnect
resulted from a clerical error involved with a billing restructuring.
There were profuse apologies, an immediate reconnection, and a
followup call the next day to inform me that we would be receiving a
credit on the next bill.

The credit (now that I have the bill) was for the entire month's
service and the entire month's usage. In other words, for mistakenly
disconnecting our service, we got a totally free month. How can you
think anything but good thoughts about a company like that?

Contrast that with the time GTE erroneously disconnected my service in
Los Gatos.  It was out for an entire week while the goons tried to
figure out which finger to insert in a certain orifice. I mentioned
credit and was told that it would not be worth anyone's while to even
compute it. When I insisted, I was transferred from one person to
another (presumably in Thousand Jokes) since no one seemed to
understand the concept of credits for interrupted service (at GTE, no
less). I can imagine what the droids will be like in Plano, Texas.

Jeez, I am going to miss Contel.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine
Date: 26 Mar 1993 16:38:13 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


Reprinted from {MacWorld} -  May, 1993:

FULL-TIME FAX FAX FORWARDING

  Vomax from Macronix is a new kind of telephone answering device that
accepts and forwards voice messages and faxes over a single phone line
while you access the device from afar using a touch-tone phone or a
modem. The Vomax can also optionally display faxes on a television
screen, so you don't need to print them out. The Vomax, which stays in
your home or office, can be set to call your pager so you know when
you've received a message or a fax. The Vomax also lets callers leave
a voice-annotated fax. The answering device also puts a date-and-time
stamp on all transactions.

  The Vomax includes a fax modem that sends and receives faxes at 9600
bps and data at 2400 bps. It does not have a printer or scanner. It
can connect to a computer's serial port, but also works as a
stand-along device. It stores 20 minutes of voice messages or 40 fax
pages with its standard RAM. The memory has a battery to preserve data
in a power failure. Vomax lists for less than $400 including its
software with security features.  Macronix, [phone]

I have no affiliation with anything in this, I just found this
interesting ...

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #216
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28798;
          29 Mar 93 4:49 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19804
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 29 Mar 1993 02:11:53 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28105
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 29 Mar 1993 02:11:05 -0600
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 02:11:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #217

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 29 Mar 93 02:11:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 217

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    What the NREN Really Is (Charles Mattair)
    New CT <-> Boston Call Delivery (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    U.S Companies Clueless (Jim Gottlieb)
    New York AT&T Headquarters Building Communication (Michael Hauben)
    Leasing Lines (Jonas R. Klein)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 11:52:15 CST
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: What the NREN Really Is
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


[Moderator's Note: Mr. Mattair passed along this message to us.  PAT]

       --- Forwarded message from eniac

Yes you may forward my parody, but I would like you to attach my
Email address to your forward.  I am interested in SUPPORTING the
NREN, but I personally believe its role should be to serve all of
science and education as NSFnet does now.  Maybe you should attach
this note to your forward.

Regards,
Greg      <[e-mail]>

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

I just returned from a network meeting in San Diego today and thought
you would be interested in my interpretation of what NSF proposes for
the National Education and Research Network (NREN).  Rather than
comment specifically, I decided it would be interesting to write a
parody which relates the NREN to the construction of a national super
highway.  Doing so removes the highly technical aspects of the overall
planned functions the NREN.  Please excuse this style, but I think
it's the only way to explain my understanding of their plan in a way
that does not immediately get very technical.  It may be flawed, but
the information is based upon Hans-Werner Braun's presentation ... as
I understood it.

Greg
                      ___________________________


    National Science Foundation Develops a National Super Highway
        Greg Chartrand  <[e-mail]>

                   3/11/93


     The National Science foundation is in the process of developing
plans to build a national super highway that will advance
transportation technology in our country.  The super highway proposed
will replace the existing interstate highway system and allow speeds
of at least 240 MPH.  The following interview with NSF developers
explores their current plans.

                                   --------

ME: I understand you are building a new Super national highway(1) to
serve the purposes of advancing ground transportation throughout our
county.

NSF: Yes we are, as a part of an earlier initiative sponsored by the
then Senator Gore.  We are very excited about the technology that will
allow transportation speeds of 240 MPH(2) across the country.

ME: That sounds exciting, how will it be built?

NSF: Well, we will have this super highway designed to allow the high
speed travel(3) and it will have six entrance/exit ramps.(4)

ME: Ahh ... that doesn't sound like very many ramps, where will they
be located?

NSF: Well, several years ago we funded the establishment of six
gourmet restaurants(5) scattered across the country, we are going to
fund the building of the super highway and access ramps at the
restaurant locations.  We are however allowing the ramp contractor(6)
to build as many ramps as he wishes, at his own expense.

ME: I assume then the contractor for the highway(7) builds ramps where
ever it makes sense to optimize access.

NSF: Well, not exactly.  We are separating the contracts for the ramps
and the highway so the bidders can be very competitive.

ME: I see.  How to you plan to connect the rest of the interstate
highway system(8) to your super national highway?

NSF: Well actually, it's not part of our plan.  We are having the
highway and access ramps built for us, it's up to the states or other
government agencies to provide the highways to the access ramps.  We
will however fund a few temporary roads(9) to connect parts of the
existing interstate highway system, but don't intend to make them
permanent.  Did I forget to mention that we will be shutting down the
existing interstate highway system?(10)

ME: You mean I will no longer be able to drive across the existing
interstate highway system?

NSF: Yes, it will be destroyed.

ME: OK, let's see if I understand.  I have a state highway system for
example, and I put in a connecting highway to your super highway, and
I can now travel on it, right?

NSF: Well, no you can't.  The super highway will only be used for
vehicles that can run 240 MPH(11) and we must approve every vehicle,
destination, and trip the vehicle takes.(12) We don't want our super
highway clogged with vehicles which can only travel 70 MPH!(13)

ME: I'm confused.  You mean you want my state for example, to build an
access road to a super highway it can't generally use?

NSF: Well, yes and no.  You see we also want to encourage development
of toll roads in our country(14).  Our six high speed access ramps are
wide enough to allow parallel toll roads to be accessed as well as our
super highway.  Private road builders will be able to put in toll
roads between our access ramps, for a fee.

ME: So there will no longer be a "free" interstate highway system?

NSF: Right!

ME: Lets see if I got this straight.  You build a national super
highway that has six access ramps located where you once established
gourmet restaurants and you destroy the interstate highway system.
There are no plans to replicate the functionality of the interstate
highway systems, but you will allow private toll road builders to use
your wide access ramps and develop parallel toll roads to your super
highway.  My state or the government has to build the roads that lead
to the super highway, but once there, cannot travel on it unless the
specific vehicle can run at 240 MPH and has specific permission from
you to travel on it.

NSF: You've got it!

ME: Well then you must have a very interesting reason to put this
highway and the access ramps at these restaurant locations.

NSF: Well, you see, the gourmet food business isn't what it used to
be.  Fast food has really taken over in our country; we really need to
preserve the gourmet food business.(15) High quality restaurants
should be located right off of classy high speed highways.  We really
would like to encourage restaurant patrons to use the super highway so
they can have breakfast in San Diego and dinner in Champaign Illinois.
We will be looking for patrons who can afford to eat at multiple
restaurants and we will let them ride the highway for free!  Of course
they must have a vehicle that can go 240 MPH.(16)

ME: I'm even more confused.  How will I get across the country?

NSF: Well, if your state puts in an access road to one of our access
ramps you take it, and then exit-off on to one of the toll roads that
will be built parallel to our super highway.

ME: How fast will I be able to go?(17)

NSF: What ever the speed limit is on the toll road.

ME: What will it cost me to ride on it?

NSF: What ever the toll is.  You see, we expect that several toll
roads will be developed.  Competition!  It should keep the price down.

ME: When the super highway is empty, how will it be used?

NSF: Well, we are telling the gourmet restaurants that they should
work together even though they will be competing with each other for
customers.(18) You know, they could develop plans to send trash to
each other so they can demonstrate how fast the transportation is on
the super highway, it would be in their best interest.(19)

ME: Aren't there plans for development of high speed toll roads
already in progress by several toll road builders?  What makes you
think they will put their roads in-between your access ramps?(20)

NSF: F.O.D.

ME: What?

NSF: Field Of Dreams.  If we build it they will come.

ME: So again, tell me who pays for what?

NSF: The government funds the super highway and six access ramps.  The
toll road providers build their own roads and pays an access fee for
the ramps.  The states and other government agencies pay for any roads
necessary to get to the access ramps.  When you get on a toll road and
pay what ever the price is.

ME: And the only ones allowed to ride on the super highway are those
persons who have special vehicles that can go 240 MPH with your
specific permission, or those who can afford to frequent the gourmet
restaurants and travel at 240 MPH.  Everyone else takes the toll
roads.

NSF: Right, but don't forget the trash runs between restaurants!

ME: Oh, how silly of me!  Hmmmm.  I wonder if this is really what
Senator Gore had in mind?


FOOTNOTES
 --------

(1) NSFnet backbone project

(2) 155 megabit

(3) high speed data transfer

(4) Network Access Points (NAP's)

(5) NSF sponsored super computer centers

(6) The contractor providing the NAP's.

(7) The contractor to provide the backbone telecommunications services

(8) The Existing internet, regional, state, and other networks

(9) NSF plans to provide interim funding for NSF regionals to connect
to the NAP's.  State networks and other government agencies are on
their own.

(10) The existing NSFnet will be turned off at some point after the
new "arrangement" is in place.

(11) The Very High Speed Backbone Service (VBNS) is reserved for
applications and purposes where a demonstrated need for high speed/
capacity transmission is needed.

(12) NSF will require approval.

(13) NSF does not wish to clog the VBNS with low speed aggregate
traffic unless additions are made to the network.  70 MPH=45 Mb/s.

(14) The NSF expects commercial providers like AT&T, MCI to put
networking between NAP's.  Most of the existing NSFnet traffic would
go over these commercial networks which would have to be paid for by
the users.

(15) The usefulness of super computer systems has been grossly reduced
by the technological advances associated with very powerful Unix work
stations.  Super computers fill a diminishing niche in science and
industry.

(16) NSF is looking for potential users that can use more than one
super computer center and use the VBNS to make the application work.
Applications of this nature are a bit obscure.

(17) There are no specifications for commercial providers.

(18) NSF super computer centers are no longer funded by NSF so they
compete for commercial and non-commercial business.

(19) NSF is asking the NSF super computer centers to develop
demonstration applications which show how the network might be used.
These applications would demonstrate, and not necessarily do anything
useful.

(20) The major telecommunications suppliers will be selling similar
services this year without the complications of the NAP's.  The NAP's
primary function would allow communications between commercial vendors
which would be very useful, but it is unclear if the telecommunications
suppliers will "buy" into this concept.

                  -------- End forwarded message


Charles Mattair         (work)    [e-mail]
<standard.disclaimer>    (home)    [e-mail]

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

Date: 28-MAR-1993 01:28:45.24
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: New CT <-> Boston Call Delivery


Finally! SNET/LINX, the "B" carrier 'serving' Connecticut and Western
Mass, has finally implemented call-delivery to Boston.

SNET, which perenially sits on its hands and waits for the "A" side to
initiate new enhancements first, must have figured that since Metro
Mobile and Cell One/Boston started call-delivery, that it was about
time for them to set it up.  (But SNET isn't solely at fault -- I
suspect that NYNEX has more to do with long delays in setting any sort
of automatic roaming deal up. It took them six years to get FMR is
most of NYNEX's NY State properties, and NYC just got it a month or so
ago.  The A side had automatic roaming and full use of features
between New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut for five years prior to
the SNET/NYNEX agreement, and even still NYNEX and SNET customers can
only get calls; there is no use of features at all [although it is
technically possible to do so right away]).

Thus:

1. From my "tests", SNET customers can get calls in the Boston system
(SID 00028) automatically. Yes, you do have to hear that God-awful
message which states "Please hold on, your party is being located.
This is a recording number 1-0, SNET Cellular". Still isn't enough to
confuse your caller? Ok, after the message is over they may have to
wait 20 seconds (of silence) for you to be found! (but you WILL
eventually get calls). It's basically the same message which callers
hear when an SNET customer is in RI, NY/NJ, or Pittsfield, Mass.  I
think SNET should get rid of that - it doesn't make the system feel to
"seamless", and maybe I DON'T want people knowing I am on my
carphone!.  (When you get a call in CT or Springfield, Mass, all the
caller hears are rings, no "hold on.." message.)

2. One can also gets calls in the Franklin County, Mass system. This
is the system on I-91 north of the Springfield MA. system, but below
the Vermont line.  Previously, although it was billed and operated as
part of the SNET/LINX system, you couldn't do anything there except
place outgoing calls.  In order to receive calls, callers needed to
dial the [phone] roam port.

 From my trials, the Franklin County system now seems to be integrated
into the SNET system, as calls go through to customers in Franklin
County without the "hold on..." message. Features also seem to work
fine as well. The Franklin county system used to have a separate SID
(not 00088), and I'm stupid not to have checked to see if the SID has
now been changed to 00088. I tend to doubt it, though, as this is a
very recent improvement, and I don't think SNET has mentioned it to
their customers yet. It may still even be in a trial stage.

3. Franklin County now has Follow Me Roaming, so non-SNET customers
whose home carriers subscribe to the service can activate FMR in
Franklin County.  Since the system appears to be integrated into the
whole SNET system (noted above), roamers can activate FMR in Franklin
and get calls throughout the SNET/LINX service area, or if they have
activated in SNET territory outside of Franklin County, can now get
calls in Franklin County. BUT -- BE CAREFUL about roamer surcharges --
SNET *MIGHT* charge a separate charge for the Franklin County system
 -- check with them first! (The "A" side does this, and I'll be
posting about this when I get some more time. I suspect that due to
who "owns" the Franklin county "B" side, the same thing may occur. I
really don't know for sure, though ...)

4. SNET is now using autonomous registration. It is similar to the
system used by the "A" side systems around CT which do NOT involve the
NYC system. The NYC system allows for "timeouts", where if you are in
NY or a roamer from NY, if your phone is not detected for 30 minutes,
you are de-registered and calls will no longer be sent to you. (You
generally need to "Power ON" or hit SEND to re-register, or just "show
up" in the system if you were out of the coverage area.) The other
(non-NYC) systems don't have this timeout, so if you are a CT customer
and go to Boston, and then turn your phone off and throw it into
Boston Harbor, your calls will CONTINUE to be sent to Boston ad
infinitum. This can cause some problems in terms of voicemail and
other features which hopefully I'll post about later.

SNET's system seems to be similar to the latter. If I am active in
NYNEX/NYC, and turn my phone off and leave it off for days, calls
still come to NYC, and callers get a NYNEX "Out of Vehicle" recording.
Doesn't this tie up the temporary/dummy numbers? Is this the way an
Autoplex swtich, which both NY and CT utilize, must work? (Or for that
matter, why must a Motorolla EMX do that for the "A" side systems?) Or
can the Autoplex and/or EMX have a timeout period, and just have not
been implemented by their respective carriers?

Therefore, if there are any customers of SNET, NYNEX/NY, NYNEX/Pittsfield
(I think they have 3! :) ), NYNEX/Boston-RI, or BAMS/Eastern PA-South
Jersey, what happens to your voicemail or No-Answer-Transfer when you
leave your home system and register in another one. For example, if
you are a CT customer and drive to NYC, how can you get calls to go
back to voicemail if you do not answer? Do they drop back upon no
answer automatically? (I am told by SNET that this is not the case.)
I'd be very interested to hear about your experiences with autonomous
registration now in place.

If I may, I also have another favor to ask. Those of you who use
Follow Me Roaming -- could you try this test for me:

1. Activate FMR in a city without automatic call delivery. (I'll use
the example of a CT customer in Toronto.).

2. Assuming you get back to a city WITH automatic call delivery from
CT, let's say you land at Kennedy Airport in NY, see what happens.
I'll bet (I'm pretty sure...) that calls will still go to Toronto.

3. Try hitting *19. Does that turn FMR off and allow automatic call delivery
to resume?

That's it!

As you may have guessed, in *my* tests, it has not been the case, and
you are essentially locked out of NY or Boston, or RI, or wherever
there is automatic call delivery if you come in with FMR active to an
automatic-delivery city.  I can go into more detail about this is
anyone is interested, but right now I'm curious as to what other
happens to other customers from other systems.

Please reply via e-mail, and as I said, I'll summarize if there is
interest.


Thanks!

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: U.S Companies Clueless
Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 03:47:22 GMT


Tony Harminc <[e-mail]> writes:

> I came across the January, 1905 issue of a US magazine...of
> the several hundred US ads not one has a telephone number.

And so it continues.  In the most recently read issue of Telecom Asia,
a publication primarily aimed at telco employees in Asian countries, I
noted that not a single U.S. company included the country code in the
listing of their telephone numbers.  Even worse, many ads provided
only an 800 number (not dialable from the prospective customers' coun-
tries).


Jim Gottlieb
E-Mail: [e-mail]    In Japan: [e-mail]
V-Mail: [phone]   Fax: [phone]   Voice: 824-5454

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Hauben)
Subject: New York AT&T Headquarters Building Communication
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 08:15:30 GMT


I go to school in New York City and am writing a paper comparing two
(previously) AT&T buildings. The buildings are as follows:

    1) 195 Broadway - the old AT&T building
    and
    2) Madison & 65/6th street - the newer AT&T Building (now Sony)

I am interested in what people know about these buildings, especially
if there is any communicative aspects in the buildings. It would be
interested to know if AT&T made a point of trying to effect
communications in either the exterior design or interior design of
either building. Also of interest is if there is any communicative
difference between the two buildings. I have seen comments refering to
the Bell Labs building(s) at Murray Hill in New Jersey being designed
with communications in mind. I thus was wondering if this idea was
true of either of these two headquarters.


Thank you,

Michael Hauben    CC '95      [e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonas R Klein)
Subject: Leasing Lines
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 04:53:20 GMT


I'm trying to set up an email system at my (private) high school.  It
will run on a 386 hidden away, with two terminals attached.  One
terminal will be in each library on each campus. (There are two
campuses.)  I originally planned to connect the terminals to the
computer with phone lines, but this would require four lines, each
costing $60+ a month for basic business rates plus unlimited local
calling.

Would it be possible to rent just the copper from the telco?  A couple
of short-haul modems cost the same as the activation on the phone
lines; this seems like it could be cheaper if renting the wires is
cheap.  Two years ago our school converted to centrex from a PBX.  All
the phone lines on campus therefore run into the administration
building on my campus.  When they put in the new system, they ran a
few hundred pairs into this building and hooked them to the old wires.
Given this much information, is it possible to tell who owns the
lines?  Could we have been renting the lines from the telco all those
years we had the PBX, (Could we have rented the PBX too?) and if not,
who do they belong to now?  There's so much beaurocracy at my school
it's often hard to tell! 8^)


Thanks,

Jonas


[Moderator's Note: Centrex extensions can call each other at no charge
other than the monhtly fee for being there, or for calls which leave
the premises, which in your case would be calls terminating outside
either campus. Why not have the terminal/modem on each end simply dial
the centrex extension where the 386 is located? I assume the 386 is
also on campus with centrex extensions available to it. These lines
should be able to stay up all the time for all telco cares.  Then you
dedicate five centrex extensions in a hunt group to the 386. All calls
to the 386 would dial into this hunt group. Your terminals will have
two of these in use most of the time (unless you wish to deliberatly
turn them off nights/weekends). Two others would be available for use
by staff/students outside the premises who wished to call in to check
their mail. A fifth centrex extension would be used for your mail and
news feed to reach you and probably would be better off left out of
the hunt group and independent. (I assume you will have network mail
and news?)

By turning off the local terminals when not likely in use nights/weekends
you'd wind up with four centrex lines (or five if you count the
news/mail feed line) for use at a time when there'd be far more people
off campus wanting to call in than the other way around.  This gives
you quite a bit of flexibility and allows the 386 to be used from on
or off campus with 'accordion-like' phone service; lines available
from either direction (centrex extension to extension or off-premises
in to centex extension) as needed. To avoid abuse of the phone lines
where the terminals are located, put an autodialer on each which
seizes as soon as the modems go off hook in response to ATD <cr>. The
autodialer would dial the four digit extension where the 386 is
located. Have those two extensions toll-restricted by the local telco
so 9-level (or whatever is dialed for long distance) is blocked out,
and set for outgoing service only. Have those modems time out after
say, two minutes of inactivity and hangup.  Person wanting to use
terminal walks up, types ATD <cr> and two or three seconds later is on
the 386 ready to log in.  If they walk away and forget to log out, it
will be done automatically when the modem idles-out and disconnects.

Finally, take the five extensions terminating at the 386 and have them
toll-restricted with the exception (maybe) of the 'uucp line'. Take
the 'cu' or 'tip' or (whatever you call it) command and restrict it to
superuser and/or root on the 386. No need for people at the terminals
on campus to be able to 'cu' and get outside phone lines via the 386.
Ditto, there is no reason for people calling in from outside to be
able to 'cu' out onto the campus centrex system for whatever mischief
they might think of.  Now you have a very nice, flexible news and mail
system both on campus from two fixed locations or on campus by anyone
with a laptop and an extension phone they can dial from as well as off
campus by anyone dialing the full seven-digit number of the centrex
extension.  Simple instructions to users: at fixed locations, enter
'ATD return' and login when system responds. From other campus
locations, dial extension xxxx. From off campus, dial xxx-xxxx.  Total
telecom cost, whatever the school pays for seven centrex extensions;
and they may already have the seven to spare not in use.

Ah, but you say the 386 was not going to be on campus ... <frown> ...
it was going to be at your home, in your bedroom perhaps ... <smile >
 ...  Well, now you got a buncha 'real' phone calls getting made from
the school centrex system ... leasing the pairs would be too
expensive.  You'd be better off weaseling the school into paying for
those five centrex extensions to be terminated in your home (or
wherever) instead so the whole thing would remain transparent where
the users were concerned.  Personally, I'd opt for having the 386 at
school (if you had not already planned it that way), and convincing
school administrators to give you a key to the premises -- barring
Behavioral Problems *they* know about that you did not tell us --
which would allow you to go there on Sunday or at midnight or whenever
it was necessary to attend to your ailing system. Keep still another
'ultra-private' centrex extension up to the 386 which you have for
your personal dial-in from home whenever you need to be on the machine
at night, etc.  I wouldn't settle for just two terminals when it is
just as easy to have a full fledged campus network.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #217
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00537;
          29 Mar 93 5:35 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17967
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 29 Mar 1993 03:01:20 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05750
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 29 Mar 1993 03:00:29 -0600
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 03:00:29 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #218

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 29 Mar 93 03:00:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 218

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    ISDN in Residential Use (Lynne Gregg)
    AT&T and Directory Assistance Charges (Lynne Gregg)
    My Bad Phone Line Swapped Out For Neighbor's Good One! (Dan Ts'o)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Marc Unangst)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Brent Whitlock)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Richard J. Pauls)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Bohdan Tashchuk)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Daniel E. Ganek)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Dave Levenson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: ISDN in Residential Use
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 12:45:00 PST


Peter DaSilva wrote:

> 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.

ISDN ** is ** available in some areas and the price is very reasonable
(in view of the carrier's costs to implement).  Several corporations
and organizations in California (where ISDN is most prevalent, at
least with Pac Bell) are running telecommuting trials (work at home)
typically engineers or programmers are involved in the telecommuting
programs and involve extending TCP nets to users homes via ISDN.

I don't view this as a political issue, though it is one that impacts
the U.S.'s telecom infrastructure.  Users rely on the telecom carriers
to deliver these services.  Don't write your Congressman on this --
ring up the CEO of your local service provider.  For further details
on ISDN deployment, I'd suggest contacting the Corporation for Open
Systems, in Reston, VA.


Regards,

Lynne

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T and Directory Assistance Charges
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 14:23:00 PST


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> Moderator's Note..."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 maintenance 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.

FYI, 555-1212 does NOT get you AT&T.  AT&T has no directory assist
business here in the U.S. with exception of "800" and International
D/A.


Regards,

Lynne

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Ts'o)
Subject: My Bad Phone Line Swapped Out For Neighbor's Good One!
Date: 28 Mar 1993 21:32:18 GMT
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston,Tx


[Moderator's Note: Telecom did not get the original messages in this
thread as far as I can detirmine.  PAT]

In article <1ojbh9$[e-mail]> [e-mail].
tmc.edu (Dan Ts'o) writes:

> I just moved into a new house and have discovered that I can't
> reliably use my old modems out of the phone lines of this house.
> Although voice sounds fine, I can't reliably even establish a
> connection at 2400baud. Some modems can setup a 1200baud connection,
> but still the connection is very shaky and the sessions are frequently
> interrupted by garbage.

> I should add one other point. I know that the problem is not in my
> house wiring because I brought my T1000SE with modem to the phone
> junction box outside my house, disconnected the house wiring and
> connected up the modem directly. It still did not work.

    Thanks to everyone that responded to my query. Actually the
problem had been there for several months but I just dreaded the
battle I thought it would take, so I put it off -- until yesterday.
Actually it wasn't so bad, perhaps I was lucky ...

    I called SW Bell and placed a service call, complaining of
noise on the line. I was scheduled a service call without a hitch, and
the guy came first thing this morning. As I said, I dreaded the
expected interaction.

    The first hour was as expected:

    "What's wrong ? The line seems fine."
    "Well, my modems won't work."
    "I can't *hear* any problem on voice."
    "My modems are for voice lines."
    "Let me check a few things..."

    So he checks, measures, dials diag numbers, yanks on the house
line, climbs on the pole, checks, etc. No problems found. All "levels"
are normal, even "excellent". Luckily this guy is open and willing to
listen. So I show him my laptop/modem, try to dialout, and we hear the
failed connection. I insist that the modem works fine, that I use it
all the time from other phone lines, and that I dialed the exact same
number from as far away as Canada a few weeks ago and this
laptop/modem worked. He looks skeptical but willing to pursue the
matter a bit. He calls the "experts", they offer nothing: "measures
fine, voice sounds fine, must be fine ..." He says to do more he would
need an oscilloscope, and he hasn't touched one in ten years ...

    The guy is about to give up and has packed his ladder away. I
asked if he could bring down another "dialtone" (line) to my house. He
is willing and brings out his ladder again. He connects up my house
wiring with a neighbor's line. We run the same laptop/modem test. IT
WORKS! He says SHIT! At last something he can hang his hat on. He is
also incredulous. Sounds fine, "measures" fine, but ain't fine ?!?

    He puts things back the original way: No workie! He goes and
connects me up with a different line between my house and the local
distribution point several blocks away: No workie! Finally he gives me
the neighbor's line between the local distribution point and the
central office! (poor neighbor ...) It works. He calls it highly
abnormal ...

    Anyways, I'm happy, but I hope my neighbor doesn't use modems.
Thanks again for all y'all's help. I think I'm lucky that this guy was
at least willing to consider the "impossible" ...


Cheers,

Dan Ts'o
Div. Neuroscience       713-798-3100
Baylor College of Medicine   1 Baylor Plaza S603
Houston, TX  77030      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Date: 28 Mar 1993 23:49:44 -0500
Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI


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

> [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area
> where the tariffs were concerned.

I disagree.  The telco already lets you pass certain messages for
free; for instance, you can discover whether or not someone at the
number you're dialing is on the phone by noting whether you get a busy
signal or a ringback when you call.  You can discover whether or not a
particular number is valid for free by noting whether you get an
intercept.  You can even find out what someone's new number is for
free by calling the old number and listening to the "The number you
have dialed has been changed.  The new number is ..." intercept.

The telco chooses to structure their rates such that the only service
you can purchase is a talk path between two points for a certain
period of time.  They don't have any method for asking a predetermined
question and getting a binary answer.  If the telco felt that such a
service would be profitable, they would probably ask that the tariffs
be amended to allow them to offer such a service.  As it is, I feel
"that which is not explicitly forbidden is allowed."

To bring this back to answering machines, I am continually amazed that
they continue to use such antiquated technology as analog magnetic
tape.  How difficult/expensive would it be to put a small hard drive
(10MB or 20MB, say) inside an answering machine, and record digitized
voice on it?  At 64Kbps/sec using u-law encoding (we're shooting for
"phone-quality" here, after all), that's a bit less than 8K/sec.  A
10MB hard disk would hold a bit over 20 minutes of messages, minus a
little for housekeeping and data structures.  This would allow for
easy time/date stamping, random access to messages (including deleting
a message in the middle of the "tape"), and probably better-quality
sound as well.  If you really want to save space, use 2-bit or 3-bit
ADPCM encoding (19.2Kbps and 28.8Kbps, respectively).  A 10MB hard
drive then holds 72 minutes and 48 minutes, respectively.

I understand that some machines in use now use NVRAM or some similar
technology to store messages; however, the cost per megabyte of most
such devices is fairly high.  You could probably sell 10MB hard drives
for $30/ea., or less, if produced in sufficient quantity.  Since the
introduction of notebook and subnotebook computers, hard drives have
become a lot more rugged; the answering machine might be able to
survive being dropped on the floor while the drive was spinning.  (Of
course, you should probably only spin up the drive when you're
actually using it, both to save power and to increase durability.)

Going a bit further, you could even build in a CNID detector, and have
different OGMs for various calling numbers.  Or use an ACL to control
remote message retrieval; only calls from specified numbers can do
more than leave a message.

The technology is here; my ZyXEL U-1496E handles voice digitization
and DTMF recognition.  With a PC to control it, it becomes a very
powerful answering machine.  But the modem costs $300 and the PC,
another $400 or $500; this should be do-able for a street price in the
$150 to $200 range.


Marc Unangst, N8VRH    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 16:33:59 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


[e-mail] (Scott Coleman) writes:

> [e-mail] (Les Bartel) writes:

>> 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.

> Here are my criteria:

> * Should use two full-sized cassettes - microcassettes are more
> fragile and have lower sound quality, and two tapes means the machine
> can switch quickly from outgoing message (OGM) to recording the
> incoming message (ICM); with a 1-tape machine it has to fast-forward
> past the other ICMs on the tape before it can record the new ICM,
> which may be a long pause if you get lots of messages.

I agree with all the criteria Scott listed, except for this one.  My
preference would be all digital recording of ICM and OGM, such as the
new AT&T digital answering machine with 26 minutes of ICM recording
time.  Two full-sized cassettes would be my second choice in recording
media.

I think it would be very useful if the answering machine also had a
feature which calls a preprogrammed telephone number to announce that
a new message has been received.  This preprogrammed number should be
changeable via the DTMF remote control, as well.  It should have a
synthesized or recorded voice which would announce something to the
effect of "This is a message for (enter answering machine owner's name
here.)  A new message is waiting for you."  The telephone number of
the answering machine which has the message could be included as well,
and the answering machine could prompt for a security code if you want
to listen to the message, also.  This feature could be set to call for
each received message, on a periodic basis if any messages have been
received, or to not call at all.  I think such a feature could be
incorporated into an answering machine like the AT&T digital model
mentioned above without much increase in cost.


    * * * * * * --> 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] (Richard J. Pauls)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Date: 28 Mar 93 18:02:09 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


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

> As for which machines have these features, my Panasonic KX-T1470 has
> them all and more, and I paid just over $100 for it a couple of years
> ago. It's been rock-steady reliable as long as I've owned it.

I agree with your recommended features, but not with your choice.  I
also own the same machine and there is one real bad feature: it is
loud as hell mechanically!  It must make seven or eight loud
mechanical noises as it slams the tape haeds in and out of the two
tapes and controls the directions.  In addition, mine is not working
now (two yrs old) It keeps losing the outgoing message and when people
call they just get a beep.  I have replaced the tape and cleaned the
heads; any other suggestions?

No, get all these features, but don't get this machine unless you keep
it in the basement covered with pillows!


Rich

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

From: [e-mail] (Bohdan Tashchuk)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Organization: Fast Technology --- Beaverton, OR
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 09:56:38 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area
> where the tariffs were concerned. ... ]

I figure that toll-savers are fair game. After all, AT&T's own
machines have them. If you can't outlaw 'em, join 'em.


Bohdan

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

From: Daniel E. Ganek <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 15:06:48 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA



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

> * Toll Saver is a must (although our Moderator probably disagrees with
> this! ;-)

> [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area
> where the tariffs were concerned. What is the difference between
> saving on tolls by not answering the phone for a certain number of
> rings as a way to pass a message to the caller and not answering the
> phone for a certain number of rings until you are in a position to
> talk to the caller, ala Larry King? What is the difference between
> saving on tolls in this way or saving on tolls by passing coded
> messages in the form of bogus collect phone calls to/from non-existent
> names?  PAT]

I thought the same way until I bought an AT&T answering machine.  They
made a big deal of the toll-saver feature in the instruction.


[Moderator's Note: Well if AT&T is happy, then I'm happy.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1993 23:00:03 GMT


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

[ his wish-list for answering machine features ]

> Here are my criteria:

> * Should use two full-sized cassettes - microcassettes are more
> fragile and have lower sound quality, and two tapes means the machine
> can switch quickly from outgoing message (OGM) to recording the
> incoming message (ICM); with a 1-tape machine it has to fast-forward
> past the other ICMs on the tape before it can record the new ICM,
> which may be a long pause if you get lots of messages.

I use an AT&T answering machine with one cassette, but no such pause.
The OGM on the tape is only a backup copy.  At power-up, the OGM is
digitized from the tape and stored in solid-state memory.  The tape is
then positioned after the last incoming message, and is ready to
record a message immediately after playing the OGM from memory.

Newer AT&T answering machines are available with solid-state memory
for both the OGM and message storage.

> [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area

I agree.  AT&T's machines do include this feature ... apparently they
have chosen to sell answering machines to people who want this
feature, even if they don't sell quite as much long distance network
time to these people over the life of the machine.

[It is a grey area, but the machine is made of grey plastic.]


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 #218
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04491;
          30 Mar 93 8:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18670
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 30 Mar 1993 02:23:12 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05731
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 30 Mar 1993 02:22:31 -0600
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 02:22:31 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #219

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 30 Mar 93 02:22:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 219

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Looking For -48VDC/120VAC Inverter (Jonathan Sadler)
    The Fortran-Filter Gateway (Mark Boolootian)
    Interesting Comparison (John Higdon)
    "Secret" DTMF Voice/Data/Fax Switch? (Joel M. Hoffman)
    New Communications Magazine Program, WWCR/LTRN (Scott R. Weis)
    Telecom Products offered by Lifestyle Fascination (Bob Baxter)
    Break in to a 1A2? (David H. Close)
    Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Randy Gellens)
    Re: Help Needed Setting Up Leased Line - SCOPE-8 (Barton F. Bruce)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Sadler)
Subject: Looking For -48VDC/120VAC Inverter
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Lachman Technology, Inc., Naperville, IL
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 22:59:20 GMT


I am looking for a vendor that carries -48VDC / 120VAC inverters.  We
havn't calculated the load requirements, so a vendor with many
different products is prefered.

This will be used for powering a SUN and a router in an application
that only has TELCO battery supply.


Thanks,

Jonathan Sadler           Lachman Technology, Inc.  --  Back from the grave
[e-mail]        1901 North  Naper Blvd, Naperville, IL 60563-8895
[e-mail]        [phone] x379           FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: The Fortran-filter Gateway
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 16:24:46 -0800 (PST)


[Ran across this on the RISKS Forum and thought you might find it
amusing - mb]


 Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 23:04:46 HST
 From: "Joe Dellinger" <[e-mail]>
 Subject: The FORTRAN-hating gateway

    Several months ago we started noticing that (now and again)
the network connection to the mainland would become very very slow;
this would continue for 10-15 minutes or so, then all would suddenly
be well again.  A while after this started happening a coworker of
mine complained to me that the connection to the mainland _never_
worked anymore. It seems that he had some FORTRAN source that he
needed to copy to a machine on the mainland, but he never could
because "the network wouldn't stay up long enough for the ftp to
complete".

    Yes, it turned out that the network outages happened whenever
he attempted to ftp that _particular_ FORTRAN source file to the
mainland. We next tried compressing the file; it copied just fine then
(but unfortunately the machine on the mainland had no uncompress
program, so it was still no go).  Finally we "split" his FORTRAN
program up into very small pieces and sent them one at a time. Most of
the pieces would copy without trouble, but a few would either not go
at all or only go after many _many_ retries.

    Examining the troublesome pieces, we found they all had one
thing in common: they contained comment blocks that began and ended
with lines consisting of nothing but capital C's (his preferred
FORTRAN commenting style). At this point we started sending e-mail to
the network gurus on the mainland asking for help. Of course, they
wanted to see an example of our un-ftp-able files, so we mailed some
to them ... but our mail never got there.  Finally we got the bright
idea of simply _describing_ what the unsendable files were like. That
worked. :-) [Dare I include in this message an example of one of the
offending FORTRAN comment blocks? Probably better not!]

    Eventually we were able to piece together the story. A new
gateway had recently been installed between our part of campus and the
connection to the mainland. This gateway had GREAT difficulty
transmitting packets that contained repeated blocks of capital C's!!!!
Just a few such packets would occupy all its energies and prevent most
everything else from getting through.  At this point we complained to
the gateway manufacturer ... and were told "Oh, yes, you've hit the
repeated C's bug! We know about that already.".  Eventually we solved
the problem ... by buying new gateways from another manufacturer. (In
the manufacturer's defense I suppose an inability to propagate FORTRAN
programs might be considered a feature by some!)

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

Date: Mon, 29 Mar 93 12:52 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Interesting Comparison


Frequently on this forum we have discussed the possiblity of cable
companies getting into the telephone business and visa versa. While I
certainly have political and economic considerations about allowing
LECs in the cable business, I have some very real and solid technical
objections to ever allowing cable companies into the telephone
business.

Without so much as a word of warning, TCI (San Jose) decided to move
all of its channels around on the cable. No doubt this is in
preparation to implement a tiered rate structure to further enhance
revenues from it captive audience. But that is not the real problem.
Just after midnight, cable service went dark -- including all channels
and the digital radio service (DMX). A phone call netted a semi-rude
response: "the channels are being re-aligned" and that service would
be out until 6 AM.

Can you imagine what would happen if it took Pac*Bell six hours to cut
in a new 5ESS? Or a radio station six hours to turn up a new
transmitter? But it is even worse than that: as I write this the cable
service is still a mess and unusable. Sound for one channel's video is
heard on another channel. A&E, something I frequently watch has been
put on cable channel 11 and is now interferred with by a strong local
air signal. Another phone call reveals that they are "still working on
it".

As a reference point, GTE Mobilnet here in the Bay Area is cutting
over to a new AT&T switch at its MTSO this coming Friday -- an
operation involving hundreds of cell sites and thousands of customers
and a very complex system. CATV is horse and buggy technology by
comparison and yet the local TCI zoo appears to be in completely over
its head.

As much as I am for local dial tone competition, we should never allow
cable TV operators anywhere near this market. Divestiture was a walk
in the park compared to what disasters would befall us should the CATV
baffoons attempt to provide genuine essential services.


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


[Moderator's Note: I assume you do not render payment to them this
month on the basis that service has been irregular and mostly unusable.
Defy them to pursue the matter further.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joel M. Hoffman)
Subject: Secret DTMF Voice/Data/Fax Switch?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 03:48:43 GMT


Is there a machine that will monitor a call on the receiving end, and
listen for DTMF tones and then transfer the call appropriately?  What
I'd like is to leave a modem on my voice line in answer mode, but have
an answering machine on the line also.  When most people call, they
just get the answering machine (with no annoying message to "press 1
to leave a message, now).  But if a caller presses, say, the number 7,
the call is transfered to the modem.

I still want to be able to dial out with the modem, of course.

I suppose I could built it, but I'm not sure how  a) to make sure the
unit only responds to incoming calls, or b) how to signal the modem to
pick up the call after I transfer it.  I'm sure there are other
difficulties I haven't considered yet, too.

Any ideas?


Joel   ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott R. Weis KB2EAR)
Subject: New Communications Magazine Program, WWCR/LTRN
Date: 30 Mar 93 03:37:02 GMT
Organization: KB2EAR's Machine


Announcing the creation of Spectrum, a new international
communications and technology radio program.  Spectrum will air
Sundays beginning May 2 at 0335 UTC via WWCR Nashville, Tn USA (7435
Khz) and the Let's Talk Radio Network (Spacenet3 Transponder 21, 5.8
Mhz Sub carrier Wide Band Audio).  The program will feature produced
segments on all aspects of communications from DC. through Light! In
addition, there will be a live phone in segment with guests from the
communications scene.  The program will be hosted by Dave Marthouse, a
long time radio enthusiast and professional broadcaster and Mark
Emanuele a professional communications consultant.  Spectrum will be
underwritten by Holmdel, NJ based Overleaf International, a Data
Processing and Telecommunications Consulting Firm.  Spectrum will
originate from studios at Overleaf's Holmdel, NJ Corporate HQ.


Dave Marthouse     Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 29 Mar 93 23:06:45 -0400
From: Bob Baxter <[e-mail]>
Organization: Fraternity of Fun Folks
Subject: Telecom Products Offered by Lifestyle Fascination


Hello all,

I recently received a copy of the late Spring 1993 catalog offered by
Lifestyle Fascination. They are a mail-order company that offers
gee-whiz gasdgets, sort of like the Sharper Image.  There were several
items listed that might be of interest to Telecom'ers.  All of the
indented text is copied verbatim from their catalog.

New CallScreener I.D. turns away nuisance calls, accepts preferred
callers, records all numbers!  Here's a caller ID that is affordable
enough for home use yet has exclusive advance features that make it
ideal for small and medium sized businesses.  You can pre-program
numbers with the keyboard or enter them after a call by touching a
button.  Numbers allocated as "unwanted" light a red LED and as an
option, eliminate ring.  Preferred calls light a green LED and ring
through.  New, unprogrammed callers flash intermittent green.  All
caller numbers (with names where service permits) are displayed on the
LCD screen.

If you've been away, all numbers can be reviewed with date and time of
each call.  You can add personal or company names to any programmed
number.  All information is retained even during power out!  Displays
time, month, day when off line.  Uses 110V AC included.  Available
with 169 or 84 name & number capacity.

  #XCS494 - CallScreener Model P80A, 84 memory - $139.95
  #XCS495 - CallScreener Model P160A, 169 memory - $159.95

Protect your anonymity on the telephone by disguising your voice -
Voice Changer II.

Variable level control alters voice's pitch at the touch of a switch.
Works on both incoming and outgoing calls.  Voice Changer II is
compatible with all telephones -- works with multi-line phones and
conference calls.  Connects easily to telephone's handset and has
built-in amplifier providing volume control.  LED light indicates when
in use.  Powered by 4 AA batteries.  SImilar to units that used to
cost up to $400!

       #XTV861 - Telephone Voice Changer - $59.95

Politely end annoying, long-winded telephone conversations with Gotta
Go (tm).

The quick, easy way to terminate undesirable calls without appearing
rude or hurting the caller's feelings.  Press the button on Gotta Go
to activate the "click" sound imitating call-waiting.  This provides
the opportunity to end the call by saying "this is the call I've been
waiting for."  Comes with easy to install 12" cord.  Requires 9 volt
battery (not included).  FCC approved.

      #XGG429 - Gotta Go Call Waiting Imitator - $19.95

That's it for the products.  Lifestyle Fascination offers two numbers
to order from: Voice - [phone] / Fax - [phone].


Regards,

Phone ... [phone] / AOL...BOBTHEDJ   Bob Baxter
Internet: [e-mail] / [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: Break In to a 1A2?
Date: 30 Mar 1993 05:43:44 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


I have a customer with a 1A2 key system, three phones, and three
lines.  They want to allow a modem to share line three (since its most
likely to be used when the business is closed anyway).  So ... I
bought a simple device to insert in the cable and break out up to five
lines to modular jacks.  Each jack has four pins.  It looks like this:

                       -----------------------------\
  from wiring closet   ------/                      |
                             +----------------------+
                             |  []  []  []  []  []  |
                             +----------------------+
                             |                      /------
                             \----------------------------- to key phone

I plug in an old pulse-only phone and get dial tone on the first three
lines, just like I expect.  But, when I try to dial, I can't break
dial tone.  I've heard of parity problems with tone dialing, but I
thought pulse was pulse.  It seems as though the key phone is holding
the line off-hook concurrently with my test phone.  And, indeed, when
my test phone goes off-hook, the key phone lights the line to show its
in use.  Would it help to insure that only tip and ring are connected
in my test phone?

Can someone with more experience tell me what I'm doing wrong?
Thanks.


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

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 30 MAR 93 00:55
Subject: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge


I remember a discussion some time back regarding not paying the
Subscriber Line Access Charge (the $3.50/month imposed by the FCC) if
one has telco toll restriction enabled (no toll calls, no operator
calls, period, $2.50/mo GTE).  I thought the conclusion was that one
did not have to pay the FCC charge when toll blocking was in force.
Did I remember incorrectly?  GTE insists that one always has to pay
the FCC charge, but then I expect them to say that, true or false.


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: That is correct. The FCC subscriber line access
charge is always due and payable. The fact that your phone line is
restricted in the type of calls it can make is your choice, not that
of telco or the commission.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 01:41:05 -0500 (EST)
From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Help Needed Setting Up Leased Line - SCOPE-8
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


Jerry Krulewicz (wireworks![e-mail]) writes:

(FWIW, Email to: wireworks![e-mail] bounced.)

> Help, I am looking for a recomendation regarding a leased line.

> The situation is that I need a line from area code 908-686 exchange to
> 908-730 exchange for data use.  The 686 end is in NJ Bell territory
> but the 730 end is in "United Territory" (a Sprint Company.)

You missed an important piece of info.

Do you need ringdown VOICE part time or is this JUST DATA???

Your choice of the -E model in ZyXEL is unfortunate.

The full blown LCD model also does do four wire leased analog lines.
I.E. a data line without ringing and such. The -E may do a non-ringing
two wire leased line but I would check.

Basically you really DON'T WANT an analog line for data if you can
avoid it. A good data grade analog line WON'T have ringing.

You are in the same area code, so are stuck with state tarrifs.

I have NO IDEA what they are there. In MA or NY it is now probably
**CHEAPER** to use 56kb DDS-II than analog. The analog prices are
going UP and the DDS-II ones are dropping (we had a 20% cut in Jan in
MA).

A GOOD DDS DSU/CSU will let you rate adapt from 56kb down to lower
speeds and go ASYNC or SYNC!! In NY 56kb is the SAME PRICE as 2.4kb,
so ALWAYS install the full 56kb and rate adapt down if you must so you
can later speed up to full 56kb sync (or 57.6kb async) without paying
for telco reinstall to get a faster speed when your end equipment can
hack the faster speed.

There are MANY DDS csu/dsus that WON'T do what you want, but a
reasonable set of newer ones WILL. WATCH OUT. If you NEVER EVER need
more than 9.6, and 9.6 DDS-II is available, older non rate adapting
CSU/DSUs can do it. If 2 wire DDS-II is available up to 19.2kb (a NJ
company makes the **SPECIAL** hardware needed, so there is a chance
you have the offering in their home state), it is generally a tad
cheaper, but the equipment NEVER will go faster and probably has zero
resale value.

A new Adtran unit does double duty as Dialup ISDN or ISDN-based leased
line mode to 128kb SYNC or ASYNC (to 115.2kb), but for leased lime
mode I doubt there are any tariffs ANYWHERE - yet. It is two wire in
both modes and includes NT1 functionality for ISDN. Costs ~ double
their regular DDS-III AR four wire to 56/64 unit.

Do you need SYNC or ASYNC??

If you must go analog, all non '+' model ZyXELs now go to 16.8 sync or
async.  The rev 6.0 microcode for the '+' models goes to 19.2kb (FTP
to ftp.camb.com for eprom binaries).

Check ADTRAN's latest four wire DDS model - DSU-III AR (they are in
Huntsville).

Or for a much CHEAPER (in all ways - IMHO) unit checkout BAT electronics.

WHAT are you doing??

Are you within 10? 20? or maybe even 30? miles and line of site with
easy roof or top floor window access for *SMALL* yagi antenna? Is this
for SEVERAL YEARS?

64kb, 128kb, 256kb cost ~ $2800, $3000, $3200 per end for NON licensed
spread spectrum radio units - plug and play - NO tribute monthly to
telco!!

Add a COMPRESSING (Gandalf) ethernet bridge to each end for ~$2k and
you have a FORMITABLE multipurpose data link at NO monthly charge.

I may be off in outer space compared to what you need, but maybe you
really could use something MORE that what you asked for - be more
specific.

Again, WHAT are you doing??

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #219
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15373;
          31 Mar 93 6:01 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27484
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 31 Mar 1993 02:59:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21647
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 31 Mar 1993 02:58:35 -0600
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 02:58:35 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #220

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 31 Mar 93 02:58:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 220

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Supreme Court Lets States Ban Robot Dialers (John R. Levine)
    US Supreme Court Upholds Minnesota Telemarketing Law (John R. Grout)
    RFD: comp.std.wireless (Wesley S. Jones)
    ISDN - What For? (Hindra Irawan)
    How Can I Decode CLID Data From A Digitized Sample? (Fred Ennis)
    Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Windsor Star via Nigel Allen)
    Wiring Standards Book? (Donald Crenshaw)
    Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences (Wil Dixon)
    Panasonic Phone Programming (Javier Henderson)
    ISDN Digit Sending (Terence Cross)
    BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers (Julian Macassey)
    Telephone Rates in OZ (Robert M. Hamer)
    Screen Phones (Arthur Chandler)
    Freenet, Nixpub Lists Wanted (Craig W. Farley)
    PC-Based Telephone Accessories (Rob Knauerhase)
    Interesting Coincidence ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Supreme Court Lets States Ban Robot Dialers
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 13:34:58 EST
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


Reuters reports that on Monday the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a
state court ruling that states can regulate or ban automated telephone
dialing and announcing systems.

Minnesota has a law, similar to that in other states, that bans their
use without either a live attendant or prior consent of the callee.
Larry Hall, a guy who has one of these machines in his home in St.
Paul and used it to make as many as 30,000 calls a day, challenged the
law on First Amendment grounds.  The State Supreme Court upheld the
law, denouncing the devices and saying that the state has a
substantial interest in protecting the privacy of a person's
residence.

Hall appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the
appeal and let the Minnesota ruling stand.  His lawyers, from the
Minnesota branch of the ACLU, said in their appeal that such rulings
will put robot calling firms out of business.  (Even though I'm one of
those card-carrying ACLU members we heard so much about a few years
ago, I'd think there are better issues for them to worry about.)

The ruling apparently referred specifically to calls to residences,
not to businesses.  It's also not clear how, if at all, this affects
interstate robot junk calls.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Grout)
Subject: US Supreme Court Upholds Minnesota Telemarketing Law
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 23:06:01 GMT


By declining to review an earlier Minnesota Supreme Court ruling in
Hall vs.  State of Minnesota, the US Supreme Court today left intact a
1987 Minnesota state law which requires unsolicited computerized
telephone sales calls to be preceded by a live operator.

A similar Federal law passed in 1991 has not yet been enforced.


John R. Grout    INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 12:37:19 CST
From: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Wesley S. Jones)
Subject: RFD: comp.std.wireless
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 18:33:38 GMT


               R E Q U E S T   F O R   D I S C U S S I O N
               -------------------------------------------

This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
moderated newsgroup to discuss communication techniques, protocols and
standards for wireless computer networks.

NEWSGROUP NAME:

comp.std.wireless

STATUS:

Moderated.  This is mainly to generate a useful, readable archive.
The plan is to make posting as automatic as possible.

BACKGROUND:


There is a clear need for a shared forum for technical discussions
between members of various standards groups concerned with wireless
networks.  Several committees are dealing with the same basic
technical issues and need to track each other's evolving positions.
As the issues develop and the questions become more detailed, the
danger of needless inconsistencies increases.

PURPOSE:

The primary goal of this newsgroup would be to to promote consistency
and mutual awareness between existing committees (e.g., IEEE 802.11
and ETSI RES-10) and any future committees. The newsgroup would
expedite their deliberations by providing a convenient forum for
technical discussion between their scheduled meetings.  Additionally,
the open nature of the newsgroup would help the standardization
process by allowing people not normally connected with the standards
groups to provide their input.  The newsgroup would have no official
standing with any standards group or other organization.

A secondary goal would be to explore applications for wireless network
technology.  The emerging standards must, after all, correctly
anticipate these applications.

SCHEDULE:

  This RFD was issued on 31 March 1993 and will last for 30 days.  If a
  consensus is reached by the end of the RFD period, a Call for Votes (CFV)
  will be issued within 5 days.  The voting period will continue for a
  period of 4 work weeks, and end at 11:59PM (EST) on the 28th day.


Thank you for your participation in this RFD effort.


John McKown & Wesley S. Jones
Motorola, Inc.
Paging and Wireless Data Group


[Moderator's Note: Readers should be advised all Requests For Discussion
regards new newsgroups are conducted in news.groups. Because comp.dcom.
telecom is a related newsgroup, I am obliged to print the notice here
so everyone affected will see it ... DO NOT reply to telecom. Reply
only to news.groups and/or the author of the message.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hindra Irawan)
Subject: ISDN - What For?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 22:47:26 GMT


Hi,

I am doing a research paper for my graduate class on ISDN uses. Can
anybody post here or email me what are the possible uses of ISDN. Real
or fantasy.


Thanks,

Hindra   [e-mail]  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Please reply to Hindra direct in email.   PAT]

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

Subject: How Can I Decode CLID Data From A Digitized Sample?
From: [e-mail] (Fred Ennis)
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 17:11:57 -0500
Organization: Page 6, Ottawa, Ontario [phone]


[e-mail] (Scott Coleman) writes:

> I'm looking for an algorithm which I could use to decode Caller*ID
> data based on a digitized sample of the sound sent by the phone
> company between the first and second rings. My (admittedly limited at
> this point) understanding of CLID is that it is FSK data, similar to

The Motorola MC145447 chip does what you want, or if you want to go
really low tech, the AM7910 modem chip will also decode it down to a
serial line.

Hope that helps!


Fred Ennis, [e-mail]

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Organization: Echo Beach


The following story from {The Windsor Star} (Windsor, Ontario,
Canada), Friday, March 26, 1993 was transcribed by Chris Farrar, sysop
of the Professional Thinkers Guild BBS, [phone], in Windsor.

    A trial service by Bell Canada comes too late to save a Colchester
South farmer who bled to death because his house didn't have a working
phone, but it will save other lives, the man's sister says.

    Ronald Bigelow, 38 bled for more than 30 minutes after
accidentally shooting himself in the leg Nov. 1 outside his rural
home.  The phone was disconnected because he couldn't afford to pay
his bills, and the nearest phone was about a half-kilometer (quarter
mile) away.

    His sister, Caroline Meathrell, campaigned to get the 911 service
planned for Essex County to be available on all phones, even if
they've been disconnected because of non-payment.

    Now Windsor Residents will get that service by June under a trial
service being offered by Bell.  Meathrell received a letter Thursday
outlining the field trial, which will use specialized computer
programming to offer the service.  If successful, the service may be
expanded into other areas.

    "It's too bad it wasn't in place for my brother," Meathrell said
Thursday from her Windsor home.  "It will save someone else's live --
or a few lives."

    Colchester South police said Bigelow could have survived the wound
if the phone had been working.

    In October, a coroner's jury looking into the death of a Mersea
Township woman and her son was told that no one could call the fire
department from a burning trailer because the phone had been
disconnected.  Karen Hope, 29, and Gary Hope, 6, died when their
mobile home on Highway 77 caught fire in January 1992.

    Yvette Meloche, a Bell service representative in Windsor, said the
service will only be available in the future to areas serviced by
electronic equipment.

    Under the trial service, a recording will tell people why service
has been discontinued and offer three options: the ability to dial 0
for the operator; 911 for emergency service, if available; or 611 for
Bell's repair office. The trial service will run in homes served by
Bell's Goyeau Street centre.


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario     [e-mail]
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario   416-629-7000/629-7044


[Moderator's Note: I may be considered cold-hearted, but I don't
understand why anyone should be entitled to *any* phone services if
they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their
own car was repossessed because they did not pay for it just in case
they need to go somewhere in a hurry? You say telco is rich and can
afford it ... so can the automobile industry. If some charitable group
wants to pay the price so everyone's phone can be connected at all
times, that would be a fine idea. If telco is being forced to foot the
bill, that is not okay.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (DONALD CRENSHAW)
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 13:47:00 -0600
Subject: Wiring Standards Book
Organization: The Dark Knight's Table BBS:  Minnetonka, MN (Free!)


> I would like to learn more about wiring standards for telecom
> applications.  I want know what RJ-11, RJ-14, RJ-45 and all these
> other standards actually say.  I don't mind buying these either.

> Can someone send me some references as a sort of required reading
> list?

One hot document (which I have on my desk right now is ANSI/EIA/TIA-
568-1991 "Commercial Building Telecommunications Wiring Standard".  It
addresses most specifically eight conductor connectors, i.e.  RJ-45.
More info on connectors is in TIA/EIA/TSB40.  I've not seen that one.

To get this document which includes lots about unshielded twisted
pair, shielded twisted pair, coax and optical fiber, call Global
Engineering Doucments at 1-800-854-7179.  Should cost $25-30 US.  You
might also try EIA at 202-457-4900.


Hope this helps,

-DON
 * Origin: The Igloo BBS 612-574-0037 (1:282/4018) (1:282/4018)
 | The Dark Knight's Table BBS [phone] Minnetonka, MN USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Wil Dixon)
Subject: Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 21:29:23 GMT


Are there any users who have implemented some form of ATM out there?
If so, I would like to know what you are doing.


Wil  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: As we just finished a thread on blizzard and ATM
(as in cash machine) breakdowns, I think it fair to say Wil is most
likely referring to the 'other meaning' of ATM!  :)    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Panasonic Phone Programming
Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA
Date: 30 Mar 93 21:28:59 PST


Hi there,

I bought a used Panasonic Easa-Phone KX-T3130 phone at a garage sale
the other day, and I've been trying to figure out how to program
numbers into the memories, without any luck. Obviously, I don't have
the manual for it.

I would like to get in touch with other netters who know how to
program this phone.


Thanks!

Javier Henderson | [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 13:50:37 BST
From: [e-mail] (Terence Cross)
Subject: ISDN Digit Sending


I am inquiring about digit sending from ISDN telephone sets, when a
*person* is dialing.

Do they send the digits on to the CO one digit at a time as the person
dials?  Do they have instead an inter-digit timeout (e.g two seconds),
and only send the digits on when no more digits are being entered or
something else?


Thanks,

Terence Cross

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers
Organization: The hole in the wall. Hollywood
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 16:49:06 GMT


On page 7 of the March 20 (1993) issue of the {Economist} is a table
of international call prices.

    According to the table, U.S. to U.K. calls (apparently via
AT&T) are $3.42 per minute.

    Calls from the U.K. to the U.S. are $1.88 (apparently via BT).
So I decided to get a BT or Mercury credit card so I could call to the
U.K at U.K. rates.

    Does anyone have any info on this?

    A start would be the U.S. 800 numbers to contact the Mercury
or BT "call home" services. They could probably put me in touch with
sales.


Julian Macassey, N6ARE  [e-mail] Voice: [phone]
Paper Mail: 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue, Hollywood, California 90046-7142


[Moderator's Note: The typical call from the USA to the UK is *not* $3.42
per minute!  It is much less. I think they got their tables wrong. I
think less than a dollar a minute is more typical.  PAT]

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

Date: 30 Mar 1993 10:51:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert M. Hamer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone Rates in OZ


I'm going to Australia in late June - early July.  If there are any
TELECOM Digest readers there, can you tell me what the rates are to
call the US from there (Day, night, however it is broken down).  I'm
trying to decide if it'll be cheaper to just call from there or to use
some sort of USA Direct type program.  Thanks.

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

Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 08:02:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Arthur Chandler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Screen Phones


  Several companies are getting into the screen-phone (also called,
somewhat pretentiously, "transaction phones) act. These nifty little
items consist of a telephone, a small LCD screen, and an extendable
keyboard for entering data. Philips is selling a 5 inch, 16-line
display model for (gasp) $639.  AT&T was planning to market a version
of their own, but shelved the idea when their market research folks
indicated that too few people would be willing to shell out $500 for a
phone that, at this point, will basically let you check your bank
balances at some banks and let you order airline tickets from some
companies.Though AT&T indicated that they might drop the price of
their unit to $200, there seems to be little indication that a $200
price tag will attract sufficient numbers to make the venture
profitable.

  One company, Online Resources in Virginia, is marketing a $89 unit
that displays only 4 lines of information. The price seems right, and
several banks are trying the device out with their customers. One
Maryland bank even offers customers a deal of $69 for the phone, plus
$6.95 for the service.  So far, more than 3,000 customers have signed
up.

  The screen phone seems to me to have more potential than the
languishing videophone idea.  About a year ago I participated in an
independent market survey that was gathering customer response to
several videophone models.  They were all terrible.  Even if they had
been wonderful, I still came away with uneasy feelings about privacy
and inadvertant use (i.e., leaving the video on and answering the
phone after just getting out of the shower).

  But the screen phone still seems to me to be an interim technology.
As more and more people purchase computers and use them as
communications devices, screen-phones will take their place alongside
of 8-track tapes as a quaint technology of a brief era.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Freenet, Nixpub Listings Wanted
Organization: Rockwell International
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 16:23:34 GMT


Moderator,

You responded to a recent inquiry about Internet access from home that
the user should look into Freenet sites and check the nixpub files.
Where is a list of Freenet sites?  Where is the nixpub (file, I
presume) located?

Thanks for responding to such basic questions.


Craig Farley, Ph.D.    [e-mail]
Rockwell International Science Center
1049 Camino dos Rios   Thousand Oaks, CA 91360


[Moderator's Note: I don't know where nixpub is kept these days. Can
anyone advise Craig?  Regards Freenet, the one which comes immediatly
to mind is cleveland.freenet.edu. There are lots of people at that
site on the telecom mailing list. I'll bet [e-mail]
would be able to supply details on sites and things like his own indial
numbers, etc.  PAT]

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

From: Rob Knauerhase <[e-mail]>
Subject: PC-Based Telephone Accessories
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 12:04:34 CST
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Illinois @ Urbana


I seem to remember the mention in comp.dcom.telecom of several
different nifty-neato devices which use a personal computer to do
something phone-related.  As is obvious from this description, I'm
vague enough on the memory that searching the archives would be tough.

So, I'm soliciting pointers to solutions (or descriptions of hacks) for:

  - call direction/voice menu (i.e. "Press 1 for this, 2 for that, etc.")
  - password to ring phone (i.e. "Enter code to talk to Rob, else get
    answering machine")
  - Caller-ID (usually a caller-ID box with a serial port?)
  - control of things via BSR or something similar (i.e. call up and
    turn on a coffeepot)
  - anything else interesting that I am forgetting right now.

Please address replies to me ([e-mail]), unless you think
the rest of the Digest would be interested.  If there is sufficient
response, I will prepare a summary either for posting or for placement
in the archives.


Thanks,

Rob Knauerhase, University of Illinois @ Urbana, Dept. of Computer Science

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Interesting Coincidence
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 11:52:38 PST


Today I received a proxy form for the shares of ATT that I owned.  I
thought t that it was interesting that I am instructed to mail the
completed proxy form to PO Box 976 in New York.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #220
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18613;
          31 Mar 93 7:29 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26046
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 31 Mar 1993 04:10:13 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27098
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 31 Mar 1993 04:09:21 -0600
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 04:09:21 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #221

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 31 Mar 93 04:09:15 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 221

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Personal Communications Services and New Lobby Group (TAP via Nigel Allen)
    Telepoint Phone Penetration in Singapore (Ang Peng Hwa)
    100 Mbits And Connectors (Marco A. Pinones)
    US NPA/NXX List (Greg Trotter)
    Two-Wire Repeater Suggestions (Dave Levenson)
    Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Mark D. Austin)
    Re: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine (David H. Close)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Joel Snyder)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine (Wil Dixon)
    Re: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature ([e-mail])
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93 (Mike McNally)
    Re: Break In to a 1A2? (Dale O. Miller)
    Re: Break In to a 1A2? (Ed Greenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: Personal Communications Services and New Lobby Group
Organization: The Gashlycrumb Tinies


James Love ([e-mail]) of the Taxpayer Assets Project posted
the following message to the PROG-PUBS mailing list.

Taxpayer Assets Project
Information Policy Note
March 29, 1993

CLINTON TRANSITION LEADER FOR THE FCC, RON PLESSER, SPEARHEADS
INDUSTRY GROUP TO LOBBY FOR FCC APPROVAL OF NEW SPECTRUM ALLOCATION
FOR "PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES."

Before the ink could dry on his new business cards, Ron Plesser has
cashed in on his recent position as director of the Clinton
Administration transition team for the FCC.  According to a March 10,
1993 press release, Plesser is the general counsel for PCS Action,
Inc, a high powered industry lobbying group which is promoting a rapid
allocation of spectrum for new wireless telecommunications
technologies for voice and data, while limiting competition in
individual markets.

Personal Communications Services (PCS) is the term used to describe a
family of digital telecommunications technologies ranging from
"handheld telephones to cutting-edge wireless computing and data
transmission devices."  The industry group claims the market for such
services could top $200 billion by the year 2010.

In addition to general counsel Ron Plesser, who has no previous
experience in common carrier regulation, PCS Action has chosen Podesta
and Associates to handle the group's public relations, a firm headed
by Tony Podesta.  John Podesta, Tony's brother and a former partner in
the firm, is currently the staff secretary for President Clinton.

We were surprised if not amazed to learn of Ron Plesser's new lobbying
efforts, because the Clinton transition team had announced ethics
policies which reportedly prohibited lobbying agencies for six months.

The members of PCS Action are an impressive collection of firms
involved in cellular telephone, telephone, broadcast television, cable
television, and publishing businesses, including:

APC/Washington Post Company
Associated PCN Company
Cox Enterprises, Inc.
Crown Media
MCI Communications
Northern Telecom
Omnipoint Communications, Inc.
Providence Journal Co.
Qualcomm, Inc.
Times Mirror Cable Television
Time Warner Telecommunications.

A major element of the PCS Action lobbying effort is to limit the
number of PCS licenses in each market.  According to the group, "more
than two PCS licenses would over-saturate potential markets and
marginalize this new service."  The group also wants to insure that
PCS licenses should be "well-qualified" to operate these businesses,
suggesting some non-market mechanism to screen out competitors for the
PCS licenses.


Excerpt from:  Washington Telecom Week; March 26, 1993

PLESSER SPELLS OUT MOST CONTENTIOUS ISSUES FACING NEW PCS COALITION,
by Jim Rogers

     Two highly contentious issues face a newly formed coalition of
communications firms that is trying to press its own agenda in the
debate surrounding Personal Communications Services, according to
Ronald Plesser, the organization's general counsel.

     Plesser, who also served as the Clinton Administration's point
man for the transition effort now under way at the Federal
Communications Commission, told Washington Telecom Week that getting
the FCC to agree to limit PCS licenses to no more than two or three
per major market and also agreeing to authorize 40 MHz of spectrum for
each license will be the coalition's two toughest challenges ...

     On the issue of limiting the number of licenses in each major
market, Plesser said that the coalition's position "is not just the
question of two or three PCS licenses."

     "You already have two cellular licenses in each market," he said.
"If you keep PCS to two licenses, you're probably looking at six or
seven competitors in each market. If you give PCS five or six licenses
per market, then you're talking about 11 or 12 competitors.

     "What the coalition is saying, is that it's not certain that with
a higher level of competitors you can get the kind of return necessary
to build efficient PCS systems. We are concerned that if there are too
many competitive licenses in the area, it will force development of
PCS to the other side of the competitive curve and there won't be
enough left to support anybody," Plesser said.

     "This is no milk toast issue at all," he continued. "lt's a
fairly tough issue and I think the coalition's members are convinced
that it is critical ... that if this thing goes to five or six PCS
licenses per market, that will marginalize and dilute the service."


James Love, Director              voice     215/658-0880
Taxpayer Assets Project           fax       call
12 Church Road                    internet  [e-mail]
Ardmore, PA  19003

                      -----------

Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada     [e-mail]
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario    416-629-7000/629-7044

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

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 93 09:55:20 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telepoint Phone Penetration in Singapore


Singapore Telecom has attracted more than 24,000 subscribers to its
zonephone or CT2 service during the first year of operation, making it
one of the most successful marketeers of the new technology [in the
world].

The other top marketeer is Hong Kong's Hutchison Paging, which managed
about 50,000 subscribers in the first 12 months, CT2 developer
Motorola said in a statement.

Hong Jong's population is about double Singapore's three million.

Telecom introduced the zonephone, often called the "poor man's
handphone" because of its limited functions and lower costs, last
January.

The launch attracted 2,500 subscribers in the first two days.

Like the handphone, the pocket-sized zonephone is portable but calls
are restricted to the 4,000 spots in Singapore where the base stations
are set up.

The phones cannot receive calls, unless they are used at home or in
the office together with a home base unit. As such, users usually
combine the phone with pagers.

Telecom had 506,752 pager subscribers and 112,800 cellular phone
subscribers as at end-January, a spokesman said.

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

From: [e-mail] (Marco A. Pinones I.)
Subject: 100 Mbits and Connectors
Date: 31 Mar 1993 05:21:50 GMT
Organization: ITESM, Campus Monterrey


We're testing some products for our lans and wans.  When using twisted
pair, they say it can go up to 100 Mbits.  Is this for real with the
connectors from Panduit, ModTap or Simmons? I mean, is there any lose
when connecting the pair to the final connector?  Thanks in advance
for any advice.   I'm talking about RJ45 conns.


Mpinones

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

Subject: US NPA/NXX List
From: [e-mail] (Greg Trotter)
Date: 30 Mar 93 13:08:28 -0600
Organization: Gallifrey - Home of the Timelords


I noticed in the Telecom Archives that there is a list of Canadian
NPA/NXXs, but none for the United States. Is there a source for this,
or is it the exclusive domain of Bellcore?


Greg Trotter    Norman, Oklahoma  Internet: [e-mail]
Fidonet: 1:147/63 Treknet: 87:6012/8009    | I don't even represent me.


[Moderator's Note: Anyone is free to copy the list of NPA/NXX codes,
but the main reason it has never been in the Telecom Archives has been
the sheer volume of data, and that it constantly is changing and being
updated with new prefixes opening, etc. When the transition (for me)
of part time caretaker to full time caretaker is finished, hopefully
by this summer, the Archives is one place which definitly needs a lot
of work done.  We'll eventually have these files; some readers have
them now, basically pending me working out a place to put them.  For
now, call 10288-0 and ask the operator for the ones you need.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Two-Wire Repeater Suggestions
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 15:28:05 GMT


I'm using a Panasonic KX-T123211 small-business PBX, with two
off-premises station lines.  These lines are connected using the OPX
accessories supplied by Panasonic for the purpose.  They connect to a
couple of OSNA lines leased from NJ Bell, as specified by Panasonic.

The OSNA lines produce 4.0 dB of loss.  This is the loss specified in
the tariff for this service.  The system works fine for calls between
on- and off-premises PBX stations.  Outside (trunk) calls to OPX
stations need more volume.  It is useable, but both ends have to
strain to hear.

Can anybody suggest a two-wire voice frequency repeater which passes
loop supervision, AC ringing, and will add about 4.0 dB of gain in
each direction?


Thanks!


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] (Mark D. Austin)
Subject: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Organization: Computer Engineering Group, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA 30332-0250
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 19:50:46 GMT


Greetings,

I remember reading awhile back that the old public phone systems used
to allow free calls if a certain frequency was heard in the receiver.
I think this frequency used to be the same one that used to come out
of a whistle distrbuted in Captain Crunch cereal. Does anyone remember
this story? I was trying to tell this story to a friend who did not
believe me. Could anyone verify and perhaps provide some more details
on this amusing story?


Thanks in advance,

Mark Austin        Georgia Tech,  Wireless Communications Group
School of Electrical Engineering, Atlanta, GA  30332-0250
E-MAIL: [e-mail]   PHONE:  [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Captain Crunch reads the Digest from time to time,
and perhaps if this message is brought to his attention, he will favor
us with a reply. I'd love to hear from him again. Yes Mark, there is a
phone enthusiast who goes by that handle. And yes, there are tones
which do not appear on touch tone pads which if sounded in the phone
cause certain reactions from the network such as you describe. Very
modern phone systems, I'm told, listen for those tones and the context
in which they are heard: they should *never* be heard from the user
side of the network, for example, and if they are, the machine hurries
to tell its keepers about the intruder(s). If those tones are heard
from the network side of things, then all is well.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: Re: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine
Date: 31 Mar 1993 05:13:54 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


[e-mail] (Justin Leavens) writes about the new Vomax.

A little over a year ago I read where partially defective RAM chips
were going to become available at very low prices.  The author
predicted that these would work very well in answering machines since
an occasional lost bit in voice recording would not be noticeable.  He
predicted that, by now, we should have seen lots of very high capacity
machines using low quality RAMs.  Does anyone know if the Vomax is the
first of the breed?  40 fax pages of storage implies quite a lot of
RAM ...


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


[Moderator's Note: I'd be interested in knowing how Ameritech (for
example) operates its 'Fax Mailbox' service. Like a voicemail service,
it stores a seemingly infinite number of fax messages for people who
subscribe to the service and pick up their faxes on the fly, from the
public machine in the hotel lobby, etc. It must take a lot of storage
space. I subscribe to the 'Overflow Mailbox' part. My fax line has
'forward on busy/no answer' to the mailbox, then Ameritech starts
trying to pass the message to me and keeps trying until the line is
open or answered.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joel M-for-Vnews Snyder)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Date: 30 Mar 1993 10:46 MST
Organization: Opus One
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brent
Whitlock) writes ...

> I think it would be very useful if the answering machine also had a
> feature which calls a preprogrammed telephone number to announce that
> a new message has been received.

Buy the Sony IT-A4000.  It's an all-digital speakerphone/answering
machine (16 minutes of messages memory).  It has all the features of a
good machine: three voice mail boxes (i.e., "press *1 to leave a
message for bill, *2 for ..."), last-number-redial, two kinds of speed
dialing (one-button and multi-button), programmable outgoing message,
announce message (announce but take no message), and a third for what
you asked for.  When a message comes in, it can call any number, say
something (either the default, or you can create one, like, "please
call joel to the phone"), accept a security code, and then you can
DTMF your way to happiness.

It also has a call timer, something I find really useful (plus a
clock, of course).

There are only a couple of things I'd like to be able to do with it
that I can't.  One is I can't FF/REW in a single message.  I can skip,
repeat, and all that, but I can't go back just a few seconds to catch
a hastily spoken phone number.  Another thing: I can't forward a
message from one voice mail box to another.  But otherwise, it's an
incredible machine.  $200 from either J&R (lousy customer service, no
return policy) or Crutchfield (incredible customer service, fantastic
return policy).


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

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

From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Reply-To: Monty Solomon <roscom![e-mail]>
Organization: Proponent
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 22:39:05 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brent
Whitlock) writes:

> I think it would be very useful if the answering machine also had a
> feature which calls a preprogrammed telephone number to announce that
> a new message has been received.  This preprogrammed number should be
> changeable via the DTMF remote control, as well.  It should have a
> synthesized or recorded voice which would announce something to the
> effect of "This is a message for (enter answering machine owner's name
> here.)

Several of the Panasonic answering machines with integral telephones
have this feature which they call Message Transfer.  You compose your
own transfer OGM and program the transfer OGM phone number.  You can
turn this feature on/off and change the transfer phone number
remotely.  The machine will call the transfer phone number and play
the transfer OGM and listen for your code.  At this point the machine
works the same way as if you had called it.

It will retry the transfer phone number up to 15 times within a
ten-minute period if it reaches a busy signal.  It can also be
configured to dial a pager.


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 07:41:15 PST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine


In the posting it is mentioned that the system works over a single
voice line. Does it require three way calling? Does it have provisions
for call waiting?


Wil Dixon

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Ptasnik)
Subject: Re: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature
Date: 30 Mar 1993 17:02:39 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


[e-mail] (Dan Danz) writes:

> I've recently discovered that, although USWest implemented CallerID
> and offers Line Blocking, if someone foolishly selects line blocking,
> they can't selectively unblock the CallerID information on a per call
> basis.  USWest says in a flyer in the latest bill that the ability to
> temporarily unblock won't be available until October 93.
> Arrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!

> I don't understand: if they can block on a per-call basis, why can't
> they unblock on a per-call basis?  What's different in the software?

Well -- at the very least it might encourage people to give up
per-line blocking ;-).  Pretty clever ploy on the part of US West if
that is the case.  US West seems to feel that the fewer lines that
have per-line blocking, the more value their service will have, the
more bucks they can make, etc.  So why not just implement per-line
blocking in a silly and inconvenient way.  Perhaps I'm just too
paranoid.


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

Dave P    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 02:14:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature


In Florida, when the police were investigating a burglary that
happened to me, I got several calls from detectives.  I always knew
when it was one of them because it was the only blocked calls I ever
got.  I wonder how they would react to a device such as the one
mentioned in the referenced article.


Ron    ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 15:48:46 GMT


Pat writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Perhaps they remembered thirty years ago when banks
> were only open 9 AM to 2 PM (or 3 PM) Monday through Friday, and that
> is when you went to get a check cashed or make deposits, etc. If you
> have ever heard the expression 'bankers hours' (as in 'she works
> bankers hours'), that is where the expression came from.  PAT]

The public's idea of bankers hours was based, as Pat correctly says,
on the hours the bank was open to the public.  The reason, of course,
is that every day the bank is required to post the day's transactions
to its books, verify that the vault inventory, and settle up with
corresponding banks.  In the days before automation, this was a
time-consuming process.  New transactions had to wait until the
process was finished (atomic database update transactions!).  The bank
had a daily 'close', usually at about 2:00pm.  From then until the end
of normal office hours, the bank employees were doing their database
transactions.

Modern telecommunications and computer technology enables today's
banks to remain open to the public far longer.  They still have a
daily close, and a daily update of their accounts, but it usually
happens in the middle of the night, and far from the offices where the
public deals with the bank.  The inter-bank settlements happen over
wires (see, Pat, this article is not totally irrelevant to the group!)
and as a 'background' operation.

(The banks who use our computer products talk to each other from time
to time all day long, using UUCP.)


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

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

From: vail![e-mail] (Mike McNally)
Subject: Re: Telecom and the Blizzard of '93
Date: 30 Mar 93 20:31:20 GMT


[e-mail] (Ole J. Jacobsen) writes:

>I got stuck ... problems getting through to United Airlines.

A friend from Providence RI was stranded here in Austin.  On Sunday,
he spent a good deal of time trying to get through to the automated
flight information line United runs.  On most of the (rare) occasions
he'd get through to the initial menu, the transfer to the system would
itself get a busy signal.

It turns out that he (and anybody else) was wasting their time anyway.
United didn't (doesn't?) bother to update the schedule information for
flights until about an hour before the "book" time, even though it was
clear that *every* flight in/out of the east coast (and probably
everywhere else) would be significantly delayed or possibly canceled.
(A United person at the Austin airport told my friend this when he
showed up and only then learned that his flight was cancelled; the
robophone system had told him it was on time.)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Break In to a 1A2?
From: [e-mail]
Date: 30 Mar 93 07:14:25 GMT
Organization: University of Arkansas at Little Rock


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(David H. Close) writes:

> I have a customer with a 1A2 key system, three phones, and three
> lines.  They want to allow a modem to share line three

> I plug in an old pulse-only phone and get dial tone on the first three
> lines, just like I expect.  But, when I try to dial, I can't break
> dial tone.

If memory serves, the key system needs to know the phone is offhook by
a short across the second pair.  When I used a standard phone, I used
one set of the switchhook closures to provide that signal.  I'm sure
the more knowledgeable can say exactly why, but I believe it had
something to do with the hold feature.


Dale O. Miller - Systems Programmer
University of Arkansas at Little Rock [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 30 Mar 93 10:59:19 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Break In to a 1A2?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)


Gee, I'd think that somebody from Caltech would know about A-lead, but
then, it's been a while for most of us ...

You need to manage the second pair on the jack properly.  That is to
say you must short that pair before you pick up the phone (or modem)
and open it AFTER you hang up.  If you open it BEFORE you hang up,
you'll put the line on hold.  THat's what the red HOLD button does.
It breaks the A-Lead pair BEFORE popping up the line button breaking
the line.

Your modem should be able to do this.  Look in the back of the book
for a parameter for "multi-line phone systems," for "A-lead" or
something like that.


Edward W. Greenberg  | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
1600 Stokes St. #24  | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95126  | Fax:  [phone] | Ham Radio: KM6CG

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #221
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02583;
          1 Apr 93 5:08 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31372
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 02:50:36 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21322
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 02:49:46 -0600
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 02:49:46 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #222

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 1 Apr 93 02:49:45 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 222

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    San Francisco Radio Pioneer Passes Away (John Higdon)
    Cap'n Crunch Speaks (John Draper)
    Akron BBS Sting (Akron Beacon Journal via Nigel Allen)
    Telephone Messages on Your Workstation (Rafael Furst)
    Choke Area Code? (Dave Leibold)
    Practice Safe Cell Phoning (Dave Leibold)
    US Justice Department and TDDs (US-DOJ Press Release via Nigel Allen)
    Switch Variances in Calling Number Delivery (Mike Riddle)
    Ameritech Faxtra Service (Brent Capps)
    Going to the Hogs (Don Kimberlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 23:02 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: San Francisco Radio Pioneer Passes Away


Edward Davis, a San Francisco radio pioneer and institution in his own
right, died yesterday at his home in Sausalito after a long bout with
cancer.

Ed, a self-declared graduate of "Hell's Kitchen" in New York, came to
San Francisco in the 1940s. Along with two partners, he put KDFC on
the air on a shoestring. Since that time KDFC, along with an AM station
acquired in the 1950s, has continuously broadcast a program of
classical music. Ed was a major factor in the FCC's "classical music
exemption" for AM/FM combos when simulcasting was prohibited in the
1960s.

Many in the Bay Area started their radio careers at KDFC as board
operators. Others have worked in other capacities at what can be best
described as an efficient "minimalist" operation. Ed received great
satisfaction in providing a quality product with the most compact
staff and minimal equipment. For many years the station consisted of a
bank of Revox tape recorders and a minimum-wage employee pressing
"start" buttons in a room several feet from the FM transmitter itself.

Even when KDFC became successful, Ed Davis refused to give in to
conventional station operation practices. To this day, the station has
a full-time staff of three people: one each for sales, operations, and
engineering. Nearly ten years ago, he moved the operation from the
small room at the mountaintop transmitter site to a beautiful restored
Victorian in Pacific Heights. Here, the station became automated "for
real", reducing the already small part-time staff.

With a station that literally ran itself, Ed branched out by offering
"classical music packages" to stations around the country. In essence,
he was offering his secret to providing the most for the least.
Included was a business plan, equipment recommendations, and digital
tapes with the classical programming itself. Several years ago, he and
some trusted employees purchased a station in Anchorage which has
proven to be surprisingly popular.

I have been associated in one capacity or another with Ed Davis since
the early 1970s. I have provided him with engineering service and he
has provided me with much support, admonishment, and advice. He will
be missed by me and by many who have had the pleasure of knowing this
great broadcaster and fine human being.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (John Draper)
Subject: Cap'n Crunch Speaks
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 20:31:15 GMT


Mark writes:

> I remember reading awhile back that the old public phone systems used
> to allow free calls if a certain frequency was heard in the receiver.
> I think this frequency used to be the same one that used to come out
> of a whistle distrbuted in Captain Crunch cereal. Does anyone remember
> this story? I was trying to tell this story to a friend who did not
> believe me. Could anyone verify and perhaps provide some more details
> on this amusing story?

Well,  here it is from the "Horses mouth" ...

Turning the "Way back machine" to 1968 or earlier, the long distance
phone system used in-band signalling at 2600 Hz.  During this time,
ATT was converting from SF (Pulse dialing with 2600 Hz pulses) to MF
(Multi-frequency), NOT associated with touch tones.

By 1968, about 90% of USA phone network was MF capable, but there were
some exchanges (Little Rock Ark to be exact) that still responded to
SF signalling.

The Cap'n Crunch whistle, when a certain hole was glued, produced 2600
Hz tone, and it was possible (but with great skill) to dial an 800
number terminating into Little Rock, sending a long burst of 2600 Hz
which cleared down from the 800 number, and set you on a long distance
trunk.  At that time, it was possible to "pulse dial" using the Cap'n
Crunch whistle.  Shortly after 1971 (About the time the {Esquire}
article was released), the Little Rock tandom office converted to MF.
Thus was how I got the name Cap'n Crunch.

Now, almost ALL long distance trunk switching is done "in band" and
will NOT respond to ANY tones.  Although some 800 numbers now
terminate overseas and I'm told that SOME trunks will respond to
in-band signaling, but I'm sure those are being watched carefully, and
most are probably filtered.  But even if it was possible to punch
through the filter, they would no doubt be using C5 signaling which is
more advanced and using a more complex handshaking mechanism.  Tone
tolerances and puse repitation rate are also critical, so ordinary
blue boxes would not be able to produce the rapid pulses necessary to
permit sucessfull switching.  But I'm told it's possible.

Hope this helps ...


John D.


[Moderator's Note: Thanks very much for writing us and responding.  PAT]

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: Akron BBS Sting Update 3
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


This message was originally posted in misc.activism.progressive by
David Lehrer ([e-mail]). Contact Mr. Lehrer, not the
poster, for further information.

"Munroe Falls carryout"

The following is an editorial published in the {Akron Beacon Journal}
on Wednesday, March 24, 1993. This editorial is copyrighted by the
{Akron Beacon Journal}, and commercial use or resale of this article is
forbidden. Permission to post this editorial in its entirety has been
generously granted by Mr. David B. Cooper, Associate Editor.

Background:

The 9-month long Mark Lehrer/Akron Anomaly BBS felony trial situation
terminated on March 8, 1993.

Topic: Published articles about the Akron Anomaly BBS 'sting' directed
by Munroe Falls, Ohio police chief Steve Stahl on June 18, 1992. All
published articles concerning this 'sting' and associated battles will
be distributed immediately upon permission being granted by the
author(s).

Responses are encouraged!

 From the Beacon: "We welcome your letters and the chance to publish
as many as possible."
  "We ask that letters be original, concise and legible and bear
the writer's full signature, address and daytime phone number."
 "All letters are subject to editing. We withhold names only for
good reason. The same conditions apply to letters sent by fax."
  "Please address your letters to Voice of the People, Akron
Beacon Journal, P.O. Box 640, Akron, Ohio 44309-0640."
  "If you want to send your letter by fax, use our fax number:
[phone]."


David Lehrer


 07084027
 MUNROE FALLS CARRYOUT

Akron Beacon Journal (AK) - WEDNESDAY March 24, 1993
Section: EDITORIAL Page: A14

MEMO:
Editorial / Our Opinion

TEXT:

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution was written to safeguard
ordinary citizens against unreasonable search and seizure.  Recently,
however, law-enforcement officials have taken to seizing possessions
of convicted and suspected criminals, particularly drug dealers.

 In the case of 23-year-old Munroe Falls resident Mark Lehrer, police
confiscated a sophisticated, $3,000 computer setup, programs and disks
on the suspicion that he might be letting kids look at dirty pictures.
That charge was never proved.  In fact, it appears that police
received only one or two complaints about his computer bulletin board,
none from area parents. Lehrer contends a clerical error put the
pornography into files accessible to all the bulletin board's users,
not just adults. Police enlisted a 15-year-old, falsified his identity
for a membership and then helped the teen call up a possibly offending
program.

 But, when the Summit County grand jury refused to indict the
University of Akron computer whiz on the original charges, Munroe
Falls police filed other charges based on the possibility that some of
the programs in Lehrer's private collection contained pictures of
minors.

 Lehrer did plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge of 'attempted
possession of criminal tools' -- his computer -- based on those
subsequent charges.

 No one downplays the seriousness of crime in our society, whether
it's in the suburbs or inner cities. None argue that children should
be able to view pornography.

 But in the absence of compelling evidence that Lehrer was trying to
peddle child porn to kids, either at the outset of this case nine
months ago or now, it could appear that the police acted hastily in
confiscating the computer. Such actions invite questions as to whether
the police were protecting against a child pornographer or using the
intimidating powers of the police and judicial system to help
themselves to a nice hunk of expensive machinery.

DESCRIPTORS: MUNROE FALLS; MARK LEHRER; POLICE; BIOGRAPHY; CHILD
PORNOGRAPHY; EVIDENCE; OBSCENITY

                         ---------

Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada  [e-mail]
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario    416-629-7000/629-7044

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

From: [e-mail] (Rafael Furst)
Subject: Telephone Messages on Your Workstation
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date:  1 Apr 93 01:21:47 GMT


Does anyone know of a telephone/computer system that lets members of
an office building record, retrieve and organize their telephone
messages on their desktop computer (specifically I am interested in
Sun Workstations).


advTHANKSance,

Rafael Furst   [e-mail]   [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 23:42:54 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Choke Area Code?


 From William Houston's World of Sport, as it appeared in last
Friday's {Globe and Mail}, there is a reference to {Providence
Journal} writer Bill Reynolds statement: "There's no truth to the
rumour that Buffalo has changed its area code to 043".

Buffalo teams or not, interchangeable NPA's aren't going that far.


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

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 23:50:40 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Practice Safe Cell Phoning


A report from Reuters notes that one company is cashing in on the
current scare on cellular phones and cancer. Quantum Laboratories
offers a $49.95 Callguard device that is supposed to cut out 97% of
the radio emissions from cellular phones.

The cellular industry, meanwhile, was reported to be getting a task
force going on cellular phone safety.


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

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: U.S. Justice Department and TDDs
Organization: Echo Beach


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

U.S. Justice Department to Award $2.5 Million in ADA Grants, Announces
New Telecommunication Devices for the Deaf

Contact: Obern Rainey, of the U.S. Department of Justice
         202-514-2007 or 202-514-1888 (TDD)

   WASHINGTON, March 31 -- The Department of Justice today announced a
$2.5 million federal grant program to speed compliance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and also the
installation of telecommunication devices for deaf persons (TDDs) for
access to its automated ADA telephone services.

   The department will award grants in amounts ranging from $85,000 to
$200,000 to applicants who propose cost-effective and efficient
approaches to disseminating information to individuals with
disabilities and organizations covered by the act about their rights
and responsibilities under Titles II and III of the ADA.  Individuals
and not-for-profit organizations, as well as state and local
government agencies may apply for the grants, but only those
applications that are national in scope or significance will be
considered for funding.

   The department is particularly interested in receiving, but is not
limiting its funding to, proposals that: reflect an ability to begin
project activities in an expedited manner; represent joint ventures
between covered entities and persons with disabilities; specifically
address how members of minority communities will be included with the
population targeted by the applicant for receipt of technical
assistance and/or provide technical assistance to state or local
government entities that have responsibilities under Title II of the
ADA.  The Solicitation for Applications also appeared in the Federal
Register on March 15, 1993.

   Applicants may submit grant proposals to the Public Access Section,
Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice until 5:30 p.m. EDT, May
14, at 1425 New York Ave., N.W., 4th floor, Washington, D.C. 20005.

   In a related action, the department announced that users of
telecommunication devices for deaf persons (TDDs) may now receive
automated telephone information service through the ADA Information
Line and the ADA Technical Assistance Grant Information Line operated
by the Public Access Section of the department's Civil Rights
Division.  Until recently, TDD users could contact information line
operators but could not use the automated services that are also
available.  Individuals with a TDD and either a rotary dial or
touch-tone telephone may call the information lines at the numbers
listed below and communicate directly with available operators;
however, a touch-tone telephone is necessary to access the prerecorded
information.

   The ADA information Line and Grant Information Line may be reached
in the following manner:

   ADA Information Line -- Callers may reach this line by dialing
202-514-0383 (TDD) or 202-514-0301 (voice).  Operators are available
to answer ADA questions from 1-5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday.  The
automated information system, however, is available 24 hours a day,
seven days a week.  By using the automated system, callers can obtain
prerecorded summaries of the statute and regulations, and phone
numbers of agencies that can provide additional assistance.  Callers
may also place orders for the department's ADA publications through
the automated system.

   Grant Information Line -- Callers may reach this line by dialing
202-515-3519 (TDD) or 202-514-0317 (voice).  This line will be in
operation during the 60-day application period extending from March 15
to May 14.  During this time, an operator will be available to answer
questions about the department's 1993 solicitation for technical
assistance grant proposals from 1-5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday.
The information on the automated system will be available 24 hours a
day, seven days a week during the application period.  By using the
automated system, callers can obtain prerecorded information
concerning the 1993 grant solicitation, including application
deadlines and procedures and order a grant application package.


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada     [e-mail]
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario   416-629-7000/629-7044

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 07:23:30 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mike Riddle)
Subject: Switch Variances in Calling Number Delivery
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE


Hello All!

In a newgroup related to supporting the ZyXEL modems, there have been
several reports of their internal Calling Number Delivery working with
ESS5 but not with DMS100/200 switches.

I thought that all the switch vendors implemented the Bellcore
standard?  Is this a case of picking standards, or is there a problem
of implementation somewhere?

(I know about the one-line vs. two-line display, and that in my area
at least, one of the DMS switches support two-line).


Thanks,

<<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>>
[e-mail]   Sysop 1:285/[e-mail]
inns.omahug.org     [phone] (1:285/27)

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

From: adcmail![e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Ameritech Faxtra Service
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 11:48:18 PST


Hi Pat,

> [Moderator's Note: I'd be interested in knowing how Ameritech (for
> example) operates its 'Fax Mailbox' service. Like a voicemail service,
> it stores a seemingly infinite number of fax messages for people who
> subscribe to the service and pick up their faxes on the fly, from the
> public machine in the hotel lobby, etc. It must take a lot of storage
> space. I subscribe to the 'Overflow Mailbox' part. My fax line has
> 'forward on busy/no answer' to the mailbox, then Ameritech starts
> trying to pass the message to me and keeps trying until the line is
> open or answered.   PAT]

Pat, I'd love to tell you how we designed it, but it's a trade secret.


Brent


[Moderator's Note: We have ways of making your spill your guts.  :)
But seriously, it is an excellent service, and worth every nickle they
charge -- I think it is $14.95 per month although they gave it to me
free to try out for awhile. It seems to work a little different than
'forward on busy/no answer' usually works however. I don't know *what*
number it is forwarding to (they won't tell me) and as soon as the
forwarding is effected but before the ringing starts there is a series
of five very short quick beeps; it rings once or twice, then the fax
tones are heard as the mailbox answers, which I might add gives my
name and fax number in the display window of the calling machine. The
caller does not even know he did not reach me.

Immediatly on reciept of the fax, Ameritech then starts trying to get
through to me every five or ten minutes to shove the fax back my way.
I wonder what prevents them from redelivering it to themselves if they
call me only to find my line still busy? Maybe they don't actually try
to call me but only query Rogers Park CO to find out if the line is
free or not.  The other variant on this is called 'Fax Mailbox'; you
give out a seven-digit direct dial mailbox number as your own then you
call and retrieve stuff as you wish. This plan is more expensive and
includes such features as 'broadcast' where you put the message in
your box and tell Ameritech to deliver it to everyone on your
distribution list. I don't need all that, but since the fax machine is
on the same line as my modem and terminal used for Digest work,
'overflow mailbox' is a dandy addition.  Now let's get out the torture
rack, the whip and chains so Brent can make his voluntary and freely
given confession about the inner-workings of Faxtra. :) There are
*some readers here* who know what happens when I require source code
for review and they openly defy me. :)  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 20:23:32 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Don Kimberlin)
Subject: Going to the Hogs


News that appeared recently indicates that cellular phones are going
to the hogs.

It was reported from Des Moines that Iowa hog farmer Dave Rousselow
got a message containing assorted grunts, squeals and snorts on his
answering machine.

The message was, however, music to the Rousselow's ears.  It told him
where to locate his misplaced cellular telephone.  He'd apparently
dropped it in the hog pen, where one of the porkers stepped on it,
happening to push its "redial" button, which made a call to the last
number he had dialed, his house.

So, on receiving the message, Rousselow went out to the hog lot and
found his misplaced cellular phone in the soup under a fence.


Origin: Borderline! BBS Fidonet Cabarrus N.C. (1:379/37)
Don Kimberlin - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: About 20 years ago, I got out of a cab at home and
left my (first and original) voice pager in the back seat. This was
one of those big, clunky, stab you in the hip models. No sooner than I
got inside, I realized it was *gone*!  I called the number for it, and
delivered a message, exhorting the cab driver to return immediatly and
bring my pager back. He showed up five or ten minutes later after four
or five messages transmitted by myself.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #222
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04006;
          1 Apr 93 5:54 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10881
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 03:44:54 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20089
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 03:44:02 -0600
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 03:44:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #223

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 1 Apr 93 03:44:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 223

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    PacBell CalREN Network (Scott Loftesness)
    Big Files: NYC <-> E Berlin (Robert Cooper)
    Banks Joins CONNECT (Patricia Snyder-Rayl)
    TeleStrategies Conference on Numbering Plan Crisis (Dave Leibold)
    Field Strength Meter Wanted (Arlindo Ribeiro de Loyolla Filho)
    Cable TV Providing Telcom or ISDN? ([e-mail])
    Brief Review of _Interrupt_ (Rob Knauerhase)
    Disaster Recovery (Seth B. Rothenberg)
    Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (Dave Niebuhr)
    ATT Proposes New Overseas Facility (Dave Niebuhr)
    George Gilder a Contributing Editor at {Forbes} (Robert L. McMillin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 31 Mar 93 08:51:40 EST
From: Scott Loftesness <[e-mail]>
Subject: PacBell CalREN Network


[from a Pacific Bell press release]

Pacific Bell has announced plans to build a communications super
highway connecting participating California universities, research
labs, major hospitals and leading high-tech firms in the San Francisco
Bay Area and Los Angeles.

Many users hooked up to the developmental portion of the full spectrum
super highway will receive free access through a nonprofit
organization.  In exchange, these users will help develop innovative
applications in education, healthcare, business, government and
research.

"We're bringing together some of the brightest minds in California to
develop applications that will bolster California's economy and
quality of life," said Phil Quigley, president of Pacific Bell.  "With
this project, we're taking a major first step to ensure that broadband
technology will be practical from the first day customers get access
to it."

Known as the California Research and Education Network (CalREN), the
project will use new communications switching and transmission
technologies in an advanced telecommunications network capable of
transmitting voice, data, video and images concurrently.  CalREN will
make these capabilities available to public, educational and business
participants.

"California's telecommunications infrastructure will play a pivotal
role in boosting business productivity, creating jobs, enhancing
education, improving health care and reducing traffic congestion,"
Quigley said.  "We're jump-starting the applications development
process in hopes that the innovative services resulting from this
effort will help jump-start the California economy."

While a major objective of this project is to serve as a testbed for
network applications development, Quigley said an advanced
telecommunications system would also make possible: teleseminars, in
which two-way video, electronic "white-boards" and simultaneous data
exchange allow participants to take part in educational programs from
their offices; "virtual" consortiums, where business people, students,
professors or scientists from geographically dispersed organizations
work together to solve complex problems; electronic medical records
processing, remote patient monitoring and remote specialist
consultations.

Eventually, applications could evolve to include multimedia patient
records that include digital voice annotations, diagnostic images and
video in a single "file" and allow doctors to exchange those files
over the high-speed network; interactive editing of feature film
footage via computer, ending the current time-consuming process of
physically shipping film; interconnecting high-speed data networks;
and access to a wealth of existing databases.

"The vision for this project takes full advantage of revolutionary
advancements emerging from the telecommunications industry and
provides a model for an infrastructure that can grow rapidly with
future developments," Quigley said.

CalREN will bring together as many as 80 educational, medical and
high-tech industrial organizations in the San Francisco Bay Area, and
a like number in Los Angeles.  The participants agree over the next
two years to develop and pilot advanced telecommunications,
information technologies and applications to improve the quality of
life for all Californians.

In addition to applications development, business participants in the
CalREN project will be asked to help nonprofit organizations,
particularly schools, participate in the project.  This assistance may
include sponsorship, funds, applications or equipment.

The network can be envisioned as three tiers.  At the top is an
ultra-high-speed switching and transmission fabric based on new
digital technology, ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode).  It can
simultaneously route voice, data and video communications over
fiber-optic lines with equal ease at speeds eventually reaching
billions of bits per seconds, a so-called "gigabit network."  This
will be the foundation for such applications as teleseminars and
high-definition imaging.

The second layer is composed of emerging high-speed "fast packet" data
services that operate at millions of bits per second.  Typical
applications for these services include interconnection of data
networks, high-speed telecommuting and medical imaging.

Within the bottom tier are services that transmit at tens of thousands
of bits per second, providing transport for such services as
telecommuting, exchanging health-care records and accessing
sophisticated computerized information sources, such as library data
bases.

Plans are for CalREN to begin offering the full set of services by
year's end in the Bay Area, and in early 1994 in Los Angeles.  Many of
the CalREN services are commercially available on a limited basis from
Pacific Bell today.

The full cost of the project will be paid by commercial users and
through funding by the nonprofit organization.

CalREN is consistent with efforts by Governor Wilson, the state
legislature and the Clinton/Gore Administration to promote an
electronic superhighway, Quigley said, adding that government should
serve as a catalyst for increased investment of this sort.

Some aspects of the CalREN project will require approval from
governmental authorities, Quigley noted.

CONTACT:  Pacific Bell Telephone,  Linda Healey, 415/542-4719

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

[Moderator's Note: Scott Loftesness is one of the sysops of the very
popular Telecommunications SIG on Compuserve (GO TELECOM).  If you are
a CIS subscriber, I urge you to look at the Forum.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Cooper)
Subject: Big Files: NYC <-> E Berlin
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 23:11:30 GMT


My company would like to send compressed graphic files between New
York City and East Berlin. We need some help in selecting the best
method. The files are multi-MBs in size. We have both RS6000s and PCs
on both ends. My company is not now on the internet (I'm writing this
from my private account on a public access machine), but these files
(CAD files) fall under business usage so I think we need to get a
commerical connection if we get on at all.  We are looking into UUnet
and PSI, and high-speed modems for direct links.

So first question, how are the phone lines into east berlin? Are they
so bad we shouldn't even consider direct dial up? If a modem would
work, the net seems to generally like ZyXel and Telebit. Which one is
better for international call with large files?

Second question(s): any recommendation on commerical internet
providers doing international connections? If we can get 56k lines on
both end that, of course, would be best. Can I get a 56k line in east
berlin?  Can I afford it? If I have to do modem dial ins to get to the
internet provider, should I just skip them and go direct?

A lot of questions, I know. I would be thankful for any and all help.
Please e-mail your advice.  Thanks in advance!!!


Robert Cooper  Brooklyn, NY   [e-mail]   212 309-9600 (Work)

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

From: [e-mail] (Patricia Snyder-Rayl)
Subject: Banks Joins CONNECT
Organization: GREX Public Access Unix [phone]
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 18:58:56 GMT


Pegasus Press, Inc.
NEWS RELEASE
                                       | Corporate Address:
                                       |    Pegasus Press, Inc.
                                       |    3487 Braeburn Circle
                                       |    Ann Arbor, MI 48108


               CONTACT:  Patricia Snyder-Rayl
                         Pegasus Press, Inc.
                         [phone] voice
                         [phone] FAX

                         America Online: PegasusPR
                         CompuServe: 70007,4640
                         Delphi: UNICORNPUB
                         GEnie: CONNECT.MAG
                         Internet: [e-mail]


F O R   I M M E D I A T E   R E L E A S E


MICHAEL A. BANKS BEGINS "THE INSIDE LINE" COLUMN FOR CONNECT MAGAZINE

ANN ARBOR, Michigan (March 24, 1993) -- Pegasus Press today announced
the addition of Michael A. Banks as an editorial staff columnist for
CONNECT magazine.

With literally thousands of book and magazine article credits to his
name, Michael Banks is recognized as one of the premiere authors in
the computer industry. He has authored such books as DELPHI: The
Official Guide (Brady Books/Simon & Schuster), The Modem Reference
(Brady Books/Simon & Schuster), Understanding FAX and E-mail (Howard
W. Sams & Co.), Portable Communications (Brady Books/Simon &
Schuster), and Laptop Power (Brady Books/Simon & Schuster), as well as
co-authored Pournelle's PC Communications Bible (with Jerry Pournelle,
published by Microsoft Press).

In a new column for CONNECT called "The Inside Line," Michael Banks
voices his opinions and shares with readers his unique viewpoint on
the online world of telecomputing. "I'll be more outspoken," says
Banks, "and, depending on the reader, more controversial in this new
column than the majority of computer magazine publications allow."

Along with fast facts, useful news and information, Banks will bring
readers the truth about what's available online, changes in the online
world, why things are as they are online, and what's happening behind
the scenes. "I'm going to shoot from the hip, but with accuracy,"
Banks said.

Banks promises his column will deliver some fascinating opinions and
extrapolations, all delivered in the style hundreds of thousands of
computer users have enjoyed in his books and other publications.

The first installment of "The Inside Line" will appear in the
July/August issue of CONNECT, which will be available on newsstand and
bookstore shelves in June.

"We feel Michael is an excellent complement to CONNECT's current
line-up of columnists and authors," says Patricia Snyder-Rayl,
managing editor for CONNECT. "Michael's style of writing and ability
to explain cutting-edge technology in easy to understand terms is
exactly what we want readers to find in CONNECT."

CONNECT is a bi-monthly magazine covering the major commercial online
services (such as CompuServe, America Online, GEnie, Delphi and BIX),
the Internet and bulletin board system networks (such as Fidonet and
RIME). The publication is available from newsstands and bookstores
everywhere.

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 23:51:20 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: TeleStrategies Conference on Numbering Plan Crisis


I received a brochure in the mail from TeleStrategies regarding their
13-14 April 1993 Washington DC conference "The North American
Numbering Plan Crisis". Topics include the basic principles of
numbering plans, the upcoming interchangeable NPA codes in North
America, local number portability, equipment upgrading topics and
more. Conference cost is listed as USD$985.

For more information on this conference, call TeleStrategies at +1 703
734.7050 or fax [phone] or mail at Box 811, McLean VA USA
22101.

Other than passing along the information, I have no connection with
TeleStrategies. Also, this may not necessarily be the same thing as
the Future of Numbering Forum that was scheduled for this time (16-18
March 1993) unless there was a change of plans from what was outlined
in the document "NANPA's Proposal on the Future of Numbering in WZ1."


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

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

Date: 31 Mar 1993 21:10:52 +0000 (C)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Field Strength Meter


Please help me. Someone know about field strength meters?  I'm
interested in getting one to fix antennas.  Leader Instruments has
one, but it's much expensive, about US$900.00.

I'm much obliged for your help.


Thanks,

ARLINDO RIBEIRO DE LOYOLLA FILHO
RADIO AMATEUR PY2-LOY(B)    TECNICO EM ELETRONICA
CENTRO DE PESQUISA E   DESENVOLVIMENTO  TELEBRAS - CAMPINAS  BRASIL
FONE (0192)39-6733    FAX  [phone]
ADDRESS-RODOVIA CAMPINAS-MOGIMIRIM
KM 118,5  P.O.BOX 1579 CEP13088-061
CAMPINAS-SAO PAULO-BRASIL   EMAIL [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, you get what you pay for (or at least you are
supposed to get more if you pay more) but it seems to me $900 is a bit
steep for these instruments.  The $29 units at Radio Shack may not
quite provide the accuracy you desire, but there ought to be a happy
medium considerably less than the price you were quoted. Basically a
FSM measures the strengh of a nearby radio wave. It will also measure
what is termed 'SWR' (or standing wave ratio), which is considered to
be a Bad Thing in too large a quantity. As the antenna is 'cut' or
'trimmed' to precisely the right length or some fraction thereof for
the desired frequency, the FSM will show when optimum configuration
has been reached. The SWR will show if some part of the signal is
going back down the coax to the transmitter, thus causing spurious
radiation which manifests itself on your neighbor's television set
during their soap opera program or in grandpa's hearing aid. Can
anyone suggest a good source of these instruments in the USA to our
reader from Brazil?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cable TV Providing Telcom or ISDN?
Date: 31 Mar 93 13:23:23 EDT
Organization: Hampshire College


I've heard a bit of (mis)information about Cable TV's capability/
interest in entering the telcom arena.  Due to my lack of technical
knowledge, I was wondering how feasable it is for CATV to provide
telephone service or digital platforms like ISDN in the near future?


[e-mail]

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

From: Rob Knauerhase <[e-mail]>
Subject: Brief Review of _Interrupt_
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 12:59:45 CST
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Illinois @ Urbana


After a bit of searching (several libraries did not have it), I was
able to get a copy of the new fiction novel _Interrupt_, by Toni
Dwiggins.  The premise of the book is a phone phreak who tries to
bring down the entire US telephone system (and almost succeeds).

The back cover regales it with things like (not an exact quote) "What
Tom Clancy has done for techno-thriller, Dwiggins does for techno-mystery"
and the like; these comments are a bit overdone, in my opinion, but book-
jacket comments frequently are.

The book is quite accurate technically.  However, in some cases, it
was almost gratuitously accurate -- it seemed as though the author was
either showing off her research or deliberately reaching out to geeks
like the readership of this forum (grin).  You shouldn't read it to
learn about the behind-the-scenes phone system, but if you already
know something about those matters, you'll appreciate many of the
references and situations.  The technical level is such that
non-telecom-hackers can also read it with perhaps only slightly
diminished enjoyment.

Without giving away the plot, let me say that the twists and turns of
the story are fairly well done; I had "pegged" the bad guy about
halfway through and later found my guess to be wrong (though I was
able to guess correctly at that time).  The bad guy's method is
perhaps a bit hard to stomach in real life, but the personality
painted for him in the book makes it quite believable within that
context.

The obvious comparison for this book is the movie _Sneakers_, not as
much for similar plots as for similar genre -- techno-geek stories
with at least some attempt at technical accuracy.  In this comparison
(in my opinion), it loses.  It's a good story, but not nearly as
well-done as _Sneakers_.

All in all, I recommend it as a good read, but not a "gee-I've-gotta-
go-out-and-get-a-copy-this-instant" novel.


Rob Knauerhase, University of Illinois @ Urbana, Dept. of Computer Science

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

From: [e-mail] (Seth B Rothenberg)
Subject: Disaster Recovery
Date: 31 Mar 93 19:12:44 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


We've seen a lot of discussion lately about disaster recovery, so I
thought it would be a nifty topic for my paper for my Impact Analysis
class, a cross listing between the School of Business and our Master
of Telecom program.  I am interested in comments/references anyone can
suggest.  (For example, I was duly impressed with CBS' ability to
recover from the WTC blast.)

If you can send direct mail, that's helpful, since I sometimes fall
behind in the newsgroup.


Thanks,

Seth Rothenberg   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 15:32:38 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy


There was an article in {Newsday} yeaterday about a man being sued by
Medphone, a Paramus, N.J.-based medical equipment company.  The charge
was that he libeled the company via computer using PRODIGY.

It seems that he held some stock in this company and during
discussions about it in one of the newsgroups, stated that he didn't
like the way it was performing.

(One of the statements in the article said that Prodigy was the
nation's largest on-line service; guess they never heard of the
Internet.)

They are saying that he caused $30 to $40 million in damages to the
company via his comments and that he has a hidden agenda.

Eric Wachtel said "We don't believe this was someone having just a bit
of fun; He went at this is a methodical manner.  I certainly have a
lot of suspicions ... but I can't comment on it now."

Peter DeNegris, a polling inspector for the Suffolk County Board of
Elections, and an attorney himself, stated that he lost $9,000 due to
declines in the stock.

Sitting on the sidelines is Prodigy who has in the past been accused
of censoring e-mail.  IMHO, if Medphone wins this case, it will give
Prodigy the tools to censor e-mail.

During a three month period DeNegris posted about two dozen messages
concerning insider dumping among other things and predicted several
days ahead the upcoming stock price changes.  Said Wachtel "In some
cases it was scarily correct."

This will be an interesting case to follow since it is being conducted
in federal court in New Jersey.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 15:45:17 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: ATT Proposes New Overseas Facility


A local weekly paper on Long Island (Suffolk Life) had a section
concerning the proceedings of the local Zoning Board of Appeals
concerning a local businessman and AT&T to build an overseas
transmitting facility about 1 1/2 miles from where I live.

Permits are needed before July 1, 1993, or AT&T will cancel the deal
and look for another site.  The zoning change is required since the
location is currently for a sales office for a residential development.

AT&T would need 3.25 acres and employ seven or eight people temporarily
while contributing an estimated $35,000 to the local school tax (out
of a $75 million dollar budget, that is peanuts).

The proposed on-line date is 1996 but that could slip due to the
action of the ZBA.

Personally and from a telecom issue, I'd like to see the facility here
if nothing more than to show people that my community commands the
respect of international companies and not just junk food ones either.

As a side note, the defunct RCA transmitting and receiving facilities
for overseas are located within 15 miles of where I live.  Telecom has
a long attachment to Long Island.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 05:23 PST
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: George Gilder a Contributing Editor at {Forbes}


Just a short note to tell you all that I just noticed author George
Gilder's name in {Forbes} listed as one of their contributing editors.
More evidence, I think, that of the financial magazines out there,
{Forbes} really has superior coverage when it comes to telecom and
technology matters.


Robert L. McMillin | Surf City Software | [e-mail] | Dude!
#include <std.disclaimer.h>

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #223
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08533;
          1 Apr 93 8:02 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24738
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 05:45:50 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18523
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 05:45:01 -0600
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 05:45:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #224

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 1 Apr 93 05:45:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 224

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: ISDN Digit Sending (Ketil Albertsen)
    Re: ISDN Digit Sending (Wil Dixon)
    Re: ISDN Digit Sending (Bob Larribeau)
    Re: ISDN Digit Sending (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Barry Margolin)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Leonard Erickson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ketil Albertsen,TIH)
Subject: Re: ISDN Digit Sending
Organization: T I H / T I S I P
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 19:55:41 GMT


[e-mail] (Terence Cross) writes:

> I am inquiring about digit sending from ISDN telephone sets, when a
> *person* is dialing.

> Do they send the digits on to the CO one digit at a time as the person
> dials?  Do they have instead an inter-digit timeout (e.g two seconds),
> and only send the digits on when no more digits are being entered or
> something else?

Either. With my ISDN phone I can dial the entire digit sequence before
I pick up the handset. In that case, the entire number is transferred
in the Setup message. If I lift the handset before I start dialing,
the digits are transferred one by one.

I don't know if my local exchange has implemented any sort of timeout;
I never used that much time dialing. (And I usually dial before I lift
the handset -- the phone has an "edit" (delete) function available
then, but there is nothing of that sort with the digit-by-digit
transfer.)

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

From: [e-mail] (Wil Dixon)
Subject: Re: ISDN Digit Sending
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 20:21:10 GMT


[e-mail] (Terence Cross) writes:

> Do they send the digits on to the CO one digit at a time as the person
> dials?  Do they have instead an inter-digit timeout (e.g two seconds),
> and only send the digits on when no more digits are being entered or
> something else?

I checked the Northern Telecom Practices for a quick answer.  Several
hundred pages later I picked up my phone (Northern Telecom M5317T ISDN
set with functional signaling) and test flew this question.

Dial 9 -- got second dial tone -- ten seconds later I got recorded
announcement on 'cannot compete call as dialed'.

Dialed 5 -- broke dial tone -- five seconds later I got recorded
announcement.

Dialed 53332 -- a valid five digit number -- call completed within a
second.

Dialed 533 -- an invalid number - ten seconds later I got recorded
announcement.

So, it can be assumed the digits go one at a time, inter digit timeout in
our case (DMS-100 BCS 34) is roughly ten seconds for a potentially valid
number on the first digit, five seconds after that.

Hope this helps.


Wil       [e-mail] 217-244-1321

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

From: Bob Larribeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ISDN Digit Sending
Organization: Consultant
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 15:59:49 GMT


> I am inquiring about digit sending from ISDN telephone sets, when a
> *person* is dialing.

> Do they send the digits on to the CO one digit at a time as the person
> dials?  Do they have instead an inter-digit timeout (e.g two seconds),
> and only send the digits on when no more digits are being entered or
> something else?

There are two methods for dialing.  The first (called en bloc) uses
the Called Party Number Information Element in the SETUP message to
transmit the digits to the network.  The second (Overlap) sends the
digits one at a time after the SETUP message is sent to the network.
There is an interdigit timeout to determine the end of the number.

Most ISDN phones I have seen in the U.S. user Overlap dialing.  The
Fujitsu phones support both in the following way:

1. Enter the number and then go off hook.  The phone takes the numbers
entered and puts them into the SETUP message; thus using en bloc
dialing.

2. Go off hook.  The phone sends the SETUP message.  Then enter the
digits which are sent to the network one at a time in Keypad Information
Elements.

Many TAs use en bloc mode dialing.


Bob Larribeau     San Francisco

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: ISDN Digit Sending
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 14:37:48 GMT


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

> I am inquiring about digit sending from ISDN telephone sets, when a
> *person* is dialing.

> Do they send the digits on to the CO one digit at a time as the person
> dials?  Do they have instead an inter-digit timeout (e.g two seconds),
> and only send the digits on when no more digits are being entered or
> something else?

The answer is, of course, yes.  To both.

Two modes of signaling are defined for Q.931: en-bloc and overlap.

Overlap signaling is the first method you describe.  In more detail --
the caller goes offhook, and the phone sends a SETUP message to the
network.  The network responds with a SETUP ACKnowledge message which,
among other things, tells the phone to turn on dialtone.  As each
digit is pressed, the phone sends an INFOrmation message to the
network carrying one digit.  (The first INFO message, by the way, gets
a response telling the phone to turn off the dialtone ...)  When all
the digits have been sent, the network sends a CALL PROCeeding message
to the phone.  From this point on, the overlap and en-bloc methods are
identical.

En-bloc signaling is essentially the second method.  When the user
goes offhook, the phone locally generates dialtone.  As the user
enters digits, the phone processes them locally.  When it determines
that the end of dialing has been reached, through a timeout, digit
counting, or some other means, it sends a SETUP message with the
complete called party number.  The network responds with a CALL
PROCeeding message.

The advantage to the overlap signaling method is that the phone
doesn't have to parse digits -- knowledge of the dialing plan is
located in the network, not the CPE, so when the dialing plan changes
(e.g. our favorite, 1+ dialing limited to 10D calls) it doesn't
require an upgrade of large numbers of CPE.

The advantage to the en-bloc signaling method is that it requires less
signaling and makes an "erase" easier.

Speaking in generalities, overlap signaling is "appropriate" for
"traditional" phonesets - a handset, a keypad, and maybe a display.
En-bloc signaling is "appropriate" for more "automated" phonesets -
for instance, if I had an ISDN phoneset application in a workstation,
en-bloc signaling would make a certain amount of sense.

Currently, the vast majority of CPE (in the US, at least) use overlap
signaling, because that's what the vast majority of ISDN switches in
the US use ...

PRI, of course, uses en-bloc signaling, because it's almost exclusively
one switch sending to another switch.

To quote Tanenbaum: The nice thing about standards is there are so
many to choose from.


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation

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

Date: Thu, 01 Apr 93 12:31:21 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives


Pat asks:

> I don't understand why  anyone should be entitled  to *any* phone services
> if they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their
> own car was repossessed....

The reason those who do not pay should be given the 911 service is
simple: humanitarian. It's part of the thing about being more human
and more humane.  The phone service should be there because it can be,
and was, the difference between life and death. As someone from a
country without such LifeLine services, I have always admired the US
for such concessions. I think it is one of the things that will
continue to make the country great.

The analogy of the automobile is just that -- an analogy. Analogies
are not arguments.

To give an extreme case of life without such humanitarian leanings,
there was in China, a man who was drowning in a lake. Several
passers-by stopped.  All could see the man but a few asked: "Who will
pay me to rescue the man?"  No one could or would. The man drowned.


[Moderator's Note: And yet hospitals in Chicago, USA, notably the
University of Chicago Hospitals and the Rush Presbyterian Medical
Center receive gun-shot victims and the gang-banging perpetrators by
the truckload night after night (a typical Friday night brings a dozen
ambulances to U of C's emergency room unloading docks in an eight hour
period with victims of violent crime) and the Intake Doctor says 'who
will pay me to rescue this man?' ... and seeing no evidence of Public
Aid Medical Green Card or other insurance the indigient gang-banger is
'stablized' (the law requires that much) and loaded back in an ambulance
whose driver is instructed to take the patient to Illinois Masonic or
else County Hospital. The patient died on the way?  That's too bad.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Date: 1 Apr 1993 05:21:44 GMT
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA


In article <[e-mail]> Nigel Allen <nigel.allen@
canrem.com> writes:

> The following story from {The Windsor Star} (Windsor, Ontario,
> Canada), Friday, March 26, 1993 was transcribed by Chris Farrar, sysop
> of the Professional Thinkers Guild BBS, [phone], in Windsor.

> A trial service by Bell Canada comes too late to save a Colchester
> South farmer who bled to death because his house didn't have a working
> phone, but it will save other lives, the man's sister says.
> His sister, Caroline Meathrell, campaigned to get the 911 service
> planned for Essex County to be available on all phones, even if
> they've been disconnected because of non-payment.

> [Moderator's Note: I may be considered cold-hearted, but I don't
> understand why anyone should be entitled to *any* phone services if
> they do not pay for it.....

Sorry, PAT, but payphones (at least here in So. Calif.) allow you to
dial operator and 911 without paying for anything. I think the
Canadian solution to non-payment is a good idea. The line is already
in place. The switchgear certainly isn't going to get loaded to any
appreciable degree by a line that can't call much of anything. To tell
the truth, this should be a service that's available to everybody at
minimal cost. In SoCal, Pac Bell offers Lifeline Service for about $3
a month, but the idea of a 911-only-service sounds like something that
could only benefit society.

And yes, PAT, sometimes you come across as cold-hearted. You must have
read too many Ayn Rand novels as a college student. (Atlas Shrugged,
and others of that ilk).


[Moderator's Note: *All phones* which are *connected* allow you to
call 911 without paying, since it is a reverse-charge call; the police
pay for it. In 1957, I was the captain of the debate team in high
school. Ayn Rand was on a tour promoting her (then) new book 'Atlas
Shrugged'. With the permission of Arthur Erickson (our debate teacher;
he was also responsible for school-wide assemblies) I wrote her a
letter and invited her to speak at our school. She came, and sold a
few copies of her novel which she autographed.

That evening, she gave an autographed copy of 'Atlas' to me because
Arthur and I took her to Ohare Airport for her flight to the next stop
and we bought her dinner on the way there. I recall there had been a
lengthy review of 'Atlas' a day or two before in the {Christian
Science Monitor} which we gave to her to read before dinner. She
read it with much interest, from time to time taking a drag through
that ostentatious cigarette holder she carried around everywhere and
sipping her cocktail. Arthur smoked Viceroys and I did too, only
because Arthur was Very Sophisticated and I wanted to be Sophisticated
also. Finally Rand finished the review in the {Monitor} and squinted
at me for what seemed a long time then she said, "You are such an
intelligent young man! Too smart to believe in Gott! Why do you
believe in Gott?" Arthur tried to keep a straight face but finally had
to hold the {Monitor} up in front of his face to hide his amused
reaction, since she was very serious. I just sat there, my
Sophistication having failed me. Throughout dinner she stared at me.
We dropped her off at Ohare and it was quite late so Arthur insisted
on delivering me to my parents and coming in the house to relay the
whole thing to them with much amusement. I've still got my autographed
copy of 'Atlas', and I still think she was not part of RealWorld.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Margolin)
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Date: 31 Mar 1993 22:22:00 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA


In article <[e-mail]> Nigel Allen <nigel.allen@
canrem.com> writes:

[News story about a Bell Canada plan to allow 911 from disconnected phones.]

> [Moderator's Note: I may be considered cold-hearted, but I don't
> understand why anyone should be entitled to *any* phone services if
> they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their
> own car was repossessed because they did not pay for it just in case
> they need to go somewhere in a hurry? You say telco is rich and can
> afford it ... so can the automobile industry. If some charitable group
> wants to pay the price so everyone's phone can be connected at all
> times, that would be a fine idea. If telco is being forced to foot the
> bill, that is not okay.  PAT]

The quoted article didn't say that they were being forced to provide
this service.  The overhead of it is presumably miniscule -- the
connection is already there.  How many emergency calls is the average
disconnected home expected to make, anyway?  This is different from
the automobile analogy, in which resources (cars) would be wasted when
they're not in use; if there were some way for a single emergency car
to be shared by all the people in town whose cars had been reposessed,
that would be a better analogy.

BTW, it's not really even the telco that's footing the bill, since it
will probably get the government to allow it to include the overhead
of this service in their rate formula (actually, I don't know how
rates are set in Canada -- *is* it government-controlled as in the
US?).  So it's really all the paying customers.  However, I really
doubt that the expense of this service would even be measurable.


Barry Margolin System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp.
[e-mail]          {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?
Date: 31 Mar 1993 22:20:38 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


Over the years of running a BBS I have been asked by AT&T and Sprint
for information on one or more of my users. They have never made
demands of me and have always explained the reason. I have given them
the information they want, but could not tell them for a fact that was
the real name or phone number since I only check local users and spot
check others by dialing them while they are one line and just seeing
if it is them. Most times it is and a couple of time they have had
call waiting and dumped real fast. I have never be approached by any
police agency. I work for a telephone company so I can understand them
trying to keep the fraud under control.

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 07:40:02 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting


In TELECOM Digest volume 13, # 215, Our Moderator noted:

> [Moderator's Note: It is correct your friend cannot be forced to pay
> for calls he did not originate or agree to pay for, however if it is
> believed that your friend is aware of these calls and doing nothing
> to prevent them -- in fact perhaps encouraging them -- then he can be
> subpoened by a federal grand jury and *forced* to produce his call
> log records.  If he is not involved in, or actively encouraging the
> fraud, then it would behoove him to offer his cooperation by (a)
> first notifying the users in a public message on the system -- in his
> hello banner perhaps -- that AT&T was making inquiries; that he was
> assisting the Company and did not approve of toll fraud, and (b)
> offering a compromise with AT&T where if the Company would tell him
> the time(s) fraud calls were made to his system, he would supply them
> with the user record(s) for the specific call. Surely he has a log of
> who called the system at what times, etc?  I think everyone involved
> in the 'instant information industry' should at least be socially
> responsible enough to cooperate in an effort to reduce toll fraud by
> the people who call them.  PAT]

Well, as a BBS operator, I think that my users have rights too. And
I'm not exactly pleased with the way you so blithely assume that the
sysop in question may be encouraging illegal activites. Nor with the
idea that he is *required* to explicitly state that illegal activities
aren't allowed on the system. Mind you, I think that *not* doing so is
incredibly stupid, but requiring it sounds like the old "I am not now
and never have been.." bit of the McCarthy era.

If AT&T calls up and *demands* something, they are going to get
informed that they need a warrant in accordance with ECPA.

If they *ask*, I'll be willing to co-operate in tracking fraud. But
since *I* can be sued by the users whose info I give out, I'll request
that they send me something in writing, and I'll talk to a lawyer
about what exactly needs to be done to co-operate without opening me
up to legal trouble.

Don't forget, AT&T has no more "right" to my logs to help solve their
problems than I have the right to *their* logs to track down the
idiots that call to try to hack into my system.

That said, if I can safely do so, I'll arrange to give account info
for calls at specific times & dates. But if they want anything more
than a week old, I'll have to set something up. Because except for
outgoing calls, the logs aren't kept beyond that. Backups can get some
of it, but they cost *money* (at $25 a tape and 3 tapes to back up the
system I can't afford much of a backlog).

BTW, here's part of "turnkey" setup for the BBS package I run. I think
it makes things clear enough.


  ***********************************************
  *                                             *
  *            QuickBBS 2.76 Policy             *
  *                                             *
  ***********************************************


The following is a statement of the policy under which This System is
operated. It outlines the general behavior demanded of callers to the
System, and explains the general guidelines under which caller
information is handled.

           Press <<Enter>> to continue.


The Operators of this System are DIAMETRICALLY opposed to the use of
Telecommunications for fraud, theft, or any other illegal, immoral, or
otherwise questionable behavior.

All information entered into this System, in both public and private
databases, is reviewed on a daily basis by the Operators. Data
pertaining to any actions considered inappropriate will be deleted. We
reserve the right to inform the proper authorities of any illegal
activities.

           Press <<Enter>> to continue.


All reasonable efforts will be made to safeguard individual information
from unauthorized access. The rights of System Operators to examine
individual records are confined to:

 <1> Providing responses to caller requests
 <2> Technical and maintenance considerations
 <3> Preventing illegal and unauthorized entry and use
 <4> Statistical analysis, bulk or aggregate
 <5> Accounting and usage documentation

           Press <<Enter>> to continue.


The System Operators will not disclose confidential information on any
user without caller consent, except in response to a court order or
subpoena, or if the obvious intent of the user is to commit an illegal
or fraudulent act.

Access to the this New QuickBBS 2.76 BBS is a privilege. Those who are
allowed access are expected to keep their passwords secure. Passwords
are for the User's protection, and are for the assigned caller
>>only<<.  Use by any other person or group, or any unauthorized use
of the designated password will result in the denial of access for all
involved. The use of more than one name is grounds for denial of
access.  Those who violate the above will be removed from the Userlog
and denied access.

           Press <<Enter>> to continue.


All information obtained from this System is for the use and
entertainment of our Users, as registered in the Userlog of this
System.  Neither the System Operators nor any other user is
responsible for any use, misuse, abuse, and/or illegal activity that
might be based on information obtained from this System.


           Press <<Enter>> to continue.

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

Leonard Erickson  [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]  [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51  [e-mail] (preferred)
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson
Internet: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #224
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01891;
          1 Apr 93 19:31 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23295
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 16:47:16 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25089
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Apr 1993 16:46:01 -0600
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 16:46:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #225

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 1 Apr 93 14:46:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 225

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Paul Houle)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Matt Healy)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Joel Snyder)
    Re: Washington Times Blows It (Richard Budd)
    Re: Washington Times Blows It (Dan Hartung)
    Re: Use of #77 in Cellular Phones (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Use of #77 on Cellular Phones (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Use of #77 in Cellular Phones (Monty Solomon)
    V&H Report: 4/93 (David Esan)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paul Houle)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Organization: New Mexico Tech
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 21:43:44 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Mark D. Austin) writes:

> I remember reading awhile back that the old public phone systems used
> to allow free calls if a certain frequency was heard in the receiver.
> I think this frequency used to be the same one that used to come out
> of a whistle distrbuted in Captain Crunch cereal. Does anyone remember
> this story? I was trying to tell this story to a friend who did not
> believe me. Could anyone verify and perhaps provide some more details
> on this amusing story?

    Yes, John Draper, the phone phreak who took on the psuedonym
"Captain Cruch" discovered that a whistle that was distributed as a
premium for Captain Crunch cereal could produce a 2600 hz tone if you
covered up one of the holes on it.  This is significant because the
first generation of automated toll equipment used 2600 hz as a guard
tone; i.e., any line that was idle had a 2600 hz tone on it.  Bell
system engineers had not realized that a person could generate a 2600
hz tone at a phone, which would fool one of the toll stations along
the line into thinking that you had hung up and that the line was
idle.  When the tone was stopped, the other end would assume that the
line was about to be used, so the distant toll station would assume
that it was talking to the other switch, and would go into a mode
where it was wiating for commands -- which were expressed in terms of
"MF" (multifrequency) tones that were similar to touch-tone, but
different.

    A "blue box" was a device that did this.  Phone Phreaks from
the early 1960's to middle 1970's had pretty free reign over the
network.  They could, say, call directory assistance in a distant area
code, which was free at the time, and then use the 2600 hz tone to get
to the command mode and then call anyone they wanted for free.
International calls could be dialed directly with the blue box, since
IDD didn't exist at the time, and phreaks could also control all the
stages of routing a call.  After investigation of irregularities in
network activity, the Bell System became aware of the "blue boxers",
and started a program to catch them.  By looking for irregularities in
the AMA (billing) records (and by making long-distance DA calls
supervise), they were able to detect things like a phone phreak
"talking" to a DA operator for five hours.  Other equipment was
installed that would detect foreign tones in the network and record
the conversation in areas that had heavy phraud, such as NY and
Detroit.

    In the meantime, the Bell system developed SS7, a
comprehensive system of out-of-band signalling, that separates command
and signal pathways, and the all-digital networks of AT&T, Sprint and
their competitors are essentially invulnerable to this kind of fraud.
A protocol using MF tones is still used to relay information between
LECs and IXCs, but I am aware of some people who put a great deal of
effort into manipulating this and who didn't have any success.
Similarly, some foreign countries still use older equipment, from
which a phreak can dial internationally to anywhere; I am aware of
some people from MIT who took a trip to Mexico a few years ago to do
this.  However, the blue box and the Crunch whistle are dead in the
US.

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Healy)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Organization: Yale U. - Genetics
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 02:41:52 GMT


Donn Parker's book {Fighting Computer Crime}, from back in the 1980s,
has a long account of Phone Phreaking, including an interview with
Captain Crunch.  According to Parker, at that time he had become a
programmer with a new handle: Captain Software.  I've no idea what
he's been up to since.  Bruce Sterling's recent book {The Hacker
Crackdown} also has some interesting telco and Phreaking history, but
he's less cautious about fact-checking than Parker.  Sterling's book
does mention Parker, whom Sterling describes as the Grand Old Man of
computer crime-fighting.


Matt Healy    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: In case you missed it, look a couple issues back on
Thursday morning ... John Draper sent us an article.   PAT]


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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 14:44:27 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Mark D. Austin) writes:

> I remember reading awhile back that the old public phone systems used
> to allow free calls if a certain frequency was heard in the receiver...

> [Moderator's Note: ... yes, there are tones which do not appear on
touch tone pads which if sounded in the phone cause certain reactions
from the network such as you describe. Very modern phone systems, I'm
told, listen for those tones and the context in which they are heard:
they should *never* be heard from the user side of the network, for
example, and if they are, the machine hurries to tell its keepers
about the intruder(s). If those tones are heard from the network side
of things, then all is well.  PAT]

Additionally, "modern" phone systems (not necessarily "very modern",
just "modern") are no longer capable of being defrauded in this way,
because the implementation of SS7 moves the signaling path out of the
voice band and on to a separate signaling network.  So a switch which
receives a tone over an SS7-ISUP-signaled trunk, even if that tone is
a valid KP or ST or other MF signaling tone, will at the very least
ignore it, and may (as Pat says) raise a flag to the network operator.


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 05:53 PST
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?


> I remember reading awhile back that the old public phone systems used
> to allow free calls if a certain frequency was heard in the receiver.
> I think this frequency used to be the same one that used to come out
> of a whistle distrbuted in Captain Crunch cereal. Does anyone remember
> this story? I was trying to tell this story to a friend who did not
> believe me. Could anyone verify and perhaps provide some more details
> on this amusing story?

I would recommend Steven Levy's history, {Hackers}.  It's got a number
of anecdotes about John Draper, aka Captain Crunch.  I think it's
still in print ...


Robert L. McMillin | Surf City Software | [e-mail] | Dude!
#include <std.disclaimer.h>

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge
Date: 31 Mar 1993 17:19:25 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.
tredydev.unisys.com writes:

> I remember a discussion some time back regarding not paying the
> Subscriber Line Access Charge (the $3.50/month imposed by the FCC) if
> one has telco toll restriction enabled (no toll calls, no operator
> calls, period, $2.50/mo GTE).  I thought the conclusion was that one
> did not have to pay the FCC charge when toll blocking was in force.
> Did I remember incorrectly?  GTE insists that one always has to pay
> the FCC charge, but then I expect them to say that, true or false.

> [Moderator's Note: That is correct. The FCC subscriber line access
> charge is always due and payable. The fact that your phone line is
> restricted in the type of calls it can make is your choice, not that
> of telco or the commission.   PAT]

While the Moderator is correct in saying that the 'access' charge is
always due and payable, I would like to point out that in the case you
describe (a line with toll restriction), the line still does have
access to the interstate network -- it can receive interstate calls.
Also, it would not surprise me if it can call 800 numbers as well.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joel M-for-Vnews Snyder)
Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge
Date: 31 Mar 1993 10:55 MST
Organization: Opus One
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.
tredydev.unisys.com writes ...

> I remember a discussion some time back regarding not paying the
> Subscriber Line Access Charge (the $3.50/month imposed by the FCC) if
> one has telco toll restriction enabled (no toll calls, no operator
> calls, period, $2.50/mo GTE).  I thought the conclusion was that one
> did not have to pay the FCC charge when toll blocking was in force.
> Did I remember incorrectly?  GTE insists that one always has to pay
> the FCC charge, but then I expect them to say that, true or false.

Well, you can talk your local phone company into whatever you can talk
them into.  My phone company sent me straight to the FCC, which said,
in effect, "even if your phone company could keep you from using long
distance service for outgoing calls, they can't keep you from
RECEIVING long distance calls, so there."  Pay up, and smile.  You
could be buying service from Deutsche Bundespost Telekom.


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



[Moderator's Note: The only thing is, if I have to pay to have access
for outgoing calls, and you have to pay to receive incoming calls
(from the network), isn't that double payment for the same access?  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 16:56:33 EDT
From: Richard Budd <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It
Organization: CSAV UTIA


Harold Hallikainen([e-mail]) wrote in TELECOM Digest
V13 #203:

> Which reminds me, I heard on NPR's Morning Edition that
> Clinton has an email account.  It sounded like a Compuserve number,
> but I was not awake enough to write it down.  Anyone know the email
> address?

It's [e-mail].  We sent a message to that address
asking Bill Clinton when he was coming back to Prague.  He can bunk at
the Castle this time, though I heard he was also welcome to stay with
the family who hosted him in 1970.

Lars Poulsen([e-mail]) wrote in TELECOM Digest V13 #211:

> The one I remember was "[e-mail]". There is also one on
> Compuserve, but you know how un-memorable the C$ addresses are.

> Anyway, whatever comes in is eventually dumped in hardcopy and routed
> the same way as
> address in your message.

<[e-mail]> was the one I remember too.  My records also show
[e-mail] and [e-mail] as other E-mail
addresses.  None of our correspondence to those addresses bounced back
to us, so they probably went through.  That includes the MCI address.
I included the Prague address in all correspondence.  Maybe Bill will
remember his expatriate constituents, considering he was once one
himself.

BTW, I took Mark Boolootian's suggestion and subscribed to the FOREIGN
POLICY section offered by Clinton's campaign organization.  Worked like a
charm!  His people are sending me a lot of mail regarding the current
constitutional crisis in Moscow.  FYI, CNN was providing us live coverage
of the Boris Yeltsin impeachment hearings before the Congress of People's
Deputies this morning.


Richard Budd  | USA  [e-mail]    | CR    [e-mail]
              |      139 S. Hamilton St.    |       Kolackova 8
              |      Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 |       18200 Praha 8

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Hartung)
Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 03:21:14 GMT


[e-mail] (Greg Andrews) writes:

> (There is a gateway for exchanging e-mail between the Internet and
> Compuserve.  The domain is "@compuserve.com", and the comma should be
> changed to a period to form the Internet address.  I.e. 76004.1647@
> compuserve.com would reach my mailbox from the internet.  The
> gateway's software swaps the comma and period as necessary.)

Did they change it? I haven't been on CI$ in a while but I thought it
was [e-mail] -- must say that the full name makes more sense!


Dan Hartung      [e-mail]    Birch Grove Software

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 04:57:12 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Use of #77 in Cellular Phones


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

> Now posted on southbound I-95 at Havre de Grace, Maryland: call #77
> (that is pound sign, not asterisk) to report disabled vehicles.  Same
> sign shows telephone keypad with nothing on the buttons except for the
> 7 and # keys.  # in many other applications signifies time-out, right?

When the # appears *after* the number.  If a # appears as the absolute
first "digit" then it can be interpreted as a speed dial number.  Or
it could be used for a function, but in either case, it can indicate
the caller is not dialing a number directly, but is either dialing an
alias (speed dial number) or is issuing a command (function code).

It may be that they have only recently gotten the software to take #
first as a code, which may be why most systems used * for both
function codes and speed dial numbers.  Or they may have run out of *
code space and moved to # which isn't being used.

Realize there can be two classes of Speed Dial numbers; caller pays
and called party pays.  If the system supports caller-pays speed dial
numbers, then they can be done as one or two digits and a #, or let
the user's telephone support speed dial the same way by using two
digits and # to indicate a caller-pays speed dial number.

One possibility is to set a standard.  * first may mean function or
speed dial, and # first could be used to mean called-party pays speed
dial.

By using prefix # to indicate a speed dial number, the local system
can allow as many digits as it wants, so that the abandoned vehicles
office can be #77, United Air Lines can be #UAL, and WMAL Radio can be
#WMAL.

Also, by having # or * first gives more room for speed dial numbers.

The reason for this may be an attempt to move speed dial numbers from
* codes to # codes in order to make sure that there are enough codes
available.  This may also be done to prevent confusion, i.e. does *69
on a cellular phone mean "Redial last connected number" or does it
mean "Jane's Massage Parlor"?  :)


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 23:27:38 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Use of #77 on Cellular Phones


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

> Now posted on southbound I-95 at Havre de Grace, Maryland: call #77
> (that is pound sign, not asterisk) to report disabled vehicles.  Same
> sign shows telephone keypad with nothing on the buttons except for the
> 7 and # keys.  # in many other applications signifies time-out, right?

A number of Toronto radio stations advertise (for call-in shows and
traffic reports etc.) that they "can be reached in most areas of the
province on cellular phones by dialing #frequency" -- e.g. station CBL
on AM 740kHz is #740, even from areas in Ontario well outside the
reception area.  Of course they always pronounce it e.g. "number-sign
seven forty", since the # character is not generally called pound
here.


Tony Harminc

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

From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Use of #77 in Cellular Phones
Reply-To: Monty Solomon <roscom![e-mail]>
Organization: Proponent
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 23:38:27 GMT


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

> Now posted on southbound I-95 at Havre de Grace, Maryland: call #77
> (that is pound sign, not asterisk) to report disabled vehicles.  Same
> sign shows telephone keypad with nothing on the buttons except for the
> 7 and # keys.  # in many other applications signifies time-out, right?

77 is SP (State Police).

In Massachusetts, there are signs to call *SP for assistance.  It is a
free call and works on both Cellular/One Boston and Nynex.  You can
also call *SP to report disabled vehicles, accidents, etc.

In other states, *77 doesn't work and you must call 911.


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: V&H Report: 4/93
Date: 31 Mar 93 16:57:43 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY


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

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

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

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

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

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

    Numbers that begin with 88 are nondialable stations in the US, Canada and
    Mexico.  They are ranches in the middle of the Nevada or Texas desert,
    or isolated outpost of civilization (always wanted to use that phrase) in
    the tundra of Canada.  I find place names like the Bar J Ranch, Double B
    Ranch, and JD Dye, Texas, Amargosa, Corncreek and Reese Valley, NV, and
    Chick Lake, Redknife and Taglu, NT.  I gather they are ringdown stations,
    or radio-telephone stations.  [It has been noted in c.d.t. that at least
    two of these numbers are for a bordello on the NV-CA border.]

    905 in suburban Toronto, and 810 in suburban Detroit have not appeared yet.

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

512: 710 ( 2,  7)  416: 680 ( 6,  2)    708: 644 (11, 10)   216: 583 (17,  4)
212: 705 ( 4,  5)  714: 668 ( 9, 12)    713: 636 (13,  9)   503: 581 (18,  7)
205: 693 ( 5, 13)  215: 665 ( 8,  5)    703: 615 (14,  5)   303: 574 (20, 11)
919: 691 ( 7, 19)  602: 657 (10, 13)    403: 610 (15,  5)   803: 573 (19,  9)
313: 688 ( 4,  8)  206: 649 (11,  7)    604: 591 (16,  9)   612: 567 (21,  6)


1. 512 - split in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.
2. 212 - split in progress.  Number should be reduced by split, and the
     movement of the Bronx to 718.
4. 919 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.
5. 313 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.
6. 416 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.
7. 714 - split in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.
8. 215 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.

Given all of that, the NPA that is largest and is not splitting nor
has plans (at this time) to split, is 205 in Alabama.  Other NPAs that
are candidates for a split include 602 (Arizona) and 206 (Western
Washington).  [Of course, this ignores the rumor the next announced
split will be in Florida.]

The three smallest NPA's were and remain (Although 917 has moved from
last to third from last):

917: 124 - The new NYC NPA (+20 new exchanges)
906: 117 - Michigan's Upper Peninsula  (no change)
807: 105 - Western Ontario (No change)

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

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

The top ten are:

917 19.23 (Growth of new NYC NPA)
203 6.40 (CT)
404 3.13 (Atlanta)
516 3.04 (Lon Gisland)
719 2.87 (Colorado)
919 2.82 (Eastern NC)
305 2.47 (SE Florida)
816 2.34 (Northern Missouri)
609 2.34 (Southern NJ)
805 2.33 (North of LA, California)


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

    917 (last 2 reports) , 305

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

512: 710  615: 562  310: 480  907: 402    908: 353  918: 300  709: 261
212: 705  214: 562  513: 476  616: 401    912: 351  218: 300  608: 254
205: 693  404: 560  317: 465  508: 397    510: 350  613: 299  509: 253
919: 691  809: 556  916: 459  219: 380    207: 349  208: 299  603: 244
313: 688  501: 554  306: 452  316: 379    318: 345  706: 297  901: 234
416: 680  314: 550  201: 450  213: 377    304: 345  712: 286  308: 212
714: 668  813: 548  913: 446  209: 373    419: 344  812: 285  417: 206
215: 665  203: 548  412: 443  217: 370    408: 339  202: 285  707: 200
602: 657  405: 539  614: 437  914: 369    319: 339  903: 284  506: 182
206: 649  305: 538  515: 436  502: 369    517: 338  808: 279  802: 181
708: 644  904: 537  407: 423  704: 368    618: 337  606: 279  719: 179
713: 636  619: 537  402: 422  418: 367    505: 332  518: 275  607: 176
703: 615  817: 530  601: 421  406: 365    702: 328  507: 275  307: 171
403: 610  804: 514  415: 420  701: 361    715: 321  909: 274  401: 141
604: 591  717: 501  210: 418  801: 360    819: 314  902: 273  413: 135
216: 583  414: 501  410: 417  504: 357    815: 314  705: 273  302: 129
503: 581  718: 500  818: 416  301: 357    915: 313  814: 268  917: 124
303: 574  514: 499  617: 414  605: 356    805: 307  315: 267  906: 117
803: 573  312: 494  516: 406  519: 355    609: 305  806: 265  807: 105
612: 567  816: 480  716: 404  204: 354    409: 301  309: 264


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #225
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09185;
          3 Apr 93 3:30 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25442
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 01:26:36 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28561
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 01:25:33 -0600
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 01:25:33 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #226

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Apr 93 01:25:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 226

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    TeleTeaching 93 (Kathy Kothmann)
    Call Accounting System For High Volume PBX Needed (Bill Garfield)
    Payphone In Band Signalling Question (Anton Mitchell)
    New Communications Magazine Program on WWCR/LTRN (Scott R. Weis)
    CND/Caller-ID Boxes (David HM Spector)
    Call Waiting Tones With Distinctive Rings Not Working (Russ Latham)
    Help Needed With V.P. Hotline For 12 Step Program (Juan Gascon)
    Dialing Codes in France, UK (Linc Madison)
    Connecting Work to Home (Terry Lemons)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 08:00:37 -0600
Reply-To: "SIG/Tel (Special Interest Group/Telecommunications) of ISTE"
From: Kathy Kothmann <[e-mail]>
Subject: TeleTeaching 93


 Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 14:31:12 +0200
 From: "Morten F. Paulsen" <[e-mail]>

WELCOME TO TELETEACHING 93

International Conference and Exhibition in Trondheim, Norway, August
20-25, 1993.

The development and application of telecommunications techniques to
enhance human knowledge and skills is the main theme of TeleTeaching
93.

The conference will cover the entire field of telecommunications in
education, training and work:

Interactive video, multimedia, videophone, computer-assisted learning,
TV-based instruction, video conferences, electronic mail, bulletin
boards, on-line data bases etc.

Areas of application:
o       primary education
o       secondary education
o       higher education
o       training
o       distance working

Aspects to be considered at the conference:
o       What technology can do now:
        the implementation of new
        techniques to meet the learning
        needs of society
o       What technology promises for the
        future: goals and visions for the
        next century

PLENARY SESSIONS:

The five keynote speakers - all prominent international experts in the
field of technology and education - will be presented in plenary
sessions:

Luis Rodriguez-Rosello, Head of the DELTA Unit under the Commission of
the EC:

"Existing and Future Technology for Teleteaching"

Barry Arnett, Education Consulting Services Executive for Skill
Dynamics, IBM:

"Education and Human Development at Future Workstations"

Jaques Perriault,
Lecturer at University Paris II:

"New Requirements for the Educational System in Industrialised
Countries Due to Changing Training Needs"

Iam Chaya-Ngam, President of Sukothai Thammatirath Open
University, Thailand:

"The Use of Teleteaching Methods for the Development of Competence
in Developing Countries: The Case of STOU"

Tony Bates, Executive Director for Research and Strategic Planning at
the Open Learning Agency of British Columbia, Canada:

"Educational Aspects of the Telecommuni-cations Revolution"

SPECIAL SESSIONS:

There will be three Special Sessions with parallel programmes:

Special Session 1:

Invited speakers will focus on international trends in the use of
telecommunications in education.

Special Session 2:

10 TeleTeaching projects will high-light the diversity of
international telecommunications in education.  Some of these projects
are still open for participation.

Special Session 3:

The European Programme for Advanced Continuing Education (EuroPACE)
and Developing Learning Through Technological Advance (DELTA) will be
discussed.

PAPER SESSIONS:

100 papers from 30 different countries will be presented in 7 Paper
Sessions with 3 to 5 parallels.

WORKSHOPS:

13 different workshops will be organized before and during the
conference.

Poster Presentations, Short Contri-butions and Demonstrations will all
add to the variety of the TeleTeaching 93 programme.

PRECONFERENCES:

Teaching and Learning in a Global Network, CPAW'93
August 18 - 19, 1993
Contact:   Helen Bargel
Internet:   [e-mail]
Dialcom:  01:YNP100

High Speed Datacommunications Network
August 19, 1993
Contact:   Frank Kobberoed
Fax:  [phone]


EXHIBITION:

The exhibition will be open during the whole conference.


ELECTRONIC INFORMATION:

You can get updated information about TeleTeaching93 from this
Internet address: [e-mail]

By writing HELP in the subject field, you will receive the necessary
information to access the files you want (ASCII-format). The text-part
of the message should be empty.

If you need help, please contact: [e-mail]

PROGRAMME INFORMATION:
Contact:    Jan Wibe,  chairman of the Programme Committee
Internet:    [e-mail]
Dialcom:   01:YNP079

REGISTRATION:
The deadline for early registration is March 31.
Fee before March 31:    NOK 2000
Fee after March 31:     NOK 2500

Working language: English

The conference is organized by The Norwegian Computer Society on
behalf of the International Federation for Information Processing.

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

Subject: Call Accounting System For High Volume PBX Needed
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 17:23:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


The company I am with has several networked MITEL SX2000 PBXs.  We
have tried several expensive call accounting packages but have been so
far disenchanted with each product.  I am looking for _suggestions_.

The major problem with the conventional packages I've tried is that we
do not use access codes.  Each digit string is processed solely on its
own content, and handed off to various trunk groups based on the
ENTIRE digit string.  My contention is that if I as a human can look
at the digit string and tell where the call is headed, then the call
accounting package I use should be able to make that determination as
well.  We had a package that came close but alas we quickly outgrew
it.

I am looking for something that is preferably PC based which can
handle 2 million call records per month and store 90 days worth. It
needs to be capable of handling multiple sites (multiport). It needs
to do pre-processing on the fly so that I can extract -on demand- any
call record or extension detail -including today's records- at any
time, and have those call records dumped to the printer (or to a flat
ascii file) within a few minutes of the request.  Obviously something
like this is going to be disk i/o intensive, so a huge ram drive is
likely in order.

I really don't want to hear from vendors aspiring to sell me their
product. Rather I would like to hear from USERS as to what in their
opinion works and what doesn't, especially on MITEL equipment with
heavy call volume and complex ARS tables.

Please e-mail your responses to my address as it appears above.  If
others express interest I will consolidate the replies and post back
to the c.d.t. Moderator for possible inclusion in a future issue.


Thanks.

Disclaimer:  This is a personal request on my own behalf.  I speak only
             for myself. Any opinions expressed are solely my own and
             not those of my employer.


Ye Olde Bailey BBS   713-520-1569 (V.32bis) 713-520-9566 (V.32bis)
  Houston,Texas          yob.sccsi.com       Home of alt.cosuard

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

Organization: City University of New York
Date: Saturday, 3 Apr 1993 00:05:10 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Payphone In Band Signalling Question


Hi,

     Could anyone please direct me to a source of information I need
about payphone in band signalling. I know the frequencies they use.
But I would like to find out how the CO signals the phone to accept
the money or to perform a coin return. Payphones I have seen use four
wires. Two of them are the ring and tip. I would guess that the other
two are for signalling but in what ways?  Any information would be
great. Thanks.


Anton Mitchell

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott R. Weis KB2EAR)
Subject: New Communications Magazine Program on WWCR/LTRN
Date: 2 Apr 93 14:07:40 GMT
Organization: KB2EAR's Machine


Announcing the creation of Spectrum, a new international
communications and technology radio program.  Spectrum will air
Sundays beginning May 2 at 0335 UTC via WWCR Nashville, Tn USA (7435
Khz) and the Let's Talk Radio Network (Spacenet3 Transponder 21, 5.8
Mhz Sub carrier Wide Band Audio).

The program will feature produced segments on all aspects of
communications from DC through Light! In addition, there will be a
live phone in segment with guests from the communications scene.  The
program will be hosted by Dave Marthouse, a long time radio enthusiast
and professional broadcaster and Mark Emanuele, a professional
communications consultant.  Spectrum will be underwritten by Holmdel,
NJ based Overleaf International, a Data Processing and
Telecommunications Consulting Firm.  Spectrum will originate from
studios at Overleaf's Holmdel, NJ Corporate HQ.


Dave Marthouse      Internet: [e-mail]

Scott R. Weis KB2EAR, EMT-A
Inernet:    [e-mail]
Packet:        [e-mail]
Snail Mail:    10 Palmer Rd., Kendall Park, NJ, 08824-1228
Phone:        [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (David HM Spector)
Subject: CND/Caller-ID Boxes
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: LAN Systems Integration/Technology Services
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 17:55:09 GMT


I suppose this has been asked a million times, but I didn't see it in
any of the documents in the archives @ lcs...

Can anyone suggest a caller-id display unit that also has an RS-232 out
the back?  Or, any suggestions on how I have get/borrow/build a
suitable device so that my computer(s) can record the caller-id
info?


Thanks much,

David HM Spector            J.P. Morgan
Vice President              30 Broad St
LAN Systems Integration     New York, NY 10260
[e-mail]  +1 212.235.9285

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

From: [e-mail] (Russ Latham)
Subject: Call Waiting Tones With Distinct Rings Not Working
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 13:42:19 -0600 (CST)


I have distinctive ringing on my phone line (different phone numbers
ring the same line, but with a different ring pattern), which also
used to work with the call waiting tones, ie there would be a
double beep when the second number is called.

About a month ago, the call waiting tones all started sounding the
same for the different numbers.  It sounds as if there is some type of
muting on the line, and then a single partial beep comes through.  I
disconnected everything on my phone line, and connected two different
phones to the service entry point, and still experience this.  I have
been talking to the phone company (Southwestern Bell) for the last
three weeks, and they can't seem to find the problem.  The distinctive
ring signals still work though.  The problem is just with the call
waiting tones.

Does anyone have any idea what might be wrong?  I don't have much
faith in SW Bell being able to figure out the problem.

There was also one other noticeable difference in my service at about
the same time.  My answering machine used to always hang up
immediately after the calling party hung-up.  Now, it stays on the
line, and records about five seconds of 'nothing' after the person
hangs up.  There is some real faint clicking sounds every now and
then, like some type of signalling, but nothing else.

Does anyone know what type of switches they use in their central
offices in the Fort Worth (Texas) area?

Any info appreciated ...


Thanks,

Russ Latham       [e-mail]
Motorola, Inc.    [e-mail]
                  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Juan Gascon)
Subject: Help Needed With V.P. Hotline For 12 Step Program
Date: 2 Apr 1993 12:17:53 -0800
Organization: Coast Community College District, Costa Mesa, CA


Originally we had thought to have areas forward their phones to a 700
EasyReach number if that were more cost effective but it seems that's
not possible.  800 numbers are too expensive and are "called number
paid" but it might work if we can identify the caller's area and bill
them (say using ANI or DNIS???).

The object is to get people who need help within this area to make a
local (or free if we could afford it) phone call which after routing
by the V.P. would either answer their questions about meetings and
such or patch them to volunteer somewhere within the area that can
help. (There are a lot of suffering addicts out there that need to
reach out and touch somebody.  We'd like to be there for them.)

Most of us are inexperienced with telephony and V.P. systems in
general and could use some kind hearted Guru that is willing to do
some charity (or nearly) consulting to point us in the right
direction.


[Moderator's Note: You would get ANI, or identification of the calling
number as part of your monthly bill on an 800 number, and if you wish
to charge these calls back to specific groups, it would be easy enough
to match your groups with a list of telephone exchange prefixes in the
respective areas they serve. There are voice processing programs avail-
able also which would ask the caller to enter either his zip code or
his area code and telephone prefix number, then use the information
entered to retrieve a file with information about the specific group
in his area. You could also probably have an 800 number which went
into a line which you (members of the organization) forwarded among
yourselves based on the day of the week or time of day. Each of you
would have notes available with the correlation between zip code and
group meeting, etc. In addition, by doing it this way (forwarding the
incoming 800 calls to members on thier home lines) you'd now have the
flexibility to offer immediate counseling as the need arose in the
process of making the referrals. You'd still get a monthly print out
of who called for accounting purposes.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 02 Apr 93 20:39:44 BST
From: Linc Madison <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Dialing Codes in France, UK


I have a couple of questions about dialing inland calls in France.  As
diligent readers of this Digest are well aware, France has abolished
"area codes" with the exception of Paris.

In France:

 FROM      TO       Dial
Paris     Paris    8 digits
Lyon      Lyon     8 digits  (for "Lyon" read "any city other than Paris")
Lyon      Paris    ???    01-XX.XX.XX.XX ?
Paris     Lyon     ???     0-XX.XX.XX.XX ?
Lyon      Calais   ???    just the eight digits, or prefixed with 0?

Am I guessing right on the dialing patterns?  Also, in Denmark, do you
always just dial eight digits for any inland (i.e., not international)
call?

Having spent a while this morning thumbing through "The Code Book"
(BT's comprehensive list of STD codes within Britain), I have a lot
more sympathy for the notion of abolishing area codes and going to
all-figure dialing.  There are a number of places in Britain where the
area code for the same place depends on whether the local number is
three     or six digits.  Most of them are straight-forward -- the code
for three-figure numbers in Eastling is 079589, and for six-figure
numbers it's 0795.  However, there are several that are not consistent
in that manner: Albrighton 090722 / 0902, Auchterhouse 082626 / 0382,
Barbon 046836 / 05242, Barlaston 078139 / 0782, Barnham Broom 060545 /
0603, Bassenthwaite Lake 059681 / 07687, Billesdon 053755 / 0533,
Bishopston 044128 / 0792 -- and that's only half way through the B's!
(This list is about three years old, so most of these have probably
been consolidated already, but it still shows how confusing the system
is.)  And now they want to add an extra digit in all the codes!

Another footnote: 0200, 0300, 0600, 0700 and 0900 are in use as
geographic area codes in the U.K.  Thus "900" numbers are on 0898,
0891, 0839, 08364, 06609, 06608, 06607, 06606, 06605, 0338, and 0336.
In addition, 0640 numbers are charged at the International Zone 6
(Australia/New Zealand) rate, which is even higher than the "premium
services" rate.  Cellular phones are on 0860, 0831, 0836, 0374, 0385,
0850, and 0881.


Linc Madison  ==  [e-mail]
     ==  [e-mail]
59 Stourcliffe Close, London W1H 5AR  U.K., Tel. [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Connecting Work to Home
Reply-To: [e-mail] ()
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 21:59:10 GMT


Hi!

What are YOU using to connect systems at home (or small remote
locations) to computers at work?

Traditionally, this has involved:

    (1) 300 bps, then 1200bps, then 2400bps and, lately, 9600 bps
    modems (one at work, and one at home);
    (2) a voice-grade phone line, connecting the modems;
    (3) a terminal, or PC with terminal emulation software, at home;
    (4) a host system at work.

Nowadays, there are a host of other choices:

    Data Highways:

o faster modems (14400bps (V.32bis) and, in future, 56000bps (V.fast)
o switched 56KB data lines (dropping in cost)
o ISDN (it's coming, it's coming, it's ... )
o ETV (Ethernet via cable TeleVision)

    Network Protocols:

o asynchronous DECnet
o Serial Line INternet Protocol (SLIP)
o Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)

And, for those of us wanting to display X at home:

eXcursion
PC-Xview
Xvision
PC-Xremote

What mix of these have you found to be attractive, and why?  Or, what
sounds good to you, but you can't do it right now because of <fill in
the blank>?

I'm looking forward to a good discussion, and to learning a lot from
it.


Thanks!

Terry Lemons   Semiconductor Engineering Group   Digital Equipment Corporation

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #226
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11681;
          3 Apr 93 5:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27817
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 02:54:30 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29961
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 02:53:46 -0600
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 02:53:46 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #227

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Apr 93 02:53:45 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 227

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Houston Chronicle NII Story (Mark Boolootian)
    MCI HomeOffice Link Press Announcement (Scott Loftesness)
    Hospital ER tx and "Dumping" (was Phone Service Expected) (Daniel Burstein)
    Seeking Recommendations on Cellular Service in Baltimore (system@apres)
    Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!? (Mike Coleman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: Houston Chronicle NII Story
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 13:26:55 -0800 (PST)


 Date: Thu, 1 Apr 93 14:54:12 CST
 From: [e-mail] (Joe Abernathy)

NREN Wrap -- This is my last story for the {Houston Chronicle}. It is
to appear on April 4, 1993. Please feel free to redistribute it for
any non-commercial use.

    To those of you who have provided so much help these past four
years, thanks. It's been a real education. I've accepted the job of
Senior Editor-News at {PC World} magazine, and I'll still be writing
the {Village Voice} Technocracy column, so I hope you'll all stay in
touch. My new contact information is P.O. Box 572390, Houston, Texas
77257-2390, [e-mail].


   By JOE ABERNATHY
   Houston Chronicle Staff Writer


   The specters of class struggle and international economic warfare
are casting a shadow over administration hearings on how to build a
sophisticated national computer network.

   Billed as an engine of job growth, a central concern is emerging
that the "data superhighway" promised by Vice President Al Gore and
President Bill Clinton during the campaign could produce a large
underclass of "information have-nots."

   Based on an emerging global computer network known as the Internet,
which links up to 12 million people in more than 30 nations, the
National Research and Education Network (NREN) is a decade-long
project of former Sen. Gore.

   Gore envisions a future in which oceans of data, including
libraries of movies, books and other creative works, would be readily
avail able to every home. In selling a $5 billion spending plan
focused on the network in 1992, Gore held forth the image of
classrooms without walls, sophisticated medical collaborations, and
globally competitive small businesses.

   "The NREN is at all odds the most important and lucrative
marketplace of the 21st century," he said in a recent statement.

   But in trying to make it work, it has become apparent that the NREN
remains in many ways a captive of its privileged institutional
heritage.  Some Americans don't even have telephone service, and many
still don't have computers with which to access the net.

     Two congressional hearings were held in late March concerning the
National Information Infrastructure, and a bill has been introduced
that would take up where Gore's 1992 High- Performance Computing Act
left off _ bringing the net to classrooms, small business and other
potentially disenfranchised Americans. Clinton's budget includes an
additional $489 million over six years for the network.

    And while the regional Bells, newspapers and other information
giants have been struggling for years over the future of the medium,
congressional insiders say that with the increased attention, a
resolution seems likely to be found during the current session of
Congress.

    "What I think is really getting squeezed out is that there hasn't
been a genuine, public interest, bottom-up grass roots voice. It's a
huge, huge issue," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Washington
offices of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, the
primary champion of civil rights in the new electronic medium. "It's
about people, it's about institutions, it's about who gets to connect
and on what terms."

    Observers also fear that the rush to wield the network as an
economic weapon could produce dramatic incursions into free speech and
other civil liberties.

"I'm very concerned that the rhetoric about national competitiveness
is transforming itself into a new cold war," said Gary Chapman,
director of CPSR's 21st Century Project in Cambridge, Mass. "The
concerns of intelligence and other federal agencies including NASA has
been to look at technology resources that are not related to military
security but to economic benefits as being things that have to be
protected by Draconian measures of security."

   Recent disciplinary actions at NASA Ames Research Center in
Northern California seem to support Chapman's concerns.

   Up to eight of the 11 scientists disciplined in December were
targeted because of their participation in politically oriented,
international discussion groups hosted on the Internet computer
network, according to documents obtained by the {Houston Chronicle}
under the Freedom of Information Act, along with subsequent interviews
of NASA Ames personnel.

   "Some people there were accused of dealing with foreign nationals
about non-classified technology issues," said Chapman, whose
organization also has made inquiries into the matter. "NASA said the
U.S.  has to protect its technology assets because of the global
environment of competitiveness."

   The issues are even simpler for Raymond Luh, a subcontracting
engineer fired by NASA. Luh, an American of Chinese ancestry, feels
that his career was destroyed simply because he joined in one of the
thousands of political discussions aired each day over the Internet.

    "I feel I have been gravely wronged by NASA," Luh said. "I cannot
possibly seek employment elsewhere. My reputation as a law-abiding
citizen and a hard-working researcher has been tarnished almost beyond
repair."

    NASA refused to comment on the matter.

    According to FOIA documents provided by NASA's Office of the
Inspector General, Luh was fired when "a document containing Chinese
writing was found in (Luh's computer). Investigation determined that
Luh's office computer held a large volume of files relating to his
efforts to promote Most Favored Nation trade status for the People's
Republic of China. Luh was not authorized to use his computer for this
activity."

   To Luh, however, he was only one of the chorus of voices that
joined in a fiery debate surrounding fallout from the Tiananmen Square
massacre. He wasn't trying to make policy -- he was exercising
intellectual freedom, in his spare time.

    "That's a very dangerous and disturbing kind of trend," said
Chapman. "The parallel is with the Cold War and transforming the modes
of thinking and the practices of these agencies into new forms of
control, even in the absence of militarily significant enemies. We'll
start thinking about the Japanese or whatever Pacific Rim country you
want to pick as being `enemies,' and intellectual commerce with these
people will be a matter of economic security.

    "The freedom of expression aspect of that is very critical. We
want to make sure that this is a system in which people can express
themselves freely without repercussions."

     Observers fear that Luh may be only the first such casualty as
federal agencies and special interest groups reshape the Internet into
their own model, carving up a pie estimated to be worth $3.5 trillion.

    While Gore's vision implies the construction of a high-speed,
high-tech fiber optic network, a number of counter-proposals are being
floated.

   The Electronic Frontier Foundation -- which earlier made a name for
itself with a successful court challenge to the conduct of the Secret
Service in a hacker crackdown -- is focusing on building a less
powerful, less costly network that could reach more people, more
quickly.

   "Our central concern is that we get from debate to doing
something," said Jerry Berman, EFF director.

   EFF's approach -- endorsed by Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass. -- is
to build an ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) service atop
the telephone network, making a modest level of digital computer
transmission available quickly to every home. The more sophisticated
fiber optic approach implied by Gore's NREN could be implemented as
time and money allow.

   But few voices have been heard backing ISDN.

   "The current state of the discussion is turmoil and chaos," said
the CPSR's Rotenberg. "It's a mistake to place too much emphasis on
any technological configuration. A lot of that energy and those
resources would be better spent talking about users and institutions
rather than technology and standards.

    "This is like trying to explain railroads in the 18th century or
cars in the 19th century. Here we are in the 20th century, and we know
something big is happening right under our feet and we know it has
something to do with these new telecommunications technologies.

   "None of us knows where this is going to take us, but I think
people should have some sensitiv ity to the prospect that the future
world we're going to live in is going to be shaped in many ways by the
decisions we make today about the information infrastructure."

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

Date: 02 Apr 93 23:18:08 EST
From: Scott Loftesness <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI HomeOffice Link Press Announcement


                "A QUICK LOOK AT MCI HomeOffice Link"
                -------------------------------------

Corporations across America now have formal policies that encourage
employees to work at home since "homeworkers" are increasing
productivity and reducing costs for employers.

MCI HomeOffice Link provides the technology to make it happen.  With
HomeOffice Link, 800 calls can be routed to sales and service
representatives, agents and others working from home by providing
network-based processing of 800 calls.

MCI HomeOffice Link extends the ultra-flexibility and convenience of
MCI's 800 Enchanced Call Router (ECR) services and features to
employees working at home full-time, part-time or just after hours.

How Does It Work?

After dialing an 800 number, callers hear a greeting, and can select
from a pre-programmed menu of options.  Or, a caller can enter a zip
code, PIN, employee code, etc., to reach the appropriate
representative.

Benefits:

* Fast efficient service.  Callers get fast and effective service
because they direct their own calls.  Plus, MCI HomeOffice Link makes
the connection to a home office completely transparent to the caller.

* Assures smooth call handling.  Using the TNT (Takeback & Transfer)
feature of MCI HomeOffice Link, homeworkers can transfer calls to any
company location nationwide.  Likewise, other offices can transfer
calls to employees working at home.

HomeOffice Link saves the caller time by not requiring hang up and
redial to reach another party or location.  With the Busy/No Answer
Rerouting feature, calls can be rerouted to another destination or to
voice mail for appropriate handling.

The caller has the capability to return to the original menu of
options using MCI HomeOffice Links's Caller Takeback feature.

* Keeps the called party informed.  The "attended transfer" capability
allows employees to discuss the caller's needs during a call transfer.
The message announcement feature allows for promotional messages to be
played while the caller is on "soft hold" during the transfer process.
Better yet, the Announced Connect feature helps to make sure the
employee accepts the call.

Additional Information:

According to a readership study, 98% of employees are happier working
at home.  MCI HomeOffice Link provides these additional advantages:

* Customization.  HomeOffice Link maximizes 800 call routing for
callers and the employer.  ECR features can be mixed and matched to
meet the specific needs of each application.

* Savings.  HomeOffice Link is a network solution rather than a
hardware solution, so a company does not need to invest in new or
upgrade existing equipment.  A single 800 number can connect to all
company locations, anywhere in the continental U.S.

* Improved call-flow management.  Fast and comprehensive reporting
(including complete call detail) is available to assist in making
real-time management decisions.

* Reliablity.

The MCI network.


PUBLIC RELATIONS ANNOUNCEMENT

                 MCI INTRODUCES NEW 800 SERVICE
                FOR CORPORATE WORK-AT-HOME MARKET

     New York--March 11, 1993--Corporations with work-at-home programs
now will be able to route incoming business calls to employees' home
offices through a single 800 number using a new MCI service, called
MCI HomeOffice Link.

     Companies using MCI HomeOffice Link are able to route calls to
employee home offices using pre-assigned personal identification
numbers, employee codes or caller zip codes, among other options.

     Callers phoning the company on the HomeOffice 800 number first
will hear a company greeting and then be asked use their touchtone
keypad to enter the appropriate pre-assigned number of the person
being called.  MCI, through its intelligent network, then routes the
call to the home office of the person being called.  If the employee
is not home or is on another line, MCI can transfer the call to a
phone mail system, a customer's call center or some other predefined
alternate destination.

     "This service actually evolved from an application that MCI
developed jointly for Dun & Bradstreet's telecommuting program," said
Jonathan Crane, president of MCI National Accounts.  "The introduction
of MCI HomeOffice Link demonstrates MCI's ability to develop custom
applications and turn those applications into service offerings that
provide key solutions to a customer's ever- changing business needs.
HomeOffice Link will appeal to corporations that have marketing,
sales, customer service and other employees working from home offices
on a full or part-time basis."

     Dun & Bradstreet Information Services, one of the nation's
leading business information service providers, uses HomeOffice Link
to support its nearly 400 business analysts and sales repres-
entatives working from home offices.  These home-based employees can
be reached through a single 800 number by entering the employees'
identification number.

     "We had a very clear need for a way to route and handle incoming
calls to these home offices," explained Jim Haines, D&B assistant vice
president for telecommunications.  "We went to MCI and asked that they
put on their thinking caps and figure out a way not only to route
these calls to our employees' home offices, but also to find a way to
have calls answered if the employees were not at home.  Through
collaboration with us, MCI arranged for the option of having calls
answered into phone mail or routed to our call centers if the employee
is not available when the call is received."

     With the HomeOffice Link service, MCI customers can receive call
reports as frequently as every day, weekly or monthly.  The call
reports can be used to track costs and assess routing schemes for
improving productivity and balancing workloads.  Other MCI 800
services can be used in conjunction with HomeOffice Link.  For
example, a HomeOffice customer could use MCI's advanced Takeback and
Transfer service to allow a home worker to reroute the same 800 call
to an alternate destination such as a customer service center, order
processing center or even another employee's office.  Previously, the
caller would have had to hang up and redial a separate number.

             Growth of Corporate Work-at-Home Market

     MCI HomeOffice Link service is just one of a number of services
MCI is providing to corporations with telecommuting programs.  Last
year, MCI introduced a new Telecommuting Consulting Service to help
corporations better meet the communication needs of their home
workers.  Dun & Bradstreet and Digital Equipment Corporation are two
of a number of major U.S. corporations that MCI is working with in
this program.

     Many large companies are initiating and expanding work-at- home
programs to create more flexible and mobile office environments and as
a way to meet the requirements of the new Clean Air Act, which is
aimed at reducing auto pollution in large metropolitan areas.
Already, the corporate work-at-home market is estimated at more than
6.6 million American workers, according to Link Resources of New York.

     MCI's HomeOffice Link is another 800 service innovation offered
as part of MCI's fast-growing Enhanced Voice Services (EVS) family of
products.  Headquartered in Washington, D.C., MCI offers a full range
of domestic and global telecommunications services through one of the
world's largest state-of-the art networks.  With 1992 revenue of over
$10 billion, the company is the second largest long distance provider
in the United States and has more than 60 offices in 55 countries and
places.

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Hospital ER tx and "Dumping" (was Phone Service Expected to Save)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 04:45:07 GMT


Lives References: <[e-mail]>

In the thread about providing "911" phone service to deadbeats, our
Moderator made some comments about how hospitals will begin treatment
of gunshot victims, and if they don't have medical coverage, transfer
them to other hospitals.

I'm getting off telecom topics here so I'll keep it short.  Any
hospital which does this is making some heavy duty violations of
federal law (and possibly local ones as well).

Under the "Comprehensive Omnibus Budgetary Reconciliation Act"
(referred to as COBRA), any hosiptal getting federal money (i.e.
Medicare -- which means 99.999% of hospitals) has the duty to treat a
patient, and cannot transfer him out unless medically indicated.  Note
that it doesn't matter whether the patient uses Medicare; if the
hospital takes any federal money, then ALL patients are covered.

More details available by email.

Stay healthy!!!


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Oh, I know all about COBRA; my former employer, the
attornies have to keep on supplying me with the medical insurance I
had for the next year if I want (can afford!) it. But I also know what
I hear listening to the police and paramedics on my PRO-34 scanner;
those people should realize the public spies on them. I'm always
hearing the dispatchers telling the officers that " ... UC called to
say they are 'on bypass' (meaning they contend the emergency room is
too backlogged to accept further patients)", and telling the 'wagon men'
(slang for the guys who drive the paddy wagons around) and paramedics
to take their loads to 'County'. Of course, Cook County Hospital's ER
is always logjammed; you can sit there eight hours *in the emergency
room* waiting to be treated on a typical weekend evening. In fairness
to UC, they do write off a huge amount of bad debt each year based on
treatment of the local yokels in ER (all inner city hospitals do),
which is why they all charge so much, which is why my (now payable
totally by myself) insurance costs so much, which is why I am dropping
it. I'll be interested to hear what President Rodham-Clinton has to
say about all this later this year.  By all means, stay healthy! In
Chicago, that means staying inside your house after dark where it is
less likely (though still possible) you will be shot or assaulted.  PAT]

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

Subject: Seeking Recommendations on Cellular Service in Baltimore
From: marcal!apres![e-mail] (System Operator)
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 93 14:04:34 CST
Organization: Applied Research, Cary, Illinois


I will soon be relocating to the Baltimore, Maryland area (Columbia,
actually) and would like to hear recommendations for a cellular
provider in the area.  I will probably be travelling within the state,
from Frederick down to Gaithersburg, but home will be Columbia.  I
currently have CellularOne service here in northern Illinois, and have
no particular complaints (except the lack of a *cheap* monthly charge
for pay-as-you-go: I generally use less than 30 minutes a month,
usually 10 minutes or so.)

I'd like to hear about the Maryland providers in that area, and what
deals might be available.


Dan   uunet!mcdchg!marcal!apres!dan   [e-mail] (System Operator)
Applied Research (cryptography & security BBS)  1 708 639 8853

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Coleman)
Subject: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!?
Organization: Twin Sun Inc, El Segundo, CA, USA
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 01:51:19 GMT


I was just told that using, say, my Sprint calling card, via their 800
number to call next door (within the same LATA), was illegal.

Is this (nonsense) really true?  Is it enforced?


Mike

El Segundo, California--Where the jets rumble over the sharks


[Moderator's Note: If Sprint does not have intrastate and intralata
tariffs on file then yes, it is illegal. So is the sale of alcoholic
beverages between the hours of 4 and 7 AM in Chicago (5 AM to 12 noon
on Sunday, and 4 AM to 6 PM on Election Day or *anytime at all* in
those precincts of the city which have by voting established Prohibition).
Yes, we legally have Prohibition in a few small areas of the city.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #227
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14910;
          3 Apr 93 6:25 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27804
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 04:11:37 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29761
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 04:10:37 -0600
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 04:10:37 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #228

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Apr 93 04:10:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 228

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (John Higdon)
    Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Joe Konstan)
    Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Al Varney)
    Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Alan Boritz)
    Re: The Fortran-filter Gateway (John Nagle)
    Re: The Fortran-filter Gateway (David W. Barts)
    Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning (Jacob DeGlopper)
    Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning (Ben Cox)
    Re: Field Strength Meter (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Field Strength Meter (Harold Hallikainen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge
Date: 3 Apr 1993 00:32:56 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.
> tredydev.unisys.com writes ...

>> I remember a discussion some time back regarding not paying the
>> Subscriber Line Access Charge (the $3.50/month imposed by the FCC) if
>> one has telco toll restriction enabled (no toll calls, no operator
>> calls, period, $2.50/mo GTE).  I thought the conclusion was that one
>> did not have to pay the FCC charge when toll blocking was in force.

> [Moderator's Note: The only thing is, if I have to pay to have access
> for outgoing calls, and you have to pay to receive incoming calls
> (from the network), isn't that double payment for the same access?  PAT]

Well, isn't it no different than each side of a conversation having to
pay the basic monthly fee for local exchange access?  After all, even
though "caller pays" for regular toll calls, the recipient must pay
the basic local charge to get dialtone in order to receive the calls.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 21:20 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge


On Apr 1 at 16:46, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: The only thing is, if I have to pay to have access
> for outgoing calls, and you have to pay to receive incoming calls
> (from the network), isn't that double payment for the same access?  PAT]

I count two accesses there: yours and his. Whether you receive calls
or make them, you have access to the network, no? I suppose it might
be argued that a receive-only situation is half an access, but I do
not think that there are provisions for fractional billing in this
area.

But even so, as was discussed at length some time back, the name on
the charge has no bearing on the purpose of the charge. Regardless of
the name, "access", the purpose was to compensate LECs for the loss of
long distance revenue as a result of divestiture. If you call it a
"Mandated Subsidy" (a much more accurate description), then you will
not feel the need to discuss matters such as interLATA access.


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

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

From: Joe Konstan <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 17:46:54 CST
Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge


This discussion came around (as it always does) to the question of
whether you are paying because someone else can call you from "the
network."

Our Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: The only thing is, if I have to pay to have access
> for outgoing calls, and you have to pay to receive incoming calls
> (from the network), isn't that double payment for the same access?  PAT]

No -- you are viewing this in what is a very sensible (and therefore
almost by definition wrong) manner.  There are two valid interpre-
tations, of which I think the second is perhaps easier to use, though
the first at least has some sense to it.

1.  The fee pays for network access as a fixed cost -- not a variable
one.  Therefore, you are paying a monthly (not per-call) amount that
covers the fact that your telco and the IXC must connect somehow.
Variable costs (per-call) are also assessed to one party as part of
long-distance rates, but fixed costs exist for each line regardless of
how many call it makes or receives.

2.  This fee is nothing more than a way for local phone companies to
retain the subsidy that Mother used to generate from long-distance
rates without getting the approval of each PUC.  In addition, it is
somewhat more appealing politically since it is "FCC mandated" and has
a catchy title.  In the end dollars are dollars.

Telephony isn't the only industry that plays games like these.
Airlines, for example, have a tendency to request FAA regulations to
handle whatever it is that they want.  The FAA regs on carry-on
baggage were instituted because the airlines wanted a rule to use
rather than just tell passengers that they had too much carry-on for a
certain flight.  Similarly, utilities often ask state PUC's for
special fees to cover things rather than just cover them by increasing
the utility bill.  Oh, well!


Joe Konstan    [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri,  2 Apr 93 22:40:48 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.
> tredydev.unisys.com writes ...

>> I remember a discussion some time back regarding not paying the
>> Subscriber Line Access Charge (the $3.50/month imposed by the FCC) if
>> one has telco toll restriction enabled (no toll calls, no operator
>> calls, period, $2.50/mo GTE).  I thought the conclusion was that one
>> did not have to pay the FCC charge when toll blocking was in force.
>> Did I remember incorrectly?  GTE insists that one always has to pay
>> the FCC charge, but then I expect them to say that, true or false.

> Well, you can talk your local phone company into whatever you can talk
> them into.  My phone company sent me straight to the FCC, which said,
> in effect, "even if your phone company could keep you from using long
> distance service for outgoing calls, they can't keep you from
> RECEIVING long distance calls, so there."  Pay up, and smile.

> [Moderator's Note: The only thing is, if I have to pay to have access
> for outgoing calls, and you have to pay to receive incoming calls
> (from the network), isn't that double payment for the same access?  PAT]

   Not speaking as a company spokesperson, and from pretty old memory,
here's what I remember of the Sub. Line Access Charge ...

   First of all, the name has some incorrect connotations, and some
FCC staff probably regret using it.  It is a Subscriber Line Charge,
but has little to do with "Access".

   Prior to divestiture, the "Long Lines" department and local
telephone companies had evolved an elaborate system of accounting for
costs and charges related to various types of calls.  Initially, toll
calls cost a lot of money and were charged a lot of money.  Over time,
as toll call volume grew and costs on a per-call basis dropped, the
Bell System faced a social and economic problem.  With PUC and FCC
approval, they kept toll charges higher than real costs warranted, and
"gave" the extra profits to the local TELCOs (including independents)
based on call volume.  In return, the local TELCOs would figure these
profits into their income for rate-making purposes.  Net result was
that the charges for local telephone service (line charges) were
somewhat lower than they would have otherwise been.

   Since all lines didn't make equal use of toll calls, this
represented a form of "tax" on the toll callers (heavily business)
used to achieve the Universal Service goal of the Bell System and
government agencies.  More people could afford telephones, which meant
more people would use telephones and eventually make or receive toll
calls.  This helped keep toll rates down, perhaps even below the rate
they would have had without the extra profit.  One could argue that
everyone gained, in the long run.

   With divestiture, the local TELCOs had a problem with how to
transition from this non-competitive extra profit from a single
carrier to a more competitive (cost-based price) environment.  They
could either maintain the extra toll revenue by over-charging the new
Interexchange Carriers or by adding that lost revenue into their costs
and raising per-line rates for local service to reflect true costs.
Neither the TELCOs nor the ICs liked the first choice, arguing that
such an approach would ultimately cost the TELCOs profits and
customers because the big-business toll users would all just order
direct lines to the ICs.  Since the extra-high TELCO access charges to
the ICs would make such toll calls much more expensive, this would be
a reasonable decision by large businesses.  However, in the long run,
such a choice by most large toll users would have meant the loss of
even more IC-access revenue, and ultimately the line charge or some
other TELCO service would have to increase to recover that revenue.

   So the second choice was made -- raise the per-line rates to
reflect the revenue loss from lowered rates to the ICs.  In order to
make this a reasonably painless process to the PUCs, the TELCOs and
their customers, a gradual transition from the high-IC-access-charge
to higher-line-charge was planned.  And just to keep the PUCs and
TELCOs from having to argue all this out in every jurisdiction, the
FCC elected to do it for them using their mandated "Subscriber Line
Access Charge".  Every so often, the FCC mandates that this charge be
increased and the rates charged to the ICs for access to the TELCOs
subscribers be decreased.  Ideally, his change is revenue-neutral to
the TELCOs, and lowers the costs of toll calls.  Each time the "Access
Charge" has been raised, the rates charged by the ICs for toll service
have dropped.

   Rather than viewing the "Access Charge" as something you pay in
order to access a toll network (an IC), instead view it as a just
another part of the monthly line charge, mandated by the FCC instead
of the PUC.  The only lines that should not pay that charge are one's
whose rates were NEVER subsidized by the per-divestiture toll "tax".
And lines that only permit local outgoing calls (and all incoming
calls) still have to pay their fair share, including the "Access
Charge"; worse yet, they don't have the benefit of cheap toll calls!

   A side effect of all this is that the cost for a local TELCo line
has increased rapidly in the last 8 years.  So now TELCos have to
adopt (via PUCs) "life-line" services in order to make telephone
service affordable to some.  But now the "tax" to support this is much
more obvious -- it's not hidden in the cost of toll calls (except in
the high rates some countries charge for International calls).


Al Varney - all from memory, so I'm sure there are some errors.

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

Date: Fri, 02 Apr 93 06:16:28 EST
From: [e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge


In an article written March 30, 1993, MPA15AB![e-mail]
writes:

> GTE insists that one always has to pay the FCC charge, but then I
> expect them to say that, true or false.

Moderator noted:

> charge is always due and payable. The fact that your phone line is
> restricted in the type of calls it can make is your choice, not that
> of telco or the commission.   PAT]

That doesn't seem right, but FCC rules seem to mandate it for outbound
AND inbound facilities.  The only exceptions under Part 69 are for
broadcast channels and wire facilities that can not be connected to
common line facilities.

But what about semi-private phone systems that offer subscriber
services, such as those at some universities that have no telco
presence (or where telco no longer has a presence)?  At what point
must they also file a tariff for, and collect, access charges for
THEIR end-users?


Alan Boritz  [e-mail]   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I am also wondering how they handle this in the
case of highly restricted phones such as on centrex systems where the
number cannot make outgoing calls at all and can only receive calls on
the centrex -- no incoming calls from outside the premises.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: The Fortran-filter Gateway
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1993 17:30:36 GMT


      About twenty years ago, I had a similar problem with a
time-sharing user who was accessing a UNIVAC mainframe via Telex.
Whenever he made a listing of the link output from his program, his
connection would disconnect.  The problem was that Telex considers
"NNNN" as an end of message, and the system library contained a symbol
with "NNNN" in its name.  Every time the listing reached that point, a
disconnection resulted.

      The user switched to TWX.


John Nagle

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

Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1993 09:51:11 +0800 (PST)
From: David W. Barts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Fortran-filter Gateway


> Several months ago we started noticing that (now and again)
> the network connection to the mainland would become very very slow;
> this would continue for 10-15 minutes or so, then all would suddenly
> be well again.

In other words, the gateway gets C-sick easily.  If the manufacturer
fixes the problem, will they call it "the Dramamine patch"?


David Barts  N5JRN                      UW Civil Engineering, FX-10
[e-mail]                Seattle, WA  98195

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

Date: Fri, 2 Apr 93 11:48 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Subject: Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning


Dave Leibold writes:

> A report from Reuters notes that one company is cashing in on the
> current scare on cellular phones and cancer. Quantum Laboratories
> offers a $49.95 Callguard device that is supposed to cut out 97% of
> the radio emissions from cellular phones.

Maybe some of us should get together and start selling a packet of
information on how to completely eliminate radio emission from your
cellular phone, as well as reduce your monthly bill by some healthy
amount.  If anyone's really creative, maybe they could put together a
power-switch remover for popular cellular phones ...


Jacob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton (MD) Volunteer Rescue Squad
 -- CWRU Biomedical Engineering - [e-mail] --

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Subject: Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 18:13:41 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Organization: Ancient Illuminated Sears of Bavaria


[e-mail] (Dave Leibold) writes:

> A report from Reuters notes that one company is cashing in on the
> current scare on cellular phones and cancer. Quantum Laboratories
> offers a $49.95 Callguard device that is supposed to cut out 97% of
> the radio emissions from cellular phones.

Hmm; if anyone wants to send me their cellphone and $50, I'll perform
a service (modification to the phone) that will cut out 100% of those
pesky emissions...  :)

If this Callguard device really does cut 97% of the radio emissions,
I'm surprised anyone would pay a dime for it.  If not, then Quantum
Labs may have a slight problem ...


Ben Cox     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Field Strength Meter
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 05:02:12 GMT


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

> Please help me. Someone know about field strength meters?  I'm

If you already have a sensitive VOM (aka multi meter) such as the
Simpson 260 or similar, you can make up a FSM by connecting around a
foot of wire (~30 cm) to each of two banana plugs, and connecting a
germanium diode between the two plugs.  Plug it into the meter, and
set it for a low current range.  Spread out the wires and you have a
FSM.  Not as accurate as a $900 one, but useable to peak a transmitter
or antenna.

Note to PAT: You can't measure SWR with a FSM directly.  Indirectly,
you can minimize the SWR by maximizeing the field strength (not
precise but reasonabally close) unless the FSM is placed where it will
respond to stray RF currents on the shield (if coax) or unbalanced
currents (not coax).  With the FSM responding more to these stray RF
currents than to the antenna's radiation, maximum on the FSM would be
nowhere near minimum SWR.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
                    Previous play (obselete): [e-mail]
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Field Strength Meter
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1993 03:36:35 GMT


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

> Please help me. Someone know about field strength meters?  I'm
> interested in getting one to fix antennas.  Leader Instruments has
> one, but it's much expensive, about US$900.00.

> [Moderator's Note: Well, you get what you pay for (or at least you are
> supposed to get more if you pay more) but it seems to me $900 is a bit
> steep for these instruments.  The $29 units at Radio Shack may not
> quite provide the accuracy you desire, but there ought to be a happy
> medium considerably less than the price you were quoted. Basically a
> FSM measures the strengh of a nearby radio wave. It will also measure
> what is termed 'SWR' (or standing wave ratio), which is considered to
> be a Bad Thing in too large a quantity. As the antenna is 'cut' or
> 'trimmed' to precisely the right length or some fraction thereof for
> the desired frequency, the FSM will show when optimum configuration
> has been reached. The SWR will show if some part of the signal is
> going back down the coax to the transmitter, thus causing spurious
> radiation which manifests itself on your neighbor's television set
> during their soap opera program or in grandpa's hearing aid. Can
> anyone suggest a good source of these instruments in the USA to our
> reader from Brazil?   PAT]

    Actually, the field strength meters I'm familiar with are
several kilobucks.  They are actually calibrated in volts per meter
(the true field strength, though the one I've used most actually
measures the magnetic field but is calibrated to read the electric
field based on the intrinsic impedance of free space ...).  The ones
I've used are from Potomac Instruments, 932 Philadelphia Ave, Silver
Spring, MD 20910, phone [phone].

    There are also field strength meters that measure power
density (watts per square meter, or a derivative) for determining RF
safety.  The one I'm most familiar with there is from Holaday
Industries, Inc., 14825 Martin Drive, Eden Prarie, MN 55344, phone +1
612 934 4920.

    Finally (almost), it seems to me that SWR merely indicates the
ratio of the load impedance to the characteristic impedance of the
transmission line (or the inverse) and should have little to do with
spurious radiation unless the output network of the transmitter varies
its harmonic radiation with load impedance.  I often think that in
amateur radio circles (I'm WA6FDN), SWR is over-rated.  I really like
to use a Smith Chart to visualize what's going on with SWR.  But, I'm
not an expert on transmission lines (or anything else, really!).

    Finally, this is probably the first posting I've seen from
South America.  A friend's parents live in Uraguay.  Anyone know of
any internet access down there so she can get her parents on email?


Thanks!

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


[Moderator's Note: Is the importance of SWR over-rated? Back in my CB
radio days (about ten years during the 1970's) I had a Cobra-142 XL,
single/double sideband / AM radio. I replaced the channel selector
with a Digiscan that gave me coverage from around 25.5 megs all the
way up to almost ten meters, 28 something, in 10 kc hops. If I needed
5 kc either way, I had a slider on it for the difference. A frequency
counter in the line told me where I was at. The Uniden chips in those
radios could be programmed to cover three thousand (!) 'channels'; the
trouble was you could not get it to oscillate (or 'key up') much below
26 megs without stuff on the other end falling out. Anyway, most of
the guys here stayed 'upstairs' working the skip from the east and
west coast. Two lousy watts, but that radio had excellent modulation
on SSB -- it was loud on AM also. My 5/8 wave ground plain antenna
was mounted on a tripod on top of the elevator machine room on the
roof, 90 feet in the air -- tallest building for two miles, and I was
a block from Lake Michigan. The coax had an 100 foot run via building
conduit and the elevator shaft. I treated SWR like a religion; an
in-line meter said it was always (1.2 to 1) or (1.3 to 1). Guys in
Indiana told me I sounded like a local -- all on two watts
(considering some loss between the antenna and downstairs). I had
another 100 watts I could have put on, but I didn't need to! I even
had a guy in Venezuela say he heard me one time although he couldn't
make it back to me. (He sent a note to my post office box.)   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #228
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24344;
          4 Apr 93 0:01 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05544
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 21:59:03 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05282
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Apr 1993 21:58:29 -0600
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 21:58:29 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #229

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Apr 93 21:58:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 229

Index To This Issue:                     Don't Forget: Set Clocks Forward!

    Stupid Switch Tricks ([e-mail])
    MajorBBS Demo v.6.02 Problem (Sebastian Wiszniewski)
    FCC Dark Fiber Decision (Scott Loftesness)
    Help Me Find A Small, Unobtrusive Pager (Scott Coleman)
    NPA Program For DOS Released (Bill Garfield)
    Truly Amazing, Truly Amazing ... Feds Delay Intro of GSM (David E A Wilson)
    How Fax Mailboxes Work (John R. Levine)
    A Very Interesting Intercept (Paul Robinson)
    Telecom Policies and AT&T Break-Up: Info Needed (Gudmundsdottir Thuridur)
    How to Busy Out a Line? (Jeff Wasilko)
    "Cellular Travel Guide" Available From Communications Publishing (J Covert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Stupid Switch Tricks
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 19:16:21 CST


On the second line at my parent's house, an interesting problem has
recently started occuring on the second line.  (This is in St. Louis,
MO (314) 355-).

The phone will function normally up until its last usage at night
(about 10:00 PM), and then the first time it is used the next morning,
it will not work.  The phone is picked up, and battery is present (and
the phone can generate DTMF), but no dial tone is received, and any
attempt to dial is ignored.  This has occurred about three times so
far (all this past week, but not on three consecutive days).  The
first two times, I called the line from another line in the house, and
the problem line rang as expected, and when answered it, it was a
perfect connection, as would be expected.  After this, the line worked
perfectly for incoming and outgoing calls.  The third time, I just let
it sit, and after somewhere between ten and sixty minutes, it
corrected itself.

Always before calling the problem line form the good line, I made
several attemptes at seizing the line (over a two or three minute
period), and none were successful.  This also was not done at the same
time each morning (the problem may have kicked in at the same time,
since I have no way of knowing when that happened, but my 'first
attempt to use the phone' each morning was different by about an hour
or so).

There are a lot of possibilities here (in spite of my background as an
electrical engineer, I haven't had time to really troubleshoot this,
as it has only happened three times, and I will be leaving town
tomorrow).

I have considered the possibility that the wiring is the problem.  It
is definitely in the jury-rigged category (60Hz hum is readily heard
on the line), and maybe something in the connection is so borderline
as to cause the switch to not always register a seizure on the line.
Perhaps the ringing voltage 'cleans' a contact or something and fixes
the line (remember, calling the phone fixes the problem for at least
the rest of the day -- not just for that one call), but that doesn't
explain the spontaneous fix that occurred on the third try.  I also do
not think this is the problem, because all the connections are clear
and there are no spontaneous disconnections.

I'm beginning to wonder if this is some kind of 'stupid switch trick.'
I know the switch isn't *SUPPOSED* to do anything like this, but I
have seen some of the crazy things that our switch does where I work,
so almost anything is possible.  The line has no special features on
it (not even Call Waiting).  I have no other details (it would be nice
to know if calling the line but NOT answering it fixes the problem ...
but I cannot make the problem occur in order to test this).  This does
not occur often enough to justify a complaint to the telco (SW Bell),
as I am well aware how they handle strange but reproducible problems,
and I don't even want to think what they would do with this
non-reproducible problem.  I don't know what kind of switch we are
served by (we are getting caller-ID shortly, and already have other
CLASS features, so it's at least a 1A (or equivalent) and I would
imagine its probably fully digital).

Has anyone every seen/heard of a switch doing something like this?

Replies by E-Mail would be fine, and I'll summarize for the group if I
get anything interesting.  The problem may well be with wiring,
although I can come up with no explanation as to what would cause a
problem of this nature.  (BTW, my brother just informed me that it
happened again ... someone just called him, though, so the problem is
fixed again for today) ... however, that would be the SECOND time it
happened today.  It it keeps up at this rate, we will have to call SW
Bell repair, so I would appreciate if anyone can offer any explanations.
(I would have to check over the inside wiring before we called SW
Bell, since we don't have inside wire maintenance).


Brett    ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (WISZNIEWSKI SEBASTIAN)
Subject: MajorBBS Demo v.6.02 Problem
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 17:18:40 GMT


ANYONE USE MajorBBS ?

I have a copy of MajorBBS Demo v.6.02. According to the documentation
it is a working demo but I can't get it to answer any calls.

I have a USR Sportster 14.4 external and a 486. I run MajorBBS under DOS.


Anyone?


Sebastian Wiszniewski - University of Toronto  COMP 9T5
I-NET:  [e-mail]

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

Date: 03 Apr 93 11:54:55 EST
From: Scott Loftesness <[e-mail]>
Subject: FCC Dark Fiber Decision


News from the Federal Communications Commission
1919 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554

Report No. CC-505
Common Carrier Action
March 29, 1993

Four BOC's Denied Authorization to Cease Providing Dark Fiber Service

The Federal Communications Commission has denied the applications of
Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., US West Communications, Bell Atlantic
Telephone Companies and BellSouth Telephone Companies to cease
providing dark fiber services.

"Dark" fiber service is the provision and maintenance of fiber optic
transmission capacity between customer premises where the electronics
and other equipment necessary to power or "light" the fiber are
provided by the customer, not the local exchange carrier (LEC).

In denying these applications, the Commission concluded that dark
fiber service is subject to FCC jurisdiction under Title II of the
Communications Act because dark fiber service is "wire communication"
offered by the BOCs on a common carrier basis. The Commission also
found that Section 214 authorization was required for termination of
the BOC's dark fiber service because such action would "discontinue,
reduce, or impair service to a community."  Finally, the Commission
concluded that the BOCs had not met their burden of proof because, on
this record, they failed to show that the public convenience and
necessity will not be adversely affected by discontinuance of their
dark fiber service.

Action by the Commission March 26, 1993, by Memorandum Opinion and
Order (FCC 93-165).  Chairman Quello, Commissioners Marshall, Barrett
and Duggan.

News Media contact: Rosemary Kimball at [phone].
Common Carrier Bureau contact: Norma Bell at [phone] or Colleen Boothby
or Greg Vogt at [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Coleman)
Subject: Help Me Find A Small, Unobtrusive Pager
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 15:21:31 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


I'm looking for a new pager. I currently use the standard boxlike
display pager which clips to one's belt. I don't like wearing the
pager actually clipped to my belt, however, so I usually carry it in
my pants pocket.  However, when I get a silent (vibrate) page, it
often buzzes against the metal keys which I also carry in that pocket.
In addition, it's bulky and hard to get at when a page comes in. And
it's far too big and heavy to fit comfortably in my shirt pocket. I've
heard of so-called wristwatch pagers, but have never seen one. You see,
I live in a somewhat podunk town, and although we have multiple paging
companies in the area (including Cybertel, an Ameritech company), it
seems that nobody carries wristwatch pagers or can even order them for
me.

Several years ago I had a "Sensar" pager which was slightly larger
than a fountain pen, and would clip to my shirt pocket comfortably.
The Sensar would be fine now except for the fact that this model has
no silent/vibrate option -- the closest it will get is a single peep,
which is still disruptive in some situations. Do they still make
Sensar-style pagers? Do the newer Sensars have a silent page mode,
with either a vibrate or a simple flashing LED instead of a peep? Do
the wristwatch pagers have a silent mode? Are they reliable and
sturdy? How come nobody seems to want to carry this style of pager in
their store? Can I get one to work on 457.0750 MHz, the frequency I'm
currently using for my paging service? How expensive are they? And
finally, what other options should I consider?

Thanks in advance for your suggestions. Please email responses to me;
I'll post a summary.


Scott Coleman   [e-mail]

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

Subject: NPA Program For DOS Released
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 20:11:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


Robert Ricketts (The PC Consultant), author of "NPA" a comprehensive
DOS-based NPA-NXX lookup utility, has just released his 1st quarter 93
version, posted on CI$ in the Safety Net as NPA931.ZIP.  It is also
posted on a couple public BBS' in the author's home city of Houston,
TX.

Though NPA is a shareware program (registration $25) it is not
crippled.  An optional feature (special registration $175) enables
exporting of data.

"NPA" can do searches (including wildcards!) for any city, state or
province based on either the city/state name or the npa/nxx. Output
includes NXX's within the NPA, city name, county name & population,
latitude and longitude and ZIP code of the rate center.  Wildcards are
valid in any field, though * searches will yield copious output.

Give "NPA" a pair of npa/nxx's to work with and the program output
will include great circle mileage between the two nxx's.

Previous users of "NPA" will appreciate that the new release is
lightning FAST!!  The program will run in full screen mode or from the
DOS command line.  Online, context-sensitive help is available with
the <F1> key in full screen mode.

NPA931.ZIP includes its own self-extracting database of V&H tables,
current as of 1st Q 93. The database includes all current North
American npa/nxx's, thus the whole package is sizeable, at just over
600k.

The author is a reader of the TELECOM Digest but does not currently
have ready access to Internet/Usenet.

For more information contact:

        The PC Consultant
        P.O. Box 42086
        Houston, TX 77242-2086
        [phone] - v-mail if no answer
        CIS 73670,1164



Ye Olde Bailey BBS   713-520-1569 (V.32bis) 713-520-9566 (V.32bis)
  Houston,Texas          yob.sccsi.com       Home of alt.cosuard

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

From: [e-mail] (David E A Wilson)
Subject: Truly Amazing, Truly Amazing ... Feds Delay Intro of GSM
Date: 3 Apr 1993 16:30:42 +1000
Organization: University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.


I was going to type in the following but was beaten to it. David
Maddison is happy for me to re-submit it for use in the TELECOM Digest.

 From: [e-mail] (MADDISON,David)
 Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 01:21:15 GMT
 Organization: La Trobe University

This little snippet was hidden away on page 18 of yesterdays "Age".
What a caring, alert press we have.

~From: "The Age" Newsaper (Melbourne, Australia) 31 March 1993

               PHONES A TURN-OFF FOR ASIO
               **************************

The introduction of a new mobile phone system billed as untappable is
being delayed because ASIO and law-enforcement agencies have insisted
that they be able to listen in on conversations.

The new network, called GSM or Global System for Mobile, was due to be
introduced by both Telecom and Optus from tomorrow.

But apparent confusion between law enforcement agencies, telecommun-
ications carriers and industry regulators about whether the system
could be tapped and who would pay for modifications to the system if
it could not, have held up launches.

It is unclear exactly how the confusion arose as it is known within
many sectors of the telecommunications industry that it is possible to
tap GSM phone calls.

Calls cannot be tapped on the GSM network itself, but they can be
tapped when they pass through a base station on the way to another
mobile handset or through the fixed telephone network to an ordinary
phone.

The GSM system is digital and sends phone calls in an encoded or
encrypted signal. This encryption makes it virtually impossible to tap
the radio signals sent out on GSM handsets.  Conversations cannot be
picked up by scanners as can conversations on the current analogue, or
018 system.

The so-called security of the GSM network has been highlighted by both
Telecom and Optus over the past few months as they have moved to sell
its benefits to possible customers.


David Wilson                [phone] voice, [phone] fax
Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong    [e-mail]

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

Subject: How Fax Mailboxes Work
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 3 Apr 93 13:02:15 EST (Sat)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> [Moderator's Note: I'd be interested in knowing how Ameritech (for
> example) operates its 'Fax Mailbox' service. Like a voicemail service,
> it stores a seemingly infinite number of fax messages for people who
> subscribe to the service and pick up their faxes on the fly, ...

Faxes aren't that much data.  Incoming messages from my fax modem,
stored in what is essentially G3 format, are between 20K and 30K per
page.  I don't believe that they can be compressed much more; G3 uses
a very effective Huffman compression technique and none of the
compression programs I've ever tried have been able to squeeze out as
much as another 10%.  I suppose they could be stored as G4 which takes
advantage of similarities between adjacent scan lines and might
optimistically cut down the size 30% or so.

That means that with 10GB of disk, which fits under a desk these days,
one can store about 400,000 pages of fax data, which should be enough
for a fairly large server.

> ... it rings once or twice, then the fax tones are heard as the mailbox
> answers, which I might add gives my name and fax number in the display
> window of the calling machine.

One can build this using off-the-shelf parts.  The fax answering
service attaches to the phone network like a voice answering service
using DID trunks, with each customer forwarded to a separate number in
the DID number block.  Brooktrout has for several years been selling
fax modems with integrated DID support which pass the DID number to
the host.  The CSI string that the caller sees is sent to the modem by
the host, so it should be easy enough to look up the appropriate
client name and number corresponding to the DID number and return that
as the CSI.

I have no idea what hardware Ameritech is using, but I see no reason
that one couldn't build a system like this out of a network of PCs
running QNX (a fast message-passing soft-realtime networked Unix
workalike used in a lot of funky data management applications) with
some strings of SCSI disks and a bunch of DID modems for a parts cost
of about $40K.  Add another $100K for software development and
overhead and it's still not a large investment to start a business.

> My fax line has 'forward on busy/no answer' to the mailbox, then
> Ameritech starts trying to pass the message to me ...

Soapbox time: Ameritech has no business running a service like this.
The only telco features this service needs are DID trunks and forward
on busy/no answer, both rather vanilla features that are supposed to
be equally available to all customers.  Ameritech may also be using a
feature that lets the fax mail system query the status of lines in the
CO, again somthing that should be equally available to all.  If the
telco can play both sides of the fence like this, they will inevitably
jigger things around to give their own service a huge advantage over
competitors'.  Case in point: I've heard of places where the monthly
charge for busy/no-answer forwarding is more than the monthly charge
for voice mail.  Can we say cross-subsidy?


Regards,

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

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

Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 04:32:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: A Very Interesting Intercept


On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a
wrong number.  I thought I'd share this recording for those of you
interested.  I have translated the number to something else so as not
to give away the original number; this number also gives the same
message.

The number to try is [phone].

Listen especially to the accent on the announcement. This announcement
was done with real care and precision. It is quite interesting.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gudmundsdottir Thuridur)
Subject: Telecom Policies and AT&T Break-Up: Info Needed
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 18:59:42 PST


I am doing a research on the positive and negative arguments for using
telecommunications policy as a key element of a national industrial
policy, and the efforts to date in achieveing this goal.  In addition,
I am studying what positive and negative lessons other countries have
learned from the experience of breaking up AT&T, and what lessons U.S.
policy-makers can learn from efforts at telecommunications reforms in
other countries.

I really appreciate any ideas you might give me regarding those
subjects.


Thuridur Gudmundsdottir   [e-mail]
340 Cloverdale Ave. #210  Los Angeles, Ca. 90036   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Subject: How to Busy Out a Line?
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 19:04:47 EST
Organization: Air Age Publishing, Wilton CT USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I need to make one of our lines busy after normal business hours and
on weekends. What is the best way to do this?

Can I simply install a switch that shorts tip and ring together?


Thanks,

Jeff
Jeff's Oasis at Home.   Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                                         [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I don't think it is a good idea to just short the
tip and ring. You're better off to put a couple other pieces in there.
A dead short will cause a trouble report to be issued. You want the
phone to appear to be busy instead.    PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 19:38:57 EST
From: John R. Covert  03-Apr-1993 1928 <[e-mail]>
Subject: New "Cellular Travel Guide" Available From Communications Publishing


The Fourth Edition of the "Cellular Travel Guide" (formerly "The
Cellular Telephone Directory") is now available from Communications
Publishing.

The new 1,184 page guide includes coverage maps, system IDs and
roaming information for metropolitan and rural cellular markets
throughout the U.S. and Canada plus information for those
international locations which provide visitor service on AMPS systems.

1-3 copies, $19.90, 4-7: $17.90, 8-15: $15.90, 16-31: $13.90, ...

Credit card orders can be phoned to 800 927-8800.  Shipping is free if
you send payment with your order to Communications Publishing, P.O.
Box 500, Mercer Island, WA 98040.

[My only involvement with this company is that I like their book and have
occasionally sent corrections or made recommendations to the publisher.]


John


[Moderator's Note: This is a reminder to the USA readers that Saturday
night/Sunday morning marks our semi-annual clock change. Clocks should
be set FORWARD one hour at 2:00 AM local time. For a good time, call
202-653-1800 at about 1:59:30 Eastern Standard Time. You'll note at
the magic second, the clock doesn't miss a beat!  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #229
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04165;
          4 Apr 93 5:02 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11434
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 03:03:25 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09973
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 03:02:03 -0500
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 03:02:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #230

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 4 Apr 93 03:02:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 230
                                          ^^^
Index To This Issue:                     Did You Set Your Clock Forward?

    Administrivia: The Usual Overflow; Time Changes, etc. (TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers (Alan Hales)
    Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers (Graham Allan)
    Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers (Julian Macassey)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Ken Stox)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Toll Saver (was Answering Machine Features) (Gordon Burditt)
    Re: Toll Saver (was Answering Machine Features) (Jack Dominey)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Ben Cox)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? ([e-mail])
    Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (Terry Cooper)
    Re: Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences (Bon Smith)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 22:31:24 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: The Usual Overflow; Time Changes, etc.


Once again I'm sorry to report the queue is overloaded beyond hope
with messages -- mostly replies -- to topics discussed in the past
couple weeks and it was necessary to purge 435 articles unused.
Nothing personal, you understand ...

Many of you should have received your Orange Card by now, along with
your PIN. I hope it is working out well for you. Since the Orange Card
is a brand new program (literally, it was started in January, 1993;
you in the TELECOM Digest readership are the charter customers of a
company which hopes to have at least a million customers later this
year), there have been some bugs, not the least of which was the
second application which went out to many of you from Accent
Communications asking for additional details. To clarify things, the
carrier is LDS. Accent is the customer service side of LDS.  Orange is
the marketing/sales component. I don't like the idea of so many
different corporations either, but they did not ask my opinion. The
new application from Orange (you early birds got the original version)
is in the form of a self-addressed mailer you send in with no postage
or envelope required. Most of you got the paper card in laminated
plastic ... a new 'credit card like' card is in the works.

People who requested the 1+ and 800 information now have their
packages, or should have them, and these are starting to come back to
my office.  If you ordered one and did not receive it, let me know.

My hope is that within a few months the Digest will become
self-supporting to the extent someone (myself?) can be paid to work
part time at least a few hours daily, ending the problems the Digest
is having now with mail long delayed in being answered, if it ever is,
etc.

Don't forget that we in the USA lose an hour tonight ... clocks should
be set forward one hour as of 2 AM local time Sunday morning. And I'm
so busy this weekend, I really could use that hour ... <smile> ... but
we will recover it in the fall. If anyone claims to you that they did
something exactly at 2 AM on Sunday, you can tell them they are a
liar; after 1:59 AM comes 3:00 AM, today only.  Call 202-653-1800 to
calibrate your clocks.


Patrick

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan Hales)
Subject: Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers
Organization: Texas Instruments Incorporated, Dallas TX
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1993 21:25:14 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Julian Macassey) writes:

> According to the table, U.S. to U.K. calls (apparently via
> AT&T) are $3.42 per minute.

> Calls from the U.K. to the U.S. are $1.88 (apparently via BT).
> So I decided to get a BT or Mercury credit card so I could call to the
> U.K at U.K. rates.

> [Moderator's Note: The typical call from the USA to the UK is *not* $3.42
> per minute!  It is much less. I think they got their tables wrong. I
> think less than a dollar a minute is more typical.  PAT]

Typical evening/night rates for calls from the USA to the UK are about
$0.60 per minute.  I don't make many calls to the UK during the day,
but I think the rate is something like $1 per minute.  Calls from the
UK (BT) to the USA used to be more expensive than this, but I don't
know if this is still the case.


Alan Hales, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Graham Allan)
Subject: Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers
Organization: University of Minnesota - High Energy Physics
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1993 15:10:09 GMT


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

> According to the table, U.S. to U.K. calls (apparently via
> AT&T) are $3.42 per minute.

I think the prices in the table are probably wrong. Perhaps they are
the "call home" charges? At the moment I pay about $0.48 per minute to
call the UK, using Sprint (this is probably closer to $0.70 before the
Sprint World/Sprint Most discounts). Last time I checked (about
December), Mercury charged about UK#0.45 per minute ($0.68) to call
the US from the UK (BT charges a bit more, probably about UK#0.65).
Both these rates are for the cheapest possible time of day.

> A start would be the U.S. 800 numbers to contact the Mercury or BT
> "call home" services. They could probably put me in touch with sales.

The BT chargecard operates differently from US calling cards: you have
to have a BT account (ie, a phone number!) to have one. If you still
want to look into it, the UK Direct number is 1-800 445 5667. The
Mercury chargecard was only recently introduced, and is even more
restrictive than the BT one -- I think it only works by going through
the operator, and I'm not sure if they have any arrangements to use it
internationally.


Graham

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

Date: Sat, 03 Apr 93 10:57 PST
From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Reply-To: Julian Macassey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers


On Mar 31 at 12:32, [e-mail] Paul Robinson writes:

> [e-mail] (Julian Macassey), writes:

> Looks like everyone is a little bit wrong here.

Yes, the {Economist} blew it. I can't get a straight answer from BT re
rates etc. But obviously the U.S. price was "worst case".


Yours,

Julian Macassey, N6ARE  [e-mail] Voice: [phone]
Paper Mail: 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue, Hollywood, California 90046-7142


[Moderator's Note: The US price was not 'worst case' -- it was totally
non-existent. No such rates exist.  Maybe that rate applies at a pay
phone.  That is the only place it would come close.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Stox)
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Date: 3 Apr 1993 23:22:20 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Contributor, Chicago, IL


Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]> writes:

> Pat asks:

>> I don't understand why  anyone should be entitled  to *any* phone services
>> if they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their
>> own car was repossessed....

> The reason those who do not pay should be given the 911 service is
> simple: humanitarian. It's part of the thing about being more human

Look at it this way, you are driving one night past this guy's house.
You just happen to have a (heart attack, seizure, acid flashback ...)
and pull off to the side of the road. A kind gentlemen (who has
been unable to pay his phone bill) comes to your rescue. Now then,
how would you want the phone network to behave?


Ken Stox   [e-mail]     ..dogma, half price!
#include <sys/bureaucracy/waste/waste/waste/waste/disclamier.h>


[Moderator's Note: Suppose I need to be taken to a hospital in a hurry
some distance away and the same kind gentleman had not made his car
payments and Chrysler Credit Corporation had pulled the vehicle.
How would you want the automobile industry to behave?  Suppose he had
the car but it was out of gasoline and he could not afford to buy any.
How would you like Standard Oil to behave? Why is telco getting the
brunt of your 'my need is the most important criteria' argument? What
difference does it make if leaving the loop connected for limited
emergency calls only costs a few cents?  If everyone who read this
Digest sent me only one penny each time they read it, my life would be
considerably more comfortable than it is now. (Box 1003, Chicago, IL
60690 -- hint!  hint!!) <smile> ... since it is only a penny to you
and a lot to me, does that give me the right to take it from you by
force?  You say telco can afford it?  What possible difference could
that make in the discussion?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 06:26:58 GMT


I think I agree with Patrick on this one. You want phone service? Pay
a bill.  The logical next step would be to require that any residence
without a phone be equipped with a 911 only phone at no charge.


Edward W. Greenberg  | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
1600 Stokes St. #24  | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95126  | Fax:  [phone] | Ham Radio: KM6CG


[Moderator's Note: But the point is, there would be a charge, its just
that the users of the service you propose would not be the ones paying
for it. Whether, as someone else wrote, the common calamity affects us
all or not is a question which could be debated.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Toll Saver (was Answering Machine Features)
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1993 03:22:10 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: I've always felt 'toll-saver' was a very grey area
> where the tariffs were concerned. What is the difference between
> saving on tolls by not answering the phone for a certain number of
> rings as a way to pass a message to the caller and not answering the
> phone for a certain number of rings until you are in a position to
>  talk to the caller, ala Larry King? What is the difference between

"Toll Saver" reduces the time the line spends ringing.  The time to
answer even if there are no calls (about six rings?) is around the
typical time for humans to answer.  The "Larry King" method extends
the time the line spends ringing to a lot more than several times the
typical minute before callers give up when they're calling humans.

Some AT&T answering machines provide "Toll Saver". I'd be very
surprised if AT&T recommended the "Larry King" method in their
marketing literature or anything else distributed to the public.  The
way they set up their network to give up after extended ringing
suggests that they don't like it one bit.

> saving on tolls in this way or saving on tolls by passing coded
> messages in the form of bogus collect phone calls to/from non-existent
> names?  PAT]

I'd be very surprised if AT&T operators recommended that method to
anyone, either.  However, I have had operators recommend to the
(wrong) person answering a person-to-person call that the answerer
give the operator a time to try again, which the operator would pass
back to me, and the operator also passed my name (and number, if I
wanted!) to them.  Either of those two bits of information passed
stood a very good chance of turning a future person-to-person call
into a future direct-dialed call, and that's what happened -- he
arrived home, got the message, and called me.

No, this wasn't any code; I really expected a better than 50-50 chance
that the person I called was going to be there and take the call.  And
I expected to keep trying until it went through.


Gordon L. Burditt   sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon


[Moderator's Note: What the operator was supposed to tell the person
taking the message was "ask him to call Operator 7 in Podunk; she has
a call for him from Mr. Burditt." Then she would suspend the ticket
for up to 24 hours. When your party got the message, he would dial the
operator and ask for Operator 7 in Podunk. His operator would be
tipped off that this was an earlier person to person call that had not
been completed. The computer would pull up the details on her screen;
she would complete the call to you and when you answered she would
advise you "ready on your call to Mr. Smith". The call would then be
billed to you at person to person rates. You originally asked for
person to person service; that is what you are now getting and what
you shall be expected to pay for.  Person to person means just that:
the telco will attempt to locate the person and having done so, get
them on the phone and back to you if there is a delay. You could have
had all that service for the P-to-P surcharge.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 3 Apr 93 16:21:52 GMT
Subject: Toll Saver (was Answering Machine Features)


PAT mentioned a few days ago that he felt the Toll Saver feature of
answering machines fell into a "grey area", since it allows you to get
information (or exchange a message) without paying for it.  While
there may be some conceptual validity to comparing this with coded
exchanges in fake collect calls and the like, I think there's another
pragmatic way of looking at the issue.

Toll Saver uses very little of telco's resources.

["telco" in this message embraces local and interexchange companies].

A fake collect call ties up operator, machine, and special trunk time
for, let's say, 15 seconds.  This is in addition to any ringing time
on the answering party's end.

The Larry King Show "let the phone ring" example used to tie up
signalling trunks for up to 30 minutes before the new policy came into
effect.  And even now it uses those trunks for four minutes (I think)
before the automatic cut-off.

Toll Saver, on the other hand, uses perhaps 24 seconds (four ring
cycles) of signalling.  It has the added benefit, from telco's POV, of
encouraging people to call the machine to check messages.  The
additional revenue *may* be enough to offset the cost of the abandoned
calls.

All of this has absolutely no bearing on whether or not Toll Saver is
legally, philosophically, or politically right or wrong.  And if this
kicks off another debate on telco's "real" costs versus charges, I
apologize to PAT and the readers of TELECOM Digest in advance!


Jack Dominey   AT&T Network Planning, Atlanta GA
[phone] AT&T Mail !dominey or try [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 23:52:22 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Organization: Ancient Illuminated Sears of Bavaria


[e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin) writes:

> I would recommend Steven Levy's history, {Hackers}.  It's got a number
> of anecdotes about John Draper, aka Captain Crunch.  I think it's
> still in print ...

Yes, it is: Dell Nonfiction; ISBN 0-440-13405-6


Ben Cox         [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 00:31:48 MST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?


Let me begin by saying that it is a shame that I feel that I have to
forge this note. Recent seizures of computer equipment from BBSes tend
to get me paranoid about anyone who might think that *I* am phreaking
into the phone system. With that in mind ...

I saw a Chinese student here get a Radio Shack pocket dialer, put a
different crystal in it, and then by rocking two of the keys on the
keypad back and forth, could produce the tone of a quarter dropping
into a pay phone.

Since the pocket dialer could store a number sequence, storing the
alternating keys made it easy for him to sound off quarters dropping
into the phone.

I watched him place a call to China and insert a few "dollars" into the
phone for the first minute.

I was shocked and quite disbelieving that modern (genuine Bell!) pay
phones would operate like this.  This worked whether or not the pay
charges were automatically handled by a computer or a live operator.

I thought it was a trick, so I asked to see it and placed a
short-distance (85 cents) call to try it and sure enough, it went
through (and gave me a 15 cent credit to the next period!)

I then sat him down and explained to him that it was a felony, and
that is a very serious crime.  He was under the impression that if he
got caught, they would just deport him.  I tried to use scare tactics.
Don't know if it worked or not ... his studies are over and he is back
home in China.


[Moderator's Note: They would put him in jail for awhile, *then* they
would deport him. Thank you for sharing; now permit me to share with
you. Why do you feel anonymous mail is so hard (or impossible) to
identify?  Your message came to me from louie.udel.edu; he got it from
relay1.uu.net where it was known as AA19173. It arrived there at 02:33
EST on Friday. UUNET got it from nyx.cs.du.edu where it left a few
seconds earlier at 00:31 MST Friday under ID AA9304020031 - AA16397.
'Nyx' is a public access machine at the University of Denver. It was a
trivial matter to ask someone at cs.du.edu to check system logs around
12:30 AM Friday to find out what *actual user names* were on line
then, and there weren't that many. Please do not send anonymous mail
to telecom.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1993 00:37:09 -0500
From: Terry (T.A.) Cooper <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada


> Having read some of the propaganda being distributed up your way, your
> opinion is understandable. I cannot imagine, however, that telephone
> service could be any better than it is here. Add to that the choices
> and prices for services and equipment and I would have to conclude that
> competition is the way to go.

It is not likely that I would pay much attention to the propaganda
since most of it comes from the unions (I have no use the scourge of
the NA economy, unions).

There are some facts that lead me to believe in the regulated monopoly
that we used to have:

1) Canada is the second largest country in the world (Russia is still
bigger).
2) There are only 26 million people here.

This leads to the fact that there is a lot of distance to be covered
and very few telephone users to go around.  What competition means is
that the wannabe Telcos will serve the high population areas (southern
Quebec and Ontario) and will leave the rest to the regional (real)
Telcos.  The regional telcos will of course no longer have the profits
of the cities to support the more remote areas.  The US doesn't have
this problem of course since there is less space and you can't go
anywhere without being in a crowd.


Terry Cooper     Northern Telecom    Ottawa, Ontario
"Opinions expressed are personal and are not those of Northern Telecom."

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences
Date: 04 Apr 1993 04:29:31 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Wil Dixon) writes:

> Are there any users who have implemented some form of ATM out there?
> If so, I would like to know what you are doing.

> [Moderator's Note: As we just finished a thread on blizzard and ATM
> (as in cash machine) breakdowns, I think it fair to say Wil is most
> likely referring to the 'other meaning' of ATM!  :)    PAT]

Yes, I'm sure he is.  I use Adobe Type Manager regularly with
Mircosoft Word For Windows in order to get all of my favorite fonts,
etc.  Oh, you mean the *other* other ATM?  :-) I heard a good line
once: There are two organizations ruled by acronyms: the military and
the phone company.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: ROBERT SMITH <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Looking For ATM Applications/Experiences
Date: 04 Apr 93 05:36:53 GMT
Reply-To: ROBERT SMITH <[e-mail]>
Organization: Stakeholder Relations, NCR Corp in Dayton,OH


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Wil Dixon) writes:

> Are there any users who have implemented some form of ATM out there?
> If so, I would like to know what you are doing.

> [Moderator's Note: As we just finished a thread on blizzard and ATM
> (as in cash machine) breakdowns, I think it fair to say Wil is most
> likely referring to the 'other meaning' of ATM!  :)    PAT]

Imagine the confusion that exists here at NCR.  We are the world's
leader in ATM's (the cash machines) but, as part of AT&T, ATM often
has the other meaning.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #230
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06052;
          4 Apr 93 5:56 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13372
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 04:01:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14545
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 04:00:03 -0500
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 04:00:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #231

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 4 Apr 93 04:00:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 231
                                          ^^^
Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 1-800-TADPOLE Wanted! Help Locate 'Touch America' (Juan Gascon)
    Re: Cable TV Providing Telcom or ISDN? (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: Telecomm Wiring Standards For Buildings - Books (Bill Blum)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Greg Abbott)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Conrad Kimball)
    Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors (Todd Inch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Juan Gascon)
Subject: Re: 1-800-TADPOLE Wanted! Help Locate 'Touch America'
Date: 4 Apr 1993 01:15:41 -0800
Organization: Coast Community College District, Costa Mesa, CA


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

> [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.

     I am not a telecom guru but I have recently been through this
experiance. Apparently when 800 numbers expire or are dropped they can
go into a referral period for six months and this period may be
extended.  Thereafter they "age" the number for a year before anyone
can request it.  You may however take the number after, I believe it
was 90 days, if you agree to pay for calls that would have gone to the
previous owner.  This agreement is in writing.  The person I spoke to
joked that it would be great to get a business competitors dropped
number and take advantage of his client base. hmmmmm ...

    BTW now that I have your attention and seeing as this poster
wants more of a reply to Follow-up, I wonder if any kind Guru can
help us out. I am working with a non-profit 12 step group to develop a
Voice Processing (8 port NewVoice dialogic compatible) system that
will serve all of Southern California.  More specifically LATA 5.  We
are trying to device a way that the individual caller after dialing
411 and getting a listing will only have to make a local call (or
free) to reach the V.P.  which will be housed in Monrovia, CA (GTE
sigh ;^( )

Anyway originally I had thought to have areas that are far enough away
to justify it, forward their phones to a 700 number I secured.  But
one cannot forward to 700 numbers I found out recently.  We need away
to have the calling area billed directly for the calls arriving to the
V.P. because the Region will not be able or willing to pay 800 service
for all calls in and out.  I heard that NET New England Tel has a
caller-pays service, Is anyone out there contemplating this (you
listening PAT?)?

    Are there anything like Public Service Announcemnts PSA that
television stations are required to air for free, available to
non-profit organizations from LD carriers and if not why?  Perhaps
someone with more clout and knowledge than I could write congress a
little note.  There are a lot of suffering addicts out there that
would like to use their last two dimes to reach out and touch us.  Is
anyone in CyberSpace willing to help us help them with consultation
and information?  Please.


Thanks,

Juan G.

[Moderator's Note: As I pointed out earlier to you, use an 800 number
and then correlate the numbers shown on the ANI with the individual
chapters of your organization. Let each of them pay their share. You
can get 800 service quite inexpensively these days. This will make it
very easy for clients to reach you and provide good records for your
local chapters later on.

Regards TADPOLE and other desired numbers: what I have found out is
that as of May 3 there will be a common database of all 800 numbers,
probably maintained by Bellcore. The database is apparently 'more or
less' up and running now, but final modifications to telco switches
are going on now and a few more weeks are needed to firm things up.
I've had people (such as the TADPOLE company) ask me what to do if
they want a 'vanity' number known to not be in service but whose
prefix is assigned to some company other than mine.

My source says what you should do is order the number you want. If it
is not in use at this time, then *ignore the carrier it 'belongs to'*,
because as of May 1 it won't belong to them anyway.  If you order 800
service through me for example -- and Lord knows I'll appreciate your
patronage -- then on the form I send you if you request it, fill in
the 800 number *as though you already had it* and the 'ring to' number
where you want it to go. Include a note saying 'dont have this number
but want it when portability is in effect' ... every effort will be
made to secure it for you, and my understanding is the requesting
carrier need only notify the database operator of how to route it.

If you do have an 800 number now and want to keep it, fill in the form
the same way and note 'I currently have this 800 number, please retain
it'.  If you have no 800 service and are not particular about the
number you get, I have a few in stock now. My source says the database
will *not* take instructions for changes until May 1, which is Saturday,
meaning May 3. If rates of 17-23 cents per minute with no monthly fee
on a *genuine* 800 number (not the MCI add-a-pin variety) seems like a
good deal to you, or at least breaks out to the same as what you pay
now more or less, please give TELECOM Digest your traffic.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: Cable TV Providing Telcom or ISDN?
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 20:21:13 GMT


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

> I was wondering how feasable it is for CATV to provide telephone
> service or digital platforms like ISDN in the near future?

This is an interesting question.  I know for a fact that is possible
to provide reasonable-quality audio over cable-like media, because
I've done it.  In particular, every packet from the IETF Audiocast in
Columbus which we receive here passes through this University's
broadband network (using equipment from Ungerman-Bass).  (We get
packet video the same way.)  This network currently runs two channels
of data (on channels 3 and 4A) and as many as eight channels of video,
with capacity primarily limited by rack space in our headend.  (Well,
there's also this broken RF modem out there...)  However, there are a
few features of this particular kind of data transmission which make
it undesirable for large-scale data applications.

1) It's slow.  Each data channel currently runs at 5 Mbit/s; we could
upgrade to 10 Mbit/s if we felt the need.  (As it is, most of the
campus is moving or has moved over to Ethernet-over-fiber, because
they don't like paying for maintenance of the broadband.)

2) It's slow.  Whenever a user sends a packet on this network, it is
broadcast on the reverse mode of the appropriate channel.  The packet
must then make it to our headend to be amplified, translated over to
the forward mode, amplified again, and distributed back to the
recipient.  This means that two people in a building a quarter mile
away could have their connectivity disrupted by flipping a single
switch in the room next to me.  Of course, this is a fault shared by
the current telephone and cable systems, and not shared by more
conventional network technologies like Ethernet.

3) Privacy.  This is the biggest problem.  When dealing with a
broadcast medium like this, snooping is extremely easy.  Now before
you respond ``but people put up with the risks for cellular'', keep in
mind that we are discussing non-mobile, fixed-location, fixed-wire
applications here.  People generally don't think of privacy as being
an issue when there is no obvious wireless connection involved.  (And
people ask me why I don't have a cable box...)  The obvious solution
is encryption, but people here will recall the problems that various
governments have with the possibility of truly private telephone
conversations.


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

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

Date: Sat, 03 Apr 93 14:09:15 EDT
From: Bill Blum <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecomm Wiring Standards For Buildings - Books


A previous poster suggested contacting Global Engineering Documents
for information in this area.

> From: [e-mail] (DONALD CRENSHAW)
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 13:47:00 -0600

> One hot document (which I have on my desk right now is ANSI/EIA/TIA-
> 568-1991 "Commercial Building Telecommunications Wiring Standard".  It
> addresses most specifically eight conductor connectors, i.e.  RJ-45.
> More info on connectors is in TIA/EIA/TSB40.  I've not seen that one.

Global Engineering Documents
1990 M Street NW, Suite 400
Washington, D.C. 20036
[phone]     [phone]    [phone] FAX

I spoke with Marcia Knights about several books and they faxed me info
(summary):

EIA/TIA-568 is $77 (stnd defines generic tc wiring system for
commercial buildings to support multiproduct/vendor environment; helps
someone with little knowledge of tc products on planning/installing
building wiring).

EIA/TSB-36 "Technical Systems Bulletin Additional Cable Specifications
for Unshielded Twisted Pair Cables" (an addendum to the 1991
EIA/TIA-568) is $27 (guidance on categories of UTP cables for data
apps; requirements on transmission performance of these cables).

EIA/TSB-40 "Telecommunications System Bulletin Additional Transmission
Specifications for Unshielded Pair Connecting Hardware" (another
addendum to EIA/TIA-568) is $29 (help in specifying connecting
elements that are compatible w/ various cable grades; outlines testing
methods and min trans requirements for UTP connecting hardware used in
hi-speed LANs; categories of connecting hdwr described herein
correspond to cable categories in TSB-36).

EIA/TIA-569 "Commercial Building Standard for Telecommunications
Pathways and Spaces" is $87 (3 concepts: buildings are dynamic,
building tc systems and media are dynamic, tc is more than just voice
and data).

EIA/TIA-570 "Residential and Light Commercial Telecommunications
Wiring Standard" is $45 (describes premises wiring intended to
connecting 1 to 4 exchange access lines to various on-site equip;
geared towards LECs, equip designers and manufacturer, building
owners/contractors and tc specialist companies.

EIA/TIA-606 "The Administration Standard for the Telecommunications
Infrastructure of Commercial Buildings" is $76 (documentation of
cables, termination hdwr, patching/cross-connection facilities,
conduits, etc.; provides a uniform admin scheme independent of apps).

I have no connection with GED.  Looks like TIA-568, TSB-36 and TSB-40
might be useful based upon descriptions.  BTW, GED will take POs,
credit card orders or COD.

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

Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 17:08:59 CST
From: Greg Abbott <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives


> Pat asks:

>> I don't understand why anyone should be entitled  to *any* phone services
>> if they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their
>> own car was repossessed....

In Champaign County, Illinois, there is a $.65 surcharge on each and
every telphone access line.  If persons who have had their phone
service disconnected, or had no "normal" telephone service connected,
were to have access to 9-1-1, we would have to figure out some way for
them to pay for their portion of the cost of providing this service.
Just from an administrative view point, this would be nearly
impossible!  The cost of running a 9-1-1 center is staggering.  The
surcharge monies only account for about 1/3 of our annual budget.

The issue over how to fund 9-1-1 service has been debated thousands of
times and there are a number of very good taxing systems in use.  I
happen to like the surcharge on telephone access lines because it
taxes those persons who wish to have access to the network.  I have
had several people call me up and complain about the surcharge.  The
majority understand once I explain what it is for and what service it
provides.  I had one elderly resident tell me that I could disconnect
9-1-1 from her telephone as she never has had a need to call for any
type of emergency assistance and she never planned on it either!  I
never planned on having that pedestrian step out from behind that
stopped bus either, but she did ... and my car happened to be in the
most inconvenient location at that very moment.  Car, driver and
pedestrian are all O.K. now, I might add.

In short, at some point people have to realize that their personal
safety is their responsibility.  The government can regulate and
mandate all kinds of things to help prevent accidents, but nothing can
ever account for every type of emergency situation.  People have to be
prepared for these emergencies.  One way to be prepared is to be able
to quickly summon emergency responders.  Subscribing to telephone
service (and paying the bill) provides them with access to 9-1-1 to
accomplish this.  If people don't want to pay for the service then
they'll have to run down to the corner pay phone or knock on a
neighbors door ... both of which consume valuable time in an
emergency.

The Director of our center and I disagree on this topic ... slightly.
He feels that indigent citizens who have had telephone service
disconnected because they couldn't afford to pay for it, should
continue to be allowed access to 9-1-1.  He also likes the idea of an
emergency only telephone service at a substantially reduced rate.


The thoughts and opinions expressed here are my own.  They in no way reflect
the policies or opinions of my employer.


GREG ABBOTT       E-MAIL: [e-mail]
9-1-1 COORDINATOR   COMPUSERVE MAIL: 76046,3107   VOICE: 217/333-4348
METCAD     FAX:   [phone]
1905 E. MAIN ST.     PAGER: 800/222-6651
URBANA, IL  61801             PIN # 9541

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

From: [e-mail] (Conrad Kimball)
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Date: 4 Apr 93 06:21:54 GMT
Organization: Boeing Computer Services (ESP), Seattle, WA


Pat asks:

> I don't understand why  anyone should be entitled  to *any* phone services
> if they do not pay for it. Should people be given automobiles after their
> own car was repossessed....

I can't speak for everywhere, but at least here in the Seattle area,
911 services _are_ paid for, by the public -- they aren't provided by
the telco as a community service (we passed a bond issue to make 911
available in all communities within the county).  If the public
chooses to define the service to be universally accessible, so be it.
There simply are a number of governmentally-supplied services that are
universally available, and emergency services are among them -
rightfully so IMHO.


Conrad Kimball | Client Server Tech Services, Boeing Computer Services
[e-mail] | P.O. Box  24346, MS 7A-35 | [phone]
Seattle, WA 98124-0346

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: Telephone Wire Outdoors
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Sat, 04 Apr 93 22:24:03 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Seth B
Rothenberg) writes:

> 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
      you meant 2-pair, right?  :-)                 ^^^^^^^^^
> 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.

Probably not a big deal.  If you can scrounge up some spare
protectors, it wouldn't hurt to add them, but you DO already have the
protector at the remote houses, just not at the local ones.

> Does anyone know of a simple intercom that will run the 100 feet
> between the houses?

I've hooked up the cheapo $15 Radio Shack (and others) 1-pair wired
intercoms via a spare pair in underground phone wire about 1 block
long.  Worked well, but as-is they are too easy to use for
eavesdropping and there is a "master" with the on/off/volume and
push-to-talk button which can eavesdrop and the "slave" (just a
switch, speaker, and capacitor) which can only "beep" the master,
requesting someone there to turn it on.  If you had one set for each
direction, that might work well.  The "eavesdrop" mode is a great
burglar-alarm or baby monitor as well.

> [Moderator's Note: (Good suggestion of burying the wire, but 3' deep
> in conduit? and non-suggestion of stealing pairs and other big-old-city
> "technology" omitted.)

If I were you and you're talking typical suburbia, and (big
assumption) you, the neighbor, and the in-laws are all fenced in, I'd
simply run outdoor wire from your house to your fence (in conduit
underground if the fence doesn't touch the house) and along the INSIDE
of the neighbor's fence to the in-laws. Make the neighbor a batch of
brownies or something in exchange for letting you run the wire there.
The typical people move every five years or so, so this semi-temporary
solution is easy to disconnect or rip out but should last as long as
the fence.  A lot easier than digging 100' x 3' trenches.

If you do need to bury -- special underground two-pair wire is
available and the telcos often bury it only 6" or so.  You can bury it
shallow if it's on private property with everyone's full knowledge and
if you keep an eye on it.  Or -- use some underground water pipe --
the tough black stuff that comes in a roll - for conduit. Caveat: Most
"quad" four-conductor wire is good for outdoors stapled to a house or
fence or something, most multi-pair is not recommended (personally,
I'd use it anyway if you aren't in harsh weather zone, realizing that
you may need to replace it after five or ten years.)  You DON'T want
both lines in one quad cable, or even two quad cables run side-by-
side for that distance due to crosstalk.

Along the lines of the Moderator's non-suggestion: If you have
underground main phone trunks with the green "pedestals", you can
simply connect the unused second pair of your underground house drop
to the proper pair (match colors with your in-laws drop in their
pedestal), which doesn't even steal a pair from the telco -- just two
houses connected to the same pair -- a "multiple" in telcoese.  This
assumes that you have two-pair drops and only one phone line (typical).
Caveat: I successfully did this once, but was caught disconnecting it
(it was intentionally temporary) by the neighbor across the street
from the pedestal, who worked for the telco!

Obvious suggestion: Ask the telco to do this for you!  They usually
will, but I don't know how much they'd charge.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #231
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id ab20008;
          5 Apr 93 1:42 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07091
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 23:45:48 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05502
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 4 Apr 1993 23:45:00 -0500
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 23:45:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #232

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 4 Apr 93 23:45:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 232

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work (Steve Forrette)
    Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work (Wil Dixon)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Steve Forrette)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (John R. Levine)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Ehud Gavron)
    Re: Dialing Codes in France, UK (Richard Cox)
    Re: Dialing Codes in France (Frederick Roeber)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Brad Whitlock)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Greg Andrews)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work
Date: 4 Apr 1993 07:21:09 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

>> [Moderator's Note: I'd be interested in knowing how Ameritech (for
>> example) operates its 'Fax Mailbox' service. Like a voicemail service,
>> it stores a seemingly infinite number of fax messages for people who
>> subscribe to the service and pick up their faxes on the fly, ...

> One can build this using off-the-shelf parts.  The fax answering
> service attaches to the phone network like a voice answering service
> using DID trunks, with each customer forwarded to a separate number in
> the DID number block.

There's another way to do this, which conserves DID numbers.  You get
a special data line from the CO that gives you information about calls
coming in on each trunk.  You can then have all customers busy/no
answer transfer to the same number.  As each call comes in, you get a
message on the data line which basically says "the call coming in on
trunk xx was forwarded from yyy-yyyy."  This method eliminates having
to pay for a DID number for each customer, and is used quite a bit by
voicemail service bureaus.

As for how to detect loopbacks, no special access to the telephone
network is needed.  Every so often, the faxmail server just needs to
place a call to the subscriber.  If the call gets forwarded, it will
appear on one of the inbound trunks.  Assuming that you wouldn't want
to just use time coincidence to detect a looping call for fear of
ignoring a real call that happens to arrive at an unlucky time, the
service bureau can answer the call, and figure out that it is talking
to itself when the each end exchanges the fax machine IDs at the
beginning of the call.

> Soapbox time: Ameritech has no business running a service like this.
> If the telco can play both sides of the fence like this, they will inevitably
> jigger things around to give their own service a huge advantage over
> competitors'.  Case in point: I've heard of places where the monthly
> charge for busy/no-answer forwarding is more than the monthly charge
> for voice mail.  Can we say cross-subsidy?

I couldn't have said it better.  US West was busily promoting such a
faxmail service here last year.  They are spending the ratepayer's
dollars on services that anyone with a PC could set up in his garage,
but are ignoring services (such as BRI ISDN) that only the telco can
provide.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wil Dixon)
Subject: Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 14:55:21 GMT


Ameritech is using Centigram's voice mail platform in many of their CO
based voice mail applications.  Centigram uses Brooktrout's Fax card
in their voice mail applications.  What you are seeing is Centigram's
box stock, off the shelf, VoiceMemo II system.  In addition to 'store
and forward', you can do 'fax on demand', 'fax publishing' (fax via
distribution lists) and most anything else you can dream up.  We use
the system, we have one in house, for fax machine overflow, ie voice
mail for fax machines.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Date: 4 Apr 1993 07:30:59 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> Paul Robinson <tdarcos@
mcimail.com> writes:

> On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a
> wrong number.

I took this opportunity to compare the international service of the
three big carriers in the US.  The results are right in line with what
I would expect from these carriers:

AT&T:  Call setup time under two seconds total, followed by well-done KDD
       intercept.

MCI:   14 second call setup time, followed by boring MCI intercept telling
       me that the number is not in service.  Two things disturb me here:
       first of course, the long call setup time.  More importantly, if MCI
       is not allowing the "real" intercept to play, and is providing their
       own, this creates the possibility in some cases of the "real"
       recording providing necessary additional information about the call
       failure, but the customer just hearing the generic MCI message.

Sprint: First attempt: "call cannot be completed as dialed"; second attempt:
       immediate fastbusy; third attempt: call setup time under two
       seconds, followed by KDD recording


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 13:17:12 GMT


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

> On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a
> wrong number.  I thought I'd share this recording for those of you
> interested.  I have translated the number to something else so as not
> to give away the original number; this number also gives the same
> message.

> The number to try is [phone].

> Listen especially to the accent on the announcement. This announcement
> was done with real care and precision. It is quite interesting.

I tried the number from my home in NYC, area code 212.  When I used
"Allnet" I got a local intercept saying something like "the number you
have dialed is not in service in the country you have called."

When I used AT&T I got connected in about 1/2 second! (was I -really-
routed to Japan?) and got the recording, in English FIRST, then
Japanese, which leads me to suspect that there is some local
("somewhere" in the USA) intercept for this which is "smart" enough to
know what's going on.


Guess I'll have to wait for my phone bill ...


[e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 4 Apr 93 14:26:12 EDT (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


In article <[e-mail]> you write:

> On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a
> wrong number.  ...

> The number to try is [phone].

Hmmn.  I tried that number using my regular carrier, Sprint, and got a
U.S. announcement from Sprint that the call couldn't be completed as
dialed.  Bummer, SS#7 strikes again.  (These days, I get U.S. busy
signals when I call a number in Spain that's busy, don't want to tie
up those expensive trunks.)

So I tried 10288 and the same number.  A lot more hiss this time, but
still a U.S. announcement, encouraging me to call my AT&T operator.
More SS#7.

Then I tried 10222.  Aha!  Success, a Japanese intercept with a strong
American accent.  Like, wow, man.  I knew I could count on MCI's
cruddy equipment not to understand that they'd reached an intercept.
To be fair, the recording was nice and clear even though it was in
Japan, obviously carried end-to-end via digital facilities.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1993 20:11:44 GMT


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

> I saw a Chinese student here get a Radio Shack pocket dialer, put a
> different crystal in it, and then by rocking two of the keys on the
> keypad back and forth, could produce the tone of a quarter dropping
> into a pay phone.

    It IS interesting that signalling thru the telephone
microphone can simulate coins dropping in the phone.  I'd think they'd
make it a little more secure than that.

    I am reminded of a former student of mine in a class on
operational amplifiers.  After explaining the amazing Schmitt trigger,
how you could build an oscillator with a schmitt, a resistor and a
capacitor, and how you can get six schmitts in a package (74C14,
74C914 or 74HC14), he built several oscillators in a very small box.
One oscillator would trigger two other oscillators that were of
appropriate frequency to simulate coin drops.  It actually worked.  He
only tried it out to verify it worked, then apparently took the box
apart.


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] (Ehud Gavron)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Date: 4 Apr 1993 15:58 MST
Organization: ACES Research Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Some anonymous guy wrote some stuff ... our Moderator responded:

> Why do you feel anonymous mail is so hard (or impossible) to
> identify?  Your message came to me from louie.udel.edu; he got it from
> relay1.uu.net where it was known as AA19173. It arrived there at 02:33
> EST on Friday. UUNET got it from nyx.cs.du.edu where it left a few
> seconds earlier at 00:31 MST Friday under ID AA9304020031 - AA16397...

Pat, I'm sure you felt very clever doing this, however you were
probably wasting your time.  Mail de-authentication INCLUDES the use
of intermediate systems, but ALSO makes the end system appear to be
an intermediate system.

For example, let's say I want to send you a forged note.  I'll create
text of the form:

    Received From: one fake host from another fake host (timestamp)
    Received From: another fake host from yet another fake host
    Received From: a usenet newsgroup! (Oh no, Mr. Bill!)
        FC 822 headers here
    Message text here

Then I'd sent this message through fakehost2, fakehost3, and finally
to you.  When you get the message there would be NO WAY for you to
determine which of fakehost3,fakehost2,myhost,fakehost,another
fakehost,usenetgroup the message really originated at.  If I pick
reasonably busy hosts for all of them (or heck, just route it through
five, and tack an extra five on the front) you'd never get it.

It's great when you can be clever, or even boast about it, but JUST AS
THE CELLULAR INDUSTRY tries to tell its clients the airwaves are safe,
please don't tell the readers of this Digest/Newsgroup that email is
authenticated.  _That_ is still in committee.


[Moderator's Note: You know, I'm not as dumb as I look. Either a host
exists or it does not. If you don't recognize a host in the envelope,
then try to resolve it. If it resolves, fine. If not, it is fake. If
it is fake, delete that line from the envelope being investigated to
reduce the clutter. Do this with all sites in the envelope. Now, first
things first: *which site* gave it to my site?  I look at the log here
at eecs.nwu.edu: who gave you <message-ID> at <time>? <Site> says
<message-ID> at <time> came to me from <site2> as <message-ID>. Okay,
that agrees with the envelope so far ... now <site2>, who gave you
(what you refer to as) <message-ID> when you gave it to <my site>?
Even in the case of a busy site, it is no real problem to go to the
log and grep <message-ID> to see from whence it came and where it
went.  And at some point, the trail will drop. At some point in the
envelope audit, <site> will say "I never gave anything like that to
you." But we know the connection between sites occurred, because
<site2> opened the window, looked out and said "hello <site3>, pleased
to meet you, what do you have for me?" His log says he did.

People who dummy up envelopes in the way you suggest seldom have the
ability to also create entries in the logs of the sites named to agree
with their activities. They also don't remember that it is not all
that easy to keep sites from authenticating each other when there is a
connection made. <Site> may not know which user was involved, but it
will almost always know which other site connected with it.  So either
hosts exist or they do not, and message-IDs exist at the time they are
shown to exist or they do not.  Eliminate the bogus ones, and audit
the real ones.  Eventually you are going to find a site which handed
off mail it knows nothing about, because the sender by-passed normal
mail software routines to hand the mail to an unsuspecting neighbor.

What time of day did this occur? Who was logged in on that site when
the forged mail was passed?  Okay for the sake of simplicity, let's
say there were three users logged in, A, B and C.  Maybe there were
fifty users logged in; at some point there is a limited return for
your efforts in this exercise so you quit looking. All three users, A,
B and C have .history files; at the time <receiving site> says
<sending site> was handing over the mail, user A had opened a telnet
connection to the same site. Amazing coincidence, eh? User A also has
a .plan, let's finger him. A long, drawn out, very stupid .plan and
look! The same word(s) he misspelled in his message to me are
misspelled in his .plan ... gosh, coincidence number two.

I never made the claim 'email is authenticated'. I said that some
anonymous mail is embarassingly easy to trace back to its sender, and
90 percent of the rest can be traced if it is worth the effort. When a
guy writes to me as [e-mail] (I altered the header to include
the nyx.cs.du.edu line), he challenges me to hunt him down. Obviously
[e-mail] can also be fake. I haven't the
resources to look critically at all the mail I get, and don't really
care as long as it *sounds* reasonable.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 15:13 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Dialing Codes in France, UK
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Linc Madison) writes:

>>  Am I guessing right on the dialing patterns?

At the moment France is divided into two zones (namely Paris Region,
and the remainder of France) and normal calls are either within a zone
or inter-zone.  Within a zone, just dial the eight digits.  No code or
trunk prefix is needed.

For calls between zones, dial 16 (the French trunk prefix) then either
the code 1 for Paris or no code for the rest of France: and the eight
digit number.

France has proposals to change the trunk prefix from 16 to 0, and
split the "rest of France" into zones 2, 3, & 4: with full eight digit
dialling being retained within each zone, and (trunk prefix + zone
code) being dialled on all calls between zones.  Green Numbers (1-800
equivalents) currently have eight digit numbers beginning with 05, but
that prefix will change to 0800 in due course. 06 is reported to be
reserved for Mobile numbers.

>>  Also, in Denmark, do you always just dial eight digits for any inland
>>  (i.e., not international) call?

Yes, exactly that.

>>  There are a number of places in Britain where the area code for the same
>>  place depends on whether the local number is three or six digits.

That's because there are two separate exchanges in those places that
are not compatible -- and their numbering ranges cannot be combined.
This situation is due to be resolved before the end of the decade.

>>  Most of them are straight-forward -- the code for three-figure numbers in
>>  Eastling is 079589, and for six-figure numbers it's 0795.  However, there
>>  are several that are not consistent in that manner:

The inconsistencies are mainly due to a shortening of the dial
sequence in the old step by step (Strowger) days, to keep within the
old 10 digit limit.  For example 044128 (for Bishopston, which has now
closed) was an abbreviation which would actually have been
"translated" to 0792-828.

>>  (This list is about three years old, so most of these have probably been
>>  consolidated already, but it still shows how confusing the system is.)

Very true -- mostly they have !

>>  And now they want to add an extra digit in all the codes!

Which remains totally unjustified.  It is simply a device for British
Telecom to attack their competitor Mercury by knocking out the
equipment that is used by customers to select between BT and Mercury
according to best pricing.

>>  "900" numbers are on 0898, 0891, 0839, 08364, 06605-06609, 0338, & 0336.

And 0881, please !

>>  In addition, 0640 numbers are charged at the International Zone 6
>>  (Australia/New Zealand) rate, which is even higher than the "premium
>>  services" rate.

This code was certainly intended for that charge rate but was
abandoned before ever being implemented.

>>  Cellular phones are on 0860, 0831, 0836, 0374, 0385, 0850, and 0881.

And the new PCN phone systems will be on 0956, 0958, 0973, 0976 and 0987.


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail] - PGP2.2 public key available on request

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Dialing Codes in France
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CERN -- European Organization for Nuclear Research
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 17:00:38 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Linc Madison <telecom@
hedonist.demon.co.uk> writes:

> I have a couple of questions about dialing inland calls in France.  As
> diligent readers of this Digest are well aware, France has abolished
> "area codes" with the exception of Paris.

Yes, there are two regions or areas in France, the "Nle de France"
(Isle of France) and "Province."  The "Nle" actually consists of:
Essonne, Hauts de Seine, Paris, Seine et Marne, Seine Saint Denis, Val
de Marne, Val d'Oire, and Yvelines (i.e., the Paris metropolitan area
 -- I'll just say Paris).  Phone numbers in Paris are written "(1) ab
cd ef gh" while numbers elsewhere are "ab cd ef gh."

To call from one Provincial place to another, dial merely the eight
digits. To call within Paris, dial merely the eight digits.  To call
from Paris to Province, dial 16, wait for dial tone, and then the
eight digits.  To call from Province to Paris, dial 16, wait for dial
tone, 1, then the eight digits.

So to summarize,

    Paris number: (1) ab cd ef gh
    Not Paris number: ab cd ef gh

    Paris     --> Paris:                  ab cd ef gh
    Not Paris --> Not Paris:              ab cd ef gh
    Paris     --> Not Paris:  16 (wfdt)   ab cd ef gh
    Not Paris --> Paris:      16 (wfdt) 1 ab cd ef gh

wfdt = wait for dial tone


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]

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

Date: Sat, 3 Apr 93 23:26:32 CST
From: [e-mail] (Brad Whitlock)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features


Ah, fergit all the creeping featurism hardcoded answering machine
feechurs.  Just give me an answering machine I can plug a terminal
into and program in my own features in REXX!


Brad Whitlock

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Andrews)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 09:49:01 GMT


[e-mail] (Marc Unangst) writes:

> To bring this back to answering machines, I am continually amazed that
> they continue to use such antiquated technology as analog magnetic
> tape.  How difficult/expensive would it be to put a small hard drive
> (10MB or 20MB, say) inside an answering machine, and record digitized
> voice on it?  At 64Kbps/sec using u-law encoding (we're shooting for
> "phone-quality" here, after all), that's a bit less than 8K/sec.  A
> 10MB hard disk would hold a bit over 20 minutes of messages, minus a
> little for housekeeping and data structures.  This would allow for
> easy time/date stamping, random access to messages (including deleting
> a message in the middle of the "tape"), and probably better-quality
> sound as well.  If you really want to save space, use 2-bit or 3-bit
> ADPCM encoding (19.2Kbps and 28.8Kbps, respectively).  A 10MB hard
> drive then holds 72 minutes and 48 minutes, respectively.

That's fine while it works.  What does the non-electronic customer do
when their storage device breaks?

Replacement cassette tapes holding up to 90 minutes cost less than $10
each.  Hard drives and non-volatile memory chips aren't anywhere near
that cheap.

It's true that ANYthing produced in the massive quantities demanded by
consumer items like answering machines would become cheap enough, but
at the moment magnetic tape products are; computer storage products
aren't.  Which one would a company want to risk their profit margin
on?


Greg Andrews, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #232
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23684;
          5 Apr 93 3:11 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21142
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 01:06:30 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21034
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 01:05:31 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 01:05:31 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #233

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Apr 93 01:05:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 233

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks (Scott Marshall)
    Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks (Chris Yoder)
    Re: ISDN in Residential Use (Ketil Albertsen)
    Re: Interesting Comparison (Marc Siskin)
    Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN? (William Sohl)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Kevin Kenny)
    Re: US NPA/NXX List (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Hardshell Shock-Proof Case For Motorola Flip Phone Wanted (John Ellis)
    Re: Hardshell Shock-Proof Case For Motorola Flip Phone Wanted (Pat Turner)
    Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers (Paul Robinson)
    Re: How to Busy Out a Line? (Roy Smith)
    Time Changing and Civilized Areas of the USA (Joel Snyder)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Cap'n Crunch Speaks
From: [e-mail] (Scott Marshall)
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 93 21:52:46 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX


It is possible ... in Australia, a program called White Box was
released by a friend of mine who shall remain nameless. It was
released on the Amiga, and was followed up by an IBM Soundblaster
Version. It worked by you enter in the number you wish to dial, and
then hold the phone up to the headphone set (which has been tuned
before hand by getting the computer to dial a local phone number,
until it works). I wont go into specifics of the tones, but it
"blasted" the tones down the lines, just before connecting to an 0014
number (MINOS GateWay -- Long Distance toll free numbers in Australia),
{to be specific, Hawaii Direct} and then the call could be re-routed
to anywhere in the world.

   Three of my friends, and a BBS called "Destiny Stone BBS" where
raided back in December, and the Commonwealth of Australia slapped on
about 130 charges against the Commonwealth. I am not up to date on the
status of that case, although all computer equipment, paper, disks,
and an oscillerscope which Australian Federeal Police believed was
used to tone the "White Box" (NOT!). The ironic thing was, Australian
Telecom claimed that White Boxing was not possible on Australian phone
systems anymore. I was on an Australian show, Hinch and proved them
wrong by seizing a trunk. Blue Boxing (WHITE) will be possible for a
long time world wide, until every nation switches to C5 or more
advanced signalling systems.


[e-mail] (Scott Marshall)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, [phone]
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Yoder)
Subject: Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks
Date: 4 Apr 1993 16:40:43 -0700
Organization: University of Colorado, Health Sciences Center.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Draper) writes:  (text omitted here)

    Hah!!  [e-mail] has never logged in, therefore: He
probably did not write this article.

    Nice joke!

    Other than that, there was mostly truth in the article.

Chris Yoder <[e-mail]> use finger for details.


[Moderator's Note: Good point. My investigation of your claim shows as
follows:

> delta-telecom > finger [e-mail]

> [netcom.com]
> Login name: crunch               In real life: John Draper
> Directory: /u4/crunch                   Shell: /bin/ksh
> Never logged in.
> New mail received Sun Apr  4 22:03:10 1993;
>   unread since Sun Apr  4 19:51:58 1993
> No Plan.

We see that mail was 'unread since Sun Apr 4 19:51:58 1993'. Since
mail before that has been read, this suggests to me mail is either
being forwarded or perhaps he is su'ing to this account from some
other account. Maybe if we ask, he'll confirm or deny.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ketil Albertsen,TIH)
Subject: Re: ISDN in Residential Use
Organization: T I H / T I S I P
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 1993 13:32:05 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Lynne Gregg <lynne.gregg@
mccaw.com> writes:

> ISDN ** is ** available in some areas and the price is very reasonable
> (in view of the carrier's costs to implement).
                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Nah. The probability is quite high that you already *use* 64 kbps
all-digital channels for you phoning, only that the telco lets you see
the digital channel through AD/DA converters. Remove the AD/DA
converters from the subscriber lines and give the customers direct
access to the channel, and you've come a large part of the way. To put
it squarely, removing AD/DA converters doesn't add tremendously to the
cost. I was once shown around in an all-digital exchange; they also
showed us the 8 POTS subscriber line POTS card and the new 64 ISDN
line card of the same size. Some of the factor of eight was due to
newer technology on the ISDN line cards, but much of it also because
the cards are much simpler.

The transmission network already is ready for ISDN. In this country
(Norway, that is) you have to go back to the early 70's to see the
last analog trunk line put into the ground. Currently some 60% of the
subscribers are hooked up to all-digital switches, raising to
something like 80% within a year.  (That is not 80% with ISDN yet, but
the switches may contain ISDN subscriber line cards.)

There certainly is someting to be done in signalling, but in an
all-digital phone network SS7 is used among the switches whether
subscriber lines are POTS or ISDN. I suppose they aren't all using SS7
yet, but hopefully the switch to SS7 is a "simple" software update (at
least it was for the System 12 switches here in Norway). Initial
development of the software is an enormous investment, but you do that
only once for each class of exchanges, and there aren't that many
different ones in the world.

Specific to ISDN is the subscriber signalling system (DSS1), but
essentially this is also a software one-time-job (for each class of
subscriber line interface); you may compare it to writing driver
software for the interface card (although a rather complex interface!)

When ISDN first came, there was a fear that the subscriber loops
coudn't handle the required 192 kbps. It seems like this fear was
essentially unfounded -- most of the few places where subscriber loops
are too bad for ISDN were ready for an upgrade in any case. When they
started out here four or five years ago, one of the telco guys said
that for ISDN to be feasible in our country, at least 80% of the
subscriber loops would have to be good enough as they were. When I
asked him later, he claimed that some 90% of the lines had turned out
to be perfectly OK, and that those too poor mostly were located in
areas where the request for ISDN is moderate.

So, going from an POTS which already employs digital trunk lines,
all-digital exchanges and SS7 signalling to ISDN is "simply" to plug
in new subscriber line cards with necessary DSS1 driver software.
Outside USA the phone company also installs an NT1 termination box at
the user's premises. (In USA they install a termination box that is
not an NT1, so you have to buy another termination that *is* an NT1
yourself.)

No, I am not saying that software upgrades, new line cards, NT1s etc.
are anywhere close to free, but I suspect that phone companies may
want to give you the impression that the investment is enormous, just
to make you accept a high price.

And the picture I draw may be somewhat rosy in technically advanced
countries, like USA and parts of Europe: Many countries have made huge
investments in non-IDSN-ready technology several decades ago --
excellent analog quality, a high functionality level for being analog.
The cost of switching to ISDN may be higher than in later or less
developed countries with little or no ties to old technology. (An
example: In Norway, we never had any anlog calling party
identification; no investments had been made in neither hardware nor
software. When we switched to SS7 a couple years back, it was
instantly available to anyone with ISDN network interfaces -- and it
works all over the SS7 based network, not only for ISDN subscribers.

Other countries, in particular Middle East oil nations and some
African countries never had any widely deployed analog network at all,
and today they are building up the world's most hyper-modern
all-digital net from ground up.)


ka.

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Siskin)
Subject: Re: Interesting Comparison
Date: 04 Apr 1993 13:23:52 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Language Resource Center


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

> Frequently on this forum we have discussed the possiblity of cable
> companies getting into the telephone business and visa versa. While I
> certainly have political and economic considerations about allowing
> LECs in the cable business, I have some very real and solid technical
> objections to ever allowing cable companies into the telephone
> business.

> Without so much as a word of warning, TCI (San Jose) decided to move
> all of its channels around on the cable. No doubt this is in
> preparation to implement a tiered rate structure to further enhance
> revenues from it captive audience. But that is not the real problem.
> Just after midnight, cable service went dark -- including all channels
> and the digital radio service (DMX). A phone call netted a semi-rude
> response: "the channels are being re-aligned" and that service would
> be out until 6 AM.

> Can you imagine what would happen if it took Pac*Bell six hours to cut
> in a new 5ESS? Or a radio station six hours to turn up a new
> transmitter?

John, you are forgetting that most cable companies at this time don't
go about changing channel assignments and equipment assignments on a
regular basis.  Telcos have the luxury of bringing in experienced
people from their other sites to supervise the cutover.  At CATV
however, they have usually either fired the person who wired their
racks in the first place, bought them as a turnkey system, or have
made many less than fully documented changes that have to be un-done.
Changing channel assignments is not a matter of just moving wires in a
terminal block but may in fact involve a virtual re-build of the
wiring to route audio and video from a dedicated reciever/Descrambler
to the specific modulator to feed the correct channel.

If the company has new modulators then they are bozos since most of
the new crop of modulators can be tuned to a new channel in a matter
of seconds.  However, if they have modulators older than two years
old, or for financial reasons bought dedicated modulators (ones that
can only output one specific channel) then it is not suprising that
there are problems.

Maybe you should hire yourself out to them to document their plant so
the next time they do this they know what wires go where.


Marc Siskin Senior Media Designer (and builder of many equipment racks)
Language Resource Center University of Michigan

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

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Telephones Not Powered by the PSTN?
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 93 16:56:27 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> bears!rhyre@cinpmx.
attmail.com writes:

> [e-mail] (Magnus Hedberg) wrote:

>> 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 "high voltage" on the telecom network.

> Many businesses here user commercial power for their telephone
> systems.  When commercial power goes, so does the businesses phone
> system.

> Telco power and service seems to be much more reliable, so I think
> you'd have a hard time selling this idea to subscribers.  Another
> problem is keeping the electic mains and the telephone wires
> separated.  You don't want to cross the wires.

>> Does anyone know if this idea already has been rejected or performed
>> somewhere in the world.

In the USA, you can attach any type of telephone to your line that has
passed "Part 68" testing which tests to be sure that the unit will not
"harm" the network.  As far as I know, all cordless phones require
power from the "commercial" power source and do not, therefore, rely
exclusively on the power from the telephone lines.  In fact, many
cordless phone units are rendered useless if there is a power failure
in the area.  A friend of mine in Connecticut used only his cordless
phone arrangement at his home and discovered that when he lost
commercial power, he also had no phone service.  Of course, all he had
to do was unplug the cordless unit and plug in a regular phone to have
a working line, but there is no requirement that he do so.  So, at
least in the USA, the idea is "accepted" by anyone who chooses to use
only a cordless phone arrangement.

> ISDN is a 'digital' phone network that runs over regular copper
> subscriber lines, but I'm not sure what voltages it uses.  In the US,
> the FCC has decreed that the customer provide power for part of the
> setup, which is one of the (many) factors that his limited its
> widespread adoption here.

There is no power provided by standard over the ISDN basic access line
in the USA.

> For regular analog phone lines, the ring voltage (~90VAC @ 20 Hz in
> the US, current limited) is the 'high voltage' that is particularly
> bothersome.

Bothersome to what?  I don't follow the point of this comment.


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]

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

Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 93 11:40:56 -0500
From: [e-mail]


> [Moderator's Note: It is correct your friend cannot be forced to pay
> for calls he did not originate or agree to pay for, however if it is
> believed that your friend is aware of these calls and doing nothing to
> prevent them -- in fact perhaps encouraging them -- then he can be
> subpoened by a federal grand jury and *forced* to produce his call log
> records. ...]

Pat,

You are, of course, right that a subpoena can require anyone to
produce any records at all -- provided, of course, that the records
exist.

Can you, however, cite me a law or a tariff that requires a telephone
subscriber to maintain a log of incoming calls?

(I agree that keeping the log is a Real Good Idea ... but nobody
should be punished for omitting an act that the law does not require.)


73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin KENNY    GE Corporate R&D, Niskayuna, New York, USA


[Moderator's Note: I know of no such law, and if no records exist,
then nothing can be subpoenaed. This of course is the oldest gag in
the world: keep no written records you'd not want someone else to see.
But such a stance would, I think, only enforce the poor reputation BBS
operators enjoy in so many quarters of the telecom industry. In the
event extensive fraud had occurred in connection with the phone lines
of a BBS, such a stance would only serve to cast suspicion -- right or
wrong -- on the operator. The lack of keeping such a log would show at
worst a conspiracy between the sysop and his callers, and at best, an
incredible degree of naetivity by the sysop. We in the Information
Providing by computer business are beginning to get some respect from
the telcos and government, etc ... we need the telcos and government
as friends, not as enemies or ambivilent on-lookers. So let's take a
responsible attitude in the operation of our BBSs, newsgroups, etc. It
won't hurt, and may actually help us a lot as a group.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: US NPA/NXX List
Date: 04 Apr 1993 14:41:45 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu (Greg Trotter) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Anyone is free to copy the list of NPA/NXX codes.
> For now, call 10288-0 and ask the operator for the ones you need.   PAT]

Pat, are you suggesting that people use AT&T operator services, even
if their default is another carrier?  How is this different from the
practice that you frowned upon so much of customers of other carriers
using AT&T for free domestic or international directory assistance
calls, only to place the actual call on the other carrier?  If too
many people start doing this, AT&T might start charging for place name
lookups! :-) Seriously, my advice would be to use the operator of your
default carrier, and if they don't provide satisfactory service,
consider a change of carriers.  Once, when I was comparing operator
services, I called each of the "big three" and asked the question "Can
I have the place name for ###-###?"  AT&T took six seconds to get the
information, Sprint took about 20, and I gave up after two minutes of
the MCI operator still not understanding what I wanted, after repeated
explanations.  These results were in line with what I expected from
each carrier.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John T Ellis)
Subject: Re: Hardshell Shock-Proof Case For Motorola Flip Phone Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 1993 16:27:36 GMT


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

> The other issues are water-tightness and the ability to hear the ring
> through it. I'm not too concerned with water-tightness, since I can
> wrap the phone/case in plastic if I plan to be in a wet environ.  I
> would really like to be able to have a reasonable chance of hearing
> the ring through the shell. I'd be willing to perhaps drill a hole or
> three through the hardshell to allow the sound to escape. Any other
> ideas?

Hmmmm.  If I were 80+' in the air, dangling from a rock with a
precarious hold, I am SURE I would not be to disposed to answering the
phone.  Likewise, if I were cruising along on the bike, I wouldn't
want to have to answer it.  It seems to me that the phone would best
serve you as an emergency tool while you were participating in the
aforementioned events or after the event was over.

As for drilling holes in the case to hear the sound.  This kinda
defeats the purpose of "water-tightness" doesnt it?  Again, I would
venture that if you are in an enviroment that is wet, somewhat
dangerous, etc. you don't want to be answering the phone.

Just my $.02 worth.


Cheers,

John T. Ellis  708-632-7857  Motorola Cellular   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 93 15:14 EST
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Hardshell Shock-Proof Case For Motorola Flip Phone Wanted


Paul Gauthier asks about a hard case for a cell phone.

If the your needs were larger I would reccomend one of the large
aluminum cases commonly used in the broadcast industry.  They will
survive anything, but are quite heavy.

This leaves you with two choices I can think of:

1) There are quite a number of small plastic cases with "waffle" foam
designed for transporting handguns.  I don't know how available these
are in Canada due to gun control restrictions.  You might want to
check out ads in some of the "macho" gun magazines such as SWAT,
Soldier of Fortune, etc.  I believe one brand name is Pelican.

2) You can make your own.  Get a plastic, metal, or wood box larger
than the cell phone.  If you can't find one you, can make one from 1/4
Luan plywood, or get a local sheet metal shop make one out of thin
sheet metal.  Cut the box in half in the plane of the cell phone.  It
can be hinged if you wish.  Take a can of expanding foam* and fill one
half of the box.  Cover the foam with a peice of Saran Wrap, and push
the phone half way into it.  When it hardens, trim the foam flush with
the parting line, then do the other side, but push the cellphone and
the hard half of the box up against the other side.  This will result
in a tight fit.  If it isn't hinged the whole affair can be held
together with a Velcro strap or rubber band.  A friend makes some
beautiful handgun cases this way, using a walnut box and velvet or a
blow on felt finish called Suede-Tex.

Try this first with a test box to get a feel for hom much foam to use.

* Don't breathe the vapors from the expanding foam, its often
methyl-isocyanate, of Union Carbide and Bopal, India fame.  The cans
of foam can be obtained at parts stores, hardware stores, or
industrial supply stores.


Patton Turner  KB4GRZ  [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 04 Mar 1993 12:32:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: BT/Mercury Call Home Numbers


[e-mail] (Julian Macassey), writes:

> On page 7 of the March 20 (1993) issue of the {Economist}
> ... According to the table, U.S. to U.K. calls (apparently via
> AT&T) are $3.42 per minute... Calls from the U.K. to the U.S. are
> $1.88 (apparently via BT).

> [Moderator's Note: The typical call from the USA to the UK is *not*
> $3.42 ... It is much less. I think they got their tables wrong.
> I think less than a dollar a minute is more typical.  PAT]

Looks like everyone is a little bit wrong here.  The AT&T operator
quoted a price -- and this is direct-dial during the highest rate
period, 7am to 2pm weekdays, $1.44 for the first minute and $0.95 for
each additional minute, dialed direct.  If placed with a credit card,
there is about a $1.60 surcharge, which together is $3.04 and only
applies to the first minute, additional minutes would then be $0.95.
About the only way that the rate could be $3.42 is to count a
credit-card placed call, plus perhaps 10% combined federal and state
taxes, but this would still only be the first-minute charge,
additional minutes, even with tax, would still be at or near $1.00
each.  If one has the operator dial the number on a credit card call,
the surcharge is about $2.20 instead of $1.60.


Paul Robinson    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 4 Apr 93 10:14:14 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Subject: Re: How to Busy Out a Line?
Organization: New York University, School of Medicine


Jeff Oasis asks:

> I need to make one of our lines busy [...] Can I simply install a switch
> that shorts tip and ring together?

Our Moderator Notes:

> [Moderator's Note: I don't think it is a good idea to just short the
> tip and ring. You're better off to put a couple other pieces in there.
> A dead short will cause a trouble report to be issued. You want the
> phone to appear to be busy instead.    PAT]

    "A couple other pieces"?  Come on, Pat.  The guy asked a
reasonable question, and what he got back was, essentially, "I know
the answer, but I'm not going to tell you".  If you're going to answer
his question, why don't you answer his question with an answer that he
can use.

    Personally, I'd suggest using a 2W resistor somewhere around
600 to 1000 ohms.  It needs to be small enough to make sure it looks
like a phone off hook, but large enough that you don't draw an
unreasonable amount of current.  The power rating has to be large
enough to not burn up if you get 100V ringing voltage.  100V into 1K
is 10W, but I would guess that for the low-duty cycle ringing signal,
a 2W resistor would do fine.  Make it 5 or 10 if you're worried about
that.  I suspect current limiting on the line won't allow you to
actually draw that much power anyway.

Roy Smith <[e-mail]>

Hippocrates Project, Department of Microbiology, Coles 202 NYU School
of Medicine, 550 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016


[Moderator's Note: Actually, that got past me before I finished the
message. I started it, got distracted and went on to the next message
without finishing what I started to say  :(.  I am embarassed by my
earlier answer.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joel M-for-Vnews Snyder)
Subject: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA
Date: 4 Apr 1993 09:19 MST
Organization: Opus One
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, Our Esteemed Moderator
writes...

> [Moderator's Note: This is a reminder to the USA readers that Saturday
> night/Sunday morning marks our semi-annual clock change.

Speak for yourself.  In the civilized parts of the US, such as Arizona
and central Indiana, we don't believe in fooling with our clocks twice
a year.  We're perfectly capable of shifting our schedules and
noticing that the days have gotten longer without moving around a
reference point which shouldn't be fiddled with.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #233
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26575;
          5 Apr 93 4:32 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05082
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 02:40:31 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22105
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 02:39:59 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 02:39:59 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #234

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Apr 93 02:40:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 234

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telecom Policies and AT&T Break-Up: Info Needed (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Bernd Schuster)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Rob Knauerhase)
    Re: Disabling *70 (Gary Breuckman)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Ken Stox)
    Re: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature (James Gleick)
    Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Use of #77 on Cellular Phones (Mark Chartrand)
    Re: Seeking Recommendations on Cellular Service in Baltimore (Brian Cuthie)
    Re: Connecting Work to Home (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (Bryan Lockwood)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 05 Apr 93 13:05:55 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom Policies and AT&T Break-Up: Info Needed


I think to do justice to a subject such as the pros and cons of AT&T's
breakup and their applications to other countries would require a
tome, nothing less.

So my two cents for your tome:

Pros:                      Cons:
Lower LD rates             Higher local rates
Economic boost             Lower LD for international calls has led to a
    (still argued)          deficit for the US

More innovations           Greater more need to be informed

Other countries have modelled themselves after USA. US companies have
therefore done many consultancies for governments considering taking
their PTT private.  Some of us speculate that China will model its PTT
after the USA's, complete with ROCs.

Greater efficiency (?) On a revenue per employee the RBOCs are the
most efficient phone companies in the world.

But I don't think it is fair to attribute all the pros and cons to the
AT&T breakup. It is the concomitant change in both UK and Japan that,
together with the AT&T divestiture, made the difference, in my
opinion.

My own sense is that govts are cautious enough so that they want to
see alternative models before they embark on privatisation/liberal-
isation.

But the AT&T breakup certainly started the ball rolling.

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

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 14:38:50 JST
From: [e-mail] (Bernd SCHUSTER)
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Organization: Production Technology Lab., SHARP Corp., Tenri, Nara, Japan


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

> In article <[e-mail]> you write:

>> On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a
>> wrong number.  ...

>> The number to try is [phone].

[interesting stuff deleted]

The KDD-announcement for calls from outside is in japanese and
english.  There is one thing with outside-of-Japan-connections that is
very unusual when compared to central Europe (and North-America?):

e.g: +81-7436-5-xxxx is a blocked number - my dormitory; calls from
and to this number are only possible from within Japan (without a
PBX). It is not possible to call an Operator (KDD, AT&T, MCI ...) to
make the connection (both directions).

There is an intercept like "The number you have dialed is not a valid
number. Please check the number and dial again.".


Bernd Schuster

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

From: Rob Knauerhase <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 0:45:32 CDT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Illinois @ Urbana


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

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

>> I saw a Chinese student here get a Radio Shack pocket dialer, put a
>> different crystal in it, and then by rocking two of the keys on the
>> keypad back and forth, could produce the tone of a quarter dropping
>> into a pay phone.

> It IS interesting that signalling thru the telephone microphone can
> simulate coins dropping in the phone.  I'd think they'd make it a
> little more secure than that.

The venerable Apple-Cat modem along with a program appropriately
called _Cat's Meow_ would generate tones (clicks or chirps, more
accurately) for nickels, dimes, and quarters.  My childhood was too
conservative to try using it myself, but secondhand reports said it
worked just fine.

I forget if automated coin prompting services listened to both ends of
the wire or not, but if so, one could even have used it to prolong
incoming coin calls.

Ah, what a modem ...


Rob Knauerhase, University of Illinois @ Urbana, Dept. of Computer Science

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Breuckman)
Subject: Re: Disabling *70
Organization:  Organized??  Me?
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 00:19:34 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.

> [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]

This won't help; he can just ignore the call-waiting tones.  What you
want is some clever box that will do a hook-flash or hangup when it
hears the tone <grin>.

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

Date: Mon, 05 Apr 93 09:04:11 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives


First, in reply to Pat's comment that he could not understand why
people should get free phone service, I said that (a) an analogy is
not an argument (as he had used the analogy of a free car for those
who needed transport) and (b) I gave an *example* of someone who
drowned in China because the passers-by wanted to be paid.

In reply, Pat gave an *analogy* of those being turned away in
Emergency cases because they could not pay.

Pat, this is yet another analogy. (exasperated :) ) The problem with
using analogies is that the arguments are assumed in the analogy.

It reminds me of my arguments with my wife. I keep telling her that
she is using history when I'm trying to deal with the present. She
then says, "What about the time you used history?" (another
exasperated :) ).


[Exasperated Moderator's Note: All I am asking of anyone who says 911
should be available in emergencies is why you are asking this of telco
without asking similar concessions by other industries. Yeah, I know
why, you don't have to write and tell me.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Stox)
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Date: 4 Apr 1993 11:30:38 -0500
Organization: MCSNet Contributor, Chicago, IL


> [Moderator's Note: Suppose I need to be taken to a hospital in a hurry
> some distance away and the same kind gentleman had not made his car
> payments and Chrysler Credit Corporation had pulled the vehicle.
> How would you want the automobile industry to behave?

Now then, do you really want me to answer that question ? :-)

> the car but it was out of gasoline and he could not afford to buy any.
> How would you like Standard Oil to behave? Why is telco getting the
> brunt of your 'my need is the most important criteria' argument?

{ Kevlar/asbestos composite bodysuit ON !}

Pat,

    I think we need to make a very important distinction here. One
of the responsibilities of the local phone company is to serve the
community.  It is one of the "costs" of having a monopoly. Somehow,
during divestiture, this concept has been lost. It has become a
free-for-all. I always thought the purpose of the divestiture was to
free up portions of AT&T, not the whole mess. The local phone company
is NOT like Chrylser Corp, or Amoco. I can choose other vendors. For
the local phone, I have no choice.

    Now then, I do believe that the phone company has the right to
make money, but it must also serve the community. Finally, it doesn't
cost the phone company that much to provide the most minimal service.
In fact, they may still end up breaking even if the phone was receive
only except for 911.  They would still make money on calls terminating
at that point. (Hey, Ma Bell could even apply for a special tariff
that would allow a higher rate to be charged when calling one of those
phones. )

    The way our society is currently structured, if one falls down
the hole deep enough to have one's phone service cut off entirely, one
will have a great deal of difficulty climbing out. Cutting someone off
the network, for all practical purposes, cuts one off from the world.
[Just a question, can you get a telegraph delivered nationwide
anymore ?]


Ken Stox   [e-mail]     ..dogma, half price!
#include <sys/bureaucracy/waste/waste/waste/waste/disclamier.h>


[Moderator's Note: But many have said how glad they will be when the
day comes the local telco does not have a monopoly any longer. Will
all the 'good citizen' requirements be junked then, or will there be
still further demands made on telco? Forget how much or how little it
will cost telco; that is irrelevant. You say you thought the purpose
of divestiture was to free up portions of AT&T 'not the whole mess'.
I want to tell you that divestiture opened a whole can of worms the
judge, in his bald-faced and unabashed hostility toward AT&T refused
to consider.  Maybe for the flaws we lived with the other way, there
was still something to be said for the full monopoly system.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (James Gleick)
Subject: Re: Block-the-Blocker CallerID Feature
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 20:48:22 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dan
Danz) writes:

> ... this little sucker (when enabled) will say "This party will not
> accept blocked calls" and disconnect.  It also records the fact that
> it received and blocked the call.

In New York, where Caller ID is being implemented, slowly, Nynex has
provided the following peculiarity.  If you get a call from an
exchange that will *soon* have Caller ID enabled, but doesn't yet, it
shows up as Blocked, not as Out of Area.

Explanation?  The switching equipment is now capable of passing the
CLID information along, but the caller has not yet had the opportunity
to select the blocking option.  So the phone company has decided to
mark *all* calls as blocked.

(Their explanation, not mine.)

If I had the equipment you describe, I wouldn't be receiving any local
calls for a while.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 20:33:32 GMT


My junk mail recently contained a catalog with one item that relates
to this thread.  It is from Johnson Smith in Florida (813-747-2356),
and is sub-titled "Things you never knew existed and other items you
can't possibly live without".

Its got all sorts of novelties and gags.  The one in particular of
interest to TELECOM Digest readers is # 5829, which is a phoney
handheld cellphone, complete with sound effects (ringing etc).  Cost
is $5.98 + shipping.  Can't get much safer.  :-)

There are lots of others, but I will not describe them here to save
space.  Send for the catalog.  It makes amusing reading, and you may
want to order some of the things described.


Rich Greenberg

Work: [e-mail] 310-417-8999 N6LRT
Play: [e-mail]  310-649-0238
Previous play (obselete): [e-mail]
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....


[Moderator's Note: I **love** the Johnson Smith catalogs. I've gotten
them for at least forty years, and remember my father showing me one
as a small child. Some of their novelty gags are pretty gross, but
they do have all sorts of odd books and novelties I'd love to own.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (mark chartrand)
Subject: Re: Use of #77 on Cellular Phones
Date: 4 Apr 1993 16:00:59 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


In article <[e-mail]> Tony Harminc <EL406045@
BROWNVM.brown.edu> writes:

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

>> Now posted on southbound I-95 at Havre de Grace, Maryland: call #77
>> (that is pound sign, not asterisk) to report disabled vehicles.  Same
>> sign shows telephone keypad with nothing on the buttons except for the
>> 7 and # keys.  # in many other applications signifies time-out, right?

> A number of Toronto radio stations advertise (for call-in shows and
> traffic reports etc.) that they "can be reached in most areas of the
> province on cellular phones by dialing #frequency" -- e.g. station CBL
> on AM 740kHz is #740, even from areas in Ontario well outside the
> reception area.  Of course they always pronounce it e.g. "number-sign
> seven forty", since the # character is not generally called pound
> here.

I have seen, in only two sources, the symbol # called "octothorpe."
Everyone else calls it "pound" "number" ro "tictactoe".  Does anyone
know where "octothorpe" comes from.  It is not in the Oxford English
Dictionary. The # symbol does indeed have 8 ("octo-") points to it,
but "thorpe" according to the OED, is ancient Anglo-Saxon for village.

Any suggestions would be welcome.

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Cuthie)
Subject: Re: Seeking Recommendations on Cellular Service in Baltimore
Date: 4 Apr 93 23:32:57 GMT
Organization: Systemix Software, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> marcal!apres!system@
mcdchg.UUCP (System Operator) writes:

> I will soon be relocating to the Baltimore, Maryland area (Columbia,
> actually) and would like to hear recommendations for a cellular
> provider in the area.  I will probably be travelling within the state,
> from Frederick down to Gaithersburg, but home will be Columbia.  I
> currently have CellularOne service here in northern Illinois, and have
> no particular complaints (except the lack of a *cheap* monthly charge
> for pay-as-you-go: I generally use less than 30 minutes a month,
> usually 10 minutes or so.)

> I'd like to hear about the Maryland providers in that area, and what
> deals might be available.

I suggest Bell-Atlantic Mobile Systems (affectionately called BAMS).
Stay away from Cellular One.

I subscribed to Cell One from 1986 until late 1991.  During that
period I saw the level of service drop substantially, including
tremendous increases in price as well as blocked and dropped calls.

 From what I have been able to find out, the problem was fundamentally
that the their most recent president, named Tim (something) was a real
jerk.  So much so that people were jumping ship so fast that there was
no one around to maintain the system.  This coupled with a switch from
the Motorola-DSC system to an AT&T one, which required complete
resectorization of the cells, has rendered the system all but useless.
Meanwhile, Tim became such a problem that a sexual/racial harrassment
task force literally dragged him and other top officers out of the
building to investigate claims by employees.  About a month ago, Tim
was removed as president of Cell One (Washington/Baltimore).

Things weren't always like this, mind you.  Once upon a time, Cell One
was the white knight of the local cellular market.  As the original
Motorola test bed for cellular (Chicago was the AT&T test market) and
an independent provider, Cell One was once a technological leader and
aggresively price competetive provider.  However, in a ruling that
still makes me wonder who's hands were in who's pockets, the FCC
allowed Wireline companies (the local RBOCs) to buy non-wireline
cellular companies in other markets.  Ever since SouthWestern Bell
bought Cell One, it has been a steady decline for the company.  Prices
are identical to BAMS and service is poor.  What we have now is a
duopoly, not competition.

Oh yea, Tim was hired when SW Bell aquired Cell One because he is
married to the daughter of some big VP at SWB.  After all the scandal
he has caused in the cellular industry, I wonder how his father-in-law
feels about him now.


Brian Cuthie             Voice: [phone]
Systemix Software, Inc.          Email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Connecting Work to Home
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 06:45:45 GMT


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

> What are YOU using to connect systems at home (or small remote
> locations) to computers at work?

> o faster modems (14400bps (V.32bis) and, in future, 56000bps (V.fast)

V.fast will probably be 28,800 bps; this is very close to the shannon
limit of what you can squeeze through a Bellcore-standardized
long-distance phone line on a good day.

Currently from home I am using a link of old non-compressing 2400 bps
modems to a terminal server on company premises. From our branch
offices we use NetHoppers with 14,400 bps modems with V.42bis
compression. Soon we hope to be able to get ISDN basic rate
connections installed. In either case, we run asynchronous PPP over
the modems. THis is like SLIP but more robust and less work to
configure.


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]

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

Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy
From: [e-mail] (Bryan Lockwood)
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 93 22:26:06 AST
Organization: The Generation Gap


[e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr) writes:

> There was an article in {Newsday} yeaterday about a man being sued by
> Medphone, a Paramus, N.J.-based medical equipment company.  The charge
> was that he libeled the company via computer using PRODIGY.

Does anyone know whatever became of a Prodigy-related rumor which
circulated the online world a year or three ago? Briefly (as I recall
it):

Some lawyer apparently noticed that his modem lights indicated large
amounts of data being sent FROM his computer to Prodigy when he hadn't
initiated an upload. He investigated further, to find that the Prodigy
software had apparently copied random fragments of the contents of his
hard disk to a file called STAGE.DAT, and appeared to be uploading
this file to the Prodigy service. Some of the files copied to
STAGE.DAT were supposedly client-related files which were definately
not meant for upload to Prodigy or any other service. I was never
clear on whether or not the STAGE.DAT file (including private customer
data) was in fact being uploaded to the Prodigy service.

At the time this rumor was circulating online, people had been
theorizing that the Prodigy folks might be using the data derived from
these, uh, sneak peaks at their user's files as 'market research' to
determine what computer-related wares Sears might be able to market.
Others supposed that this behaviour of the Prodigy user software might
be a simple bug. And naturally, some folks suggested more sinister
motivations behind the whole thing.

Please remember, folks, this is old news and perhaps totally unfounded
 -- let's not 'Shergold' this story, eh? I'm just curious to know what
became of it.


Bryan Lockwood    [e-mail]   1@501 (WWIVnet)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #234
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28288;
          5 Apr 93 5:23 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30970
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 03:29:34 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22649
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 03:28:59 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 03:28:59 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #235

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Apr 93 03:29:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 235

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Nixpub Listings (Phil Eschallier)
    Re: Dialing Codes in France (Jean-Bernard Condat)
    Re: Dialing Within France, UK (Linc Madison)
    Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks (Rob Knauerhase)
    Re: How to Busy Out a Line? (Floyd Davidson)
    Information Needed on Starting Telec List (Bob Puffer)
    Telecom Follies (Barry Mishkind)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 04 Apr 93 11:47 EST
From: Phil Eschallier <[e-mail]>
Subject: Nixpub Listings


The nixpub lists are kept on jabber.bts.com and are available from a
number of sources (ftp/uucp/bbs).  I have attached the lasted short
list -- the long list is a bit large for mailing to folks that didn't
specifically request it.  the footer contains the info on sources for
retrieving these ... I hope this helps.


Phil Eschallier                |  Bux Technical Services
[e-mail]    or             |  P.O. Box 110 / Doylestown, PA  18901
 ...!{dsinc!gvls1}!jabber!phil |  Voice [phone] / Fax [phone]

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

NixPub Short Listing -- March 29, 1993
Public/Open Access UNIX (*NIX) Sites [both Fee and No Fee]

Sites Listed <139>

Legend:      $   - Fee                   -$  - No Fee
             24  - 24 Hours/Day          -24 - Not 24 Hours/Day
             H   - Courier HST           A   - Anonymous UUCP
             P   - Telebit PEP           F   - Anonymous FTP
             V   - V.32[bis]             I   - Live Internet Connection
             W   - Worldblazer TurboPEP  M   - Electronic Mail
                                         N   - USENET News
                                         S   - UNIX Shell
                                         T   - Multiple Telephone Lines

Updated                System                        Speed
Last  Telephone #      Name       Location           Range     Legend

03/93 201-759-8450^    tronsbox   Belleville      NJ 300-FAST   24 -$ MNPST
03/93 203-661-1279     admiral    Greenwich       CT 300-FAST   24 -$ AHMNPTV
03/93 206-328-4944^    polari     Seattle         WA 300-FAST   24 $ MNPST
03/93 206-367-3837^    eskimo     Seattle         WA 300-FAST   24 $ MNSTVW
03/93 206-382-6245^    halcyon    Seattle         WA 300-FAST   24 $ IMNPST
03/93 206-747-6397^    seanews    Redmond         WA 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNV
03/93 212-420-0527^    magpie     NYC             NY 300-FAST   24 -$ APTWV
03/93 212-675-7059^    marob      NYC             NY 300-FAST   24 -$ APT
03/93 212-787-3100^    panix      New York City   NY 300-FAST   24 $ IMNPSTV
03/93 214-436-3281^    sdf        Dallas          TX 300-FAST   24 -$ AMNPSTV
03/93 214-705-2901^    metronet   Dallas          TX 300-FAST   24 $ IMNSTV
03/93 215-348-9727     jabber     Doylestown      PA 300-FAST   24 -$ AMNPTV
03/93 215-654-9184^    cellar     Horsham         PA 300-FAST   24 $ HMNTV
03/93 216-481-9445     wariat     Cleveland       OH 300-FAST   24 $ AMNSV
03/93 216-582-2460^    ncoast     Cleveland       OH 1200-FAST  24 $ MNPST
03/93 217-789-7888     pallas     Springfield     IL 300-FAST   24 $ HMNSTV
03/93 301-220-0462^    digex      Greenbelt       MD 300-2400   24 $ IMNST
03/93 301-924-5998     highlite   Laurel          MD 1200-FAST  24 $ MNSTV
03/93 303-871-3324^    nyx        Denver          CO 300-FAST   24 -$ MNST
03/93 309-676-0409     hcs        Peoria          IL 300-FAST   24 -$ MNT
03/93 312-248-0900     ddsw1      Chicago         IL 300-FAST   24 $ AMNPSTV
03/93 312-282-8606^    gagme      Chicago         IL 300-FAST   24 $ MNPSTV
03/93 312-283-0559^    chinet     Chicago         IL 300-FAST   24 $ HNPT
03/93 313-623-6309     nucleus    Clarkston       MI 1200-2400  24 -$ AM
03/93 313-761-3000     grex       Ann Arbor       MI 300-FAST   24 $ MNST
03/93 313-996-4644^    m-net      Ann Arbor       MI 300-FAST   24 $ IMST
03/93 401-455-0347     anomaly    Esmond          RI 300-FAST   24 -$ IMNPS
03/93 403-569-2882     debug      Calgary         AB 300-FAST   24 $ HMNPTV
03/93 407-299-3661^    vicstoy    Orlando         FL 1200-2400  24 -$ MNS
03/93 407-438-7138^    jwt        Orlando         FL 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNPTV
03/93 408-241-9760^    netcom     San Jose        CA 1200-FAST  24 $ IMNPSTV
03/93 408-245-7726^    uuwest     Sunnyvale       CA 300-FAST   24 -$ N
03/93 408-249-9630^    quack      Santa Clara     CA 300-FAST   24 $ IMNPSTVW
03/93 408-293-9010     a2i        San Jose        CA 1200-FAST  24 $ IMNPSTV
03/93 408-423-9995     cruzio     Santa Cruz      CA 1200-2400  24 $ MNPT
03/93 408-458-2289     gorn       Santa Cruz      CA 300-FAST   24 -$ MNPST
03/93 408-725-0561^    portal     Cupertino       CA 300-FAST   24 $ MNT
03/93 408-739-1520^    szebra     Sunnyvale       CA 300-FAST   24 -$ MN+P
03/93 410-661-2598     wb3ffv     Baltimore       MD 1200-FAST  24 -$ AHMNPTV
03/93 412-431-8649^    eklektik   Pittsburgh      PA 300-FAST   24 $ MNST
03/93 412-481-5302     telerama   Pittsburgh      PA 300-2400   24 $ IMN
03/93 414-241-5469^    mixcom     Milwaukee       WI 1200-FAST  24 $ MNST
03/93 414-321-9287     solaria    Milwaukee       WI 300-2400   24 -$ MNS
03/93 414-734-2499     edsi       Appleton        WI 300-2400   24 $ MN
03/93 415-332-6106^    well       Sausalito       CA 1200-FAST  24 $ IMNST
03/93 415-826-0397^    wet        San Francisco   CA 1200-FAST  24 $ MNPSTV
03/93 415-949-3133^    starnet    Los Altos       CA 300-FAST   24 $ MNPSTV
03/93 415-967-9443^    btr        Mountain View   CA 300-FAST   24 $ HMNPSTV
03/93 416-249-5366     r-node     Etobicoke       ON 300-FAST   24 -$ MNPSTVW
03/93 416-452-0926     telly      Brampton        ON 1200-FAST  24 $ MNP
03/93 416-461-2608     tmsoft     Toronto         ON 300-FAST   24 $ MNS
03/93 502-231-5908     compunet   Louisville      KY 300-FAST   24 -$ HMNTV
03/93 503-220-0636^    techbook   Beaverton       OR 300-FAST   24 -$ AIMNPTV
03/93 503-293-1772^    agora      PDX             OR 1200-FAST  24 $ MNSTV
03/93 503-297-3211^    m2xenix    Portland        OR 300-FAST   24 -$ MNPSTV
03/93 503-632-7891^    bucket     Portland        OR 300-FAST   24 -$ IMNPSTV
03/93 508-664-0149     genesis    North Reading   MA 1200-FAST  24 -$ HMNSTV
03/93 508-752-9121     schunix    Worcester       MA 2400-FAST  24 $ MNPTV
03/93 510-294-8591     woodowl    Livermore       CA 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNP
03/93 510-530-9682     bdt        Oakland         CA 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNPTV
03/93 510-623-8652^    jack       Fremont         CA 300-FAST   24 -$ MNPST
03/93 510-704-1058     HoloNet    Berkeley        CA 1200-FAST  24 $ IMNTV
03/93 512-346-2339^    bigtex     Austin          TX FAST       24 -$ APS
03/93 513-779-8209     cinnet     Cincinnati      OH 1200-FAST  24 $ MNPS
03/93 514-435-8896     ichlibix   Blainville Queb CA 300-FAST   24 -$ HTV
03/93 517-487-3356     lunapark   E. Lansing      MI 1200-2400  24 -$
03/93 517-789-5175     anubis     Jackson         MI 300-1200   24 -$ M
03/93 518-237-2163     tnl        Troy            NY 300-FAST   24 -$ MNS
03/93 518-346-8033     sixhub     upstate         NY 300-2400   24 $ MNST
03/93 602-293-3726     coyote     Tucson          AZ 300-FAST   24 -$ MN+P
03/93 602-649-9099^    telesys    Mesa            AZ 1200-FAST  24 $ AMNPSTVW
03/93 602-941-2005^    xroads     Phoenix         AZ 1200-2400  24 $ NT
03/93 602-991-5952     aa7bq      Scottsdale      AZ 300-2400   24 -$ MNS
03/93 603-429-1735     mv         Litchfield      NH 1200-FAST  24 $ IMNPT
03/93 603-448-5722     tutor      Lebanon         NH 300-FAST   24 -$ MN
03/93 604-576-1214     mindlink   Vancouver       BC 300-FAST   24 $ HMNPT
03/93 605-348-2738     loft386    Rapid City      SD 300-FAST   24 $ MNPS
03/93 606-233-2051     lunatix    Lexington       KY 300-2400   24 -$ MNPST
03/93 608-246-2701     fullfeed   Madison         WI FAST       24 -$ MNPSTV
03/93 608-273-2657     madnix     Madison         WI 300-2400   24 -$ MNS
03/93 612-473-2295^    pnet51     Minneapolis     MN 300-2400   24 -$ MNT
03/93 613-237-0792     latour     Ottawa          ON 300-2400   24 -$ AMNSTV
03/93 613-837-3029     micor      Orleans         ON 300-FAST   24 -$ MNPSTV
03/93 614-868-9980^    bluemoon   Reynoldsburg    OH 300-FAST   24 -$ HIMNPT
03/93 615-288-3957     medsys     Kingsport       TN 1200-FAST  24 -$ ANP
03/93 615-895-4675     raider     Murfreesboro    TN 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNSTV
03/93 616-457-1964     wybbs      Jenison         MI 300-FAST   24 -$ AMNPST
03/93 617-739-9753^    world      Brookline       MA 300-FAST   24 $ IMNPST
03/93 619-278-8267     cg57       San Diego       CA 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNPTV
03/93 619-453-1115^    netlink    San Diego       CA 1200-2400  24 -$ MNT
03/93 619-569-4072^    crash      San Diego       CA 12/24/96   24 $ HMNPSTV
03/93 619-634-1376     cyber      Encinitas       CA 3/12/24/9  24 -$ HMNTV
03/93 703-281-7997^    grebyn     Vienna          VA 300-2400   24 $ MNT
03/93 703-803-0391^    tnc        Fairfax Station VA 300-FAST   24 -$ MNPT
03/93 708-425-8739     oaknet     Oak Lawn        IL 300-FAST   24 -$ MN
03/93 708-833-8126^    vpnet      Villa Park      IL 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNPST
03/93 708-879-8633     unixuser   Batavia         IL 300-FAST   24 -$ MNSV
03/93 708-983-5147     wa9aek     Lisle           IL 1200-FAST  24 -$ PTV
03/93 713-480-2686^    blkbox     Houston         TX 300-FAST   24 $ IMNTV
03/93 713-668-7176^    nuchat     Houston         TX 300-FAST   24 -$ MNPS
03/93 713-684-5900^    sugar      Houston         TX 300-FAST   24 -$ IMNPTVW
03/93 714-635-2863^    dhw68k     Anaheim         CA 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNPST
03/93 714-821-9671^    alphacm    Cypress         CA 1200-FAST  24 -$ APT
03/93 714-842-5851^    conexch    Santa Ana       CA 300-2400   24 $ AMNS
03/93 714-894-2246^    stanton    Irvine          CA 300-2400   24 $ MNS
03/93 714-944-7833     alchemy    Rancho Cucamong CA 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNP
03/93 716-634-6552     exuco1     Buffalo         NY 300-FAST  -24 -$ MNPTV
03/93 718-729-5018     dorsaidm   NYC             NY 300-FAST   24 $ MNTV
03/93 719-520-1700     cns        Coloroda Spring CO 300-2400   24 $ IMNST
03/93 719-632-4111     oldcolo    Colorodo Spring CO 1200-FAST  24 $ HMNT
03/93 801-566-6283^    bitsko     Salt Lake City  UT 300-FAST   24 -$ MNP
03/93 804-627-1828     wyvern     Norfolk         VA 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNSTV
03/93 812-333-0450     sir-alan   Bloomington     IN 1200-FAST  24 -$ AHMPTV
03/93 812-421-8523     aquila     Evansville      IN 300-2400   24 $ AM
03/93 814-353-0566     cpumagic   Bellefonte      PA 1200-FAST  24 -$ AHMNV
03/93 818-287-5115^    abode      El Monte        CA 2400-FAST  24 $ MNPS
03/93 818-367-2142^    quake      Sylmar          CA 300-FAST   24 $ MNPTVW
03/93 818-793-9108^    atrium     Pasadena        CA 300-2400   24 -$ T
03/93 900-468-7727     uunet      Falls Church    VA 3/12/24/9  24 $ AIMNPTVW
03/93 904-456-2003     amaranth   Pensacola       FL 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNP
03/93 906-228-4399     lopez      Marquette       MI 1200-2400  24 $ MN
03/93 916-649-0161^    sactoh0    Sacramento      CA 1200-FAST  24 $ MNPSTV
03/93 916-923-5013     rgm        Sacramento      CA 1200-FAST  24 $ HMNS
03/93 919-248-1177^    rock       RTP             NC 300-FAST   24 $ IMNT
04/93 [phone] gna        Paris           FR 1200-FAST  24 -$ AMNPTV
04/93 [phone]  clinet     Espoo           FI 300-FAST   24 $ MNSTV
04/93 [phone]    nervous    Rimini (Fo)     IT 300-FAST   24 -$ HNPV
04/93 [phone]   ixgch      Kaiseraugst     CH 300-FAST   24 -$ HMNV
04/93 [phone] infocom    Berkshire       UK 300-FAST   24 -$ AMNPTV
04/93 [phone]  dircon     London          UK 300-FAST   24 $ MN
04/93 [phone]  ibmpcug    Middlesex       UK 300-FAST   24 $ IMSTV
04/93 [phone]  HelpEx     London          UK 300-2400   24 $ MN
04/93 [phone] scuzzy     Berlin          DE 300-FAST   24 -$ AHIS
04/93 [phone]    isys-hh    Hamburg         DE 300-FAST   24 -$ AMNS+V
04/93 [phone]    odbffm     Frankfurt/Main  DE 300-FAST   24 -$ MNSV
04/93 [phone]   gold       Baldham         DE 300-FAST   24 -$ AHMNPTV
04/93 [phone]   kralizec   Sydney          AU 1200-FAST  24 $ MNS
04/93 [phone]   actrix     Wellington      NZ 300-FAST   24 $ HMNST
04/93 [phone]   cavebbs    Wellington      NZ 1200-FAST  24 -$ MNSV

NOTES:  1) ^ means the site is reachable using PC Pursuit.

        2) The information in this document is kept as current as possible.
           However, you use this data at your own risk and cost.

      o  anonymous uucp from jabber.
            [phone] [Telebit access]
            login: nuucp  NO PWD   [no rmail permitted]
            long list: /usr/spool/uucppublic/nixpub.long
            short list: /usr/spool/uucppublic/nixpub.short
            (also available from the "*NIX Depot" BBS)
      o  mail server on jabber
            mail to [e-mail]
            body containing:
               get PUB nixpub.long
            or
               get PUB nixpub.short
      o  the nixpub-list electronic mailing list.  to subscribe to
         the list:
            mail to [e-mail]
            body containing:
               subscribe NIXPUB-LIST Your Name
      o  USENET, regular posts to:
            comp.misc
            comp.bbs.misc
            alt.bbs
      o  anonymous ftp from VFL.Paramax.COM [128.126.220.104]
            under ~/pub/pubnet/{nixpub.long,nixpub.short}
      o  archive server from cs.widener.edu.
            mail to [e-mail]
            Subject: or body of
               send nixpub long
            or
               send nixpub short
            or
               send nixpub long short
            or even
               index nixpub

The "nixpub" listings are (C) Copyright 1993, Bux Technical Services.
This publication is released for unlimited redistribution over any
electronic media providing it remains in its original form.
Publishing, removing this copyright notice, or in any way revising
this document's contents is forbidden without written consent from the
owner.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 04 Apr 93 23:59:59 GMT
Subject: Re: Dialing Codes in France


In article <[e-mail]>, Frederick G. M. Roeber
<roeber@ vxcrna.cern.ch> writes:

> So to summarize,

>     Paris number: (1) ab cd ef gh
>     Not Paris number: ab cd ef gh
>
>     Paris     --> Paris:                  ab cd ef gh
>     Not Paris --> Not Paris:              ab cd ef gh
>     Paris     --> Not Paris:  16 (wfdt)   ab cd ef gh
>     Not Paris --> Paris:      16 (wfdt) 1 ab cd ef gh

> wfdt = wait for dial tone

The original French numbering system in France give a special
abbreviation for all phone number. At the place of "1abcdefgh", all
French telecommunications technicians use Z-ABPQMCDU, with

  Z         --> Area code:
                Now: "1" for Paris, and "_" [nothing] for the rest;
                Soonly: "1", "2", "3", "4" & "5";

  AB        --> General first 2-digit number
                Paris has recently open phone number beginning with A=5
                (normally A=3 or 4 or 6, for Paris);

  PQ        --> Secondary (hidden) thirst and 4th caracters
                Two last numbers that appears on the detailled phone bill;

  M         --> like "milliers";
  C         --> like "centaines";
  D         --> like "dizaines";
  U         --> like "unites".

All numbers beginning by A=1 are reserved (12 for phone
investigations, 11 for Minitel access, 18 for police, etc.). All
numbers beginning by AB=36 are carefully list in a 36-list that give
all new France Telecom services (3656=telegram by Minitel,
3699=automatic clock, 3644=phone regulator, etc.)

A France Telecom in-house service (3614 Comutel) give all the weekly
modifications of all Z-ABPQ in France (restrictions of call, ISDN
(=Numeris) services, etc.).

Bonne journee :-)


Jean-Bernard Condat
Chaos Computer Club France [CCCF]    B.P. 8005
E-Mail: [e-mail]         69351 Lyon Cedex 08, France
Phone:  [phone]               Fax:  [phone]

Editor of  _Chaos Digest_  the French computer security e-journal
Available on request at:             [e-mail]
or by: ftp.eff.org, in /pub/cud/chaos/chaos.1-xx   (xx=issue nbr)

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

Date: Sun, 04 Apr 93 19:37:52 BST
From: Linc Madison <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Dialing Within France, UK


I got an answer on my question about dialing within France.

To dial from Paris to not-Paris, dial 16~xx.xx.xx.xx.
To dial from not-Paris to Paris, dial 16~1.xx.xx.xx.xx.
Within Paris or within the rest of the country, just dial xx.xx.xx.xx.

The ~ represents a second tone you must wait for.  The "16" code is
planned to be switched to "0" some time "soon"; i.e., hopefully this
century :-)

There is also a plan to expand from the current two areas (Paris = 1
and the rest of the country = no code) to four or five geographic area
codes.

As regards Denmark, just dial the eight digits for all calls within
Denmark.


Linc Madison  ==  [e-mail]  ==  [e-mail]
59 Stourcliffe Close, London W1H 5AR  U.K., Tel. [phone]

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

From: Rob Knauerhase <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 2:11:42 CDT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Illinois @ Urbana


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Chris Yoder) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
> Draper) writes: (text omitted here)

> Hah!!  [e-mail] has never logged in, therefore: He
> probably did not write this article.

[...]

>> [netcom.com]
>> Login name: crunch               In real life: John Draper
>> Never logged in.

This actually isn't a trick at all; in fact, it's quite common.  It
just means that his mail is received at a server which he cannot log
in to.  Other machines can NFS-mount the mail spool volume and mail
can be read there.  Alternately, the machine can hand mail to a set
address (as is the case with me and "cs.uiuc.edu").

I'd bet that on closer inspection Pat would see that Draper's mail
came from (foo).netcom.com, with the Reply-To: and/or From: addresses
set to their standard address.


Rob Knauerhase, University of Illinois @ Urbana, Dept. of Computer Science

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

From: [e-mail] (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: How to Busy Out a Line?
Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1993 07:21:11 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Roy Smith) writes:

> Jeff Oasis asks:

>> I need to make one of our lines busy [...] Can I simply install a switch
>> that shorts tip and ring together?

> Personally, I'd suggest using a 2W resistor somewhere around
> 600 to 1000 ohms.  It needs to be small enough to make sure it looks
> like a phone off hook, but large enough that you don't draw an
> unreasonable amount of current.  The power rating has to be large
> enough to not burn up if you get 100V ringing voltage.  100V into 1K
> is 10W, but I would guess that for the low-duty cycle ringing signal,
> a 2W resistor would do fine.  Make it 5 or 10 if you're worried about
> that.  I suspect current limiting on the line won't allow you to
> actually draw that much power anyway.

There isn't really much difference between a 0 ohm resister across the
line and something larger.  First off it is NOT going to get ring
current because it is off-hook.  So let's not worry about that.
Second, no matter how you make it off-hook the current is limited by
the CO as long as you don't provide current ... so forget about
drawing too much current, you won't.

Third and last, it makes no difference how or why you are off hook you
will trigger an alarm at the CO with any modern switch if you do not
dial a number in some pre-determined time period.

The best advice is don't make the phone off hook at all, just disable
the ringer or whatever other equipment you have attached to the line.
If that is not possible then do in fact try shorting the cable pair
and see what happens.  Most likely you will end up with a
non-functional line within a few hours ... but it might not.  And even
if the line doesn't work when you restore it to normal, it might after
a few minutes or hours.  That all depends on what the particular CO
switch does or doesn't do and there is an extreme range of
possibilities.  Try it and find out.


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

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

Date: Sun, 04 Apr 93 11:25:34 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Information Needed on Starting Telec List


I'm not sure if this is the proper list to be asking my question but
I'll give it a shot.  Does anyone out there have information on how to
start a Telec list? Any information would be greatly appreciated.

email responses [e-mail].


Thanks,

Bob Puffer


[Moderator's Note: I am not even sure what a 'Telec List' is.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 4 Apr 93 23:20 MST
From: [e-mail] (barry mishkind)
Subject: Telecom Follies


In the local US West directory, there is a listing for the
"Antidefacation League of B'Nai B'Rith Tucson" ...

 ... it's claimed it was an unintentional error.


[Moderator's Note: I'm sure it was. A close cousin to the telephone
directory in terms of tiny print and page after page of listings is
the Sunday {Chicago Tribune} classified ads. Typically a hundred pages
every weekend of classified ads ... a couple hundred thousand ads
every weekend, they say. The job of getting it all out on time and
correct is a difficult one.  But it became more difficult several
years ago when a prankster got into the classified advertising
computer and explained a common abbreviation which appears with many
'help wanted' ads.  At the bottom of several ads where the 'equal
opportunity, M/F' line appears, this chap added the notation, "M/F?
That means Mother Fu__ers".  The Tribune began hearing about it
Saturday afternoon, after the Sunday paper had been available for
street sales for about two hours ... they caught the mother f. who
tampered with the computer and fired him. He was a disgruntled
ad-taker who had earlier worked for (and been fired by) one of the
companies whose ads he chose to deface with his rude remarks. He was
so dumb, I guess he did not realize it could be traced back to his
login, or maybe he did not care.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #235
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04250;
          5 Apr 93 20:35 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05536
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 18:30:25 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16189
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 18:29:40 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 18:29:40 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #236

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Apr 93 18:29:40 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 236

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Martien Kuunders)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (John Higdon)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Richard D.G. Cox)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (William Sohl)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy ([e-mail])
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (Bruce Sullivan)
    Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks (Chris Yoder)
    Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks (John Higdon)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Ketil Albertsen)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Scott Marshall)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 05 Apr 1993 18:08:16 +0000 (GMT)
From: [e-mail] (Martien Kuunders)
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Organization: PTT Research, The Netherlands


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

> On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a
> wrong number.  I thought I'd share this recording for those of you
> interested.  I have translated the number to something else so as not
> to give away the original number; this number also gives the same
> message.

>The number to try is [phone].

I just dialed it from the Netherlands, call setup time something like
a couple of seconds, after that the amusing message follows, both in
English and Japanese, accompanied by some muzak. Should be a nice
message to tape and put on one's answering machine. I just wonder which
number Paul was calling and why?


Martien Kuunders, [e-mail]
[phone] ICBM 52.05N 4.24E
These opinions are mine and mine alone but can be licensed for a nominal fee -

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

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 02:49 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept


[e-mail] (Daniel Burstein) writes:

> When I used AT&T I got connected in about 1/2 second! (was I -really-
> routed to Japan?) and got the recording, in English FIRST, then
> Japanese, which leads me to suspect that there is some local
> ("somewhere" in the USA) intercept for this which is "smart" enough to
> know what's going on.

The recording does indeed come from Japan. Unlike the usual American
non-attention to detail, KDD detects where the call is coming from
and assumes that English is the preferred language. The fast call
setup time is just proof of who the REAL technical leader in long
distance happens to be despite the huff'n'puff of MCI and Sprint.

By the way, "unable to complete your call as dialed" recordings from
Sprint or MCI should not be interpreted as SS7 magic. They are one of
two things: either an internal table of valid numbers kept by the
carrier (prone to get out of date), or simply call failures. The
recording that says, "You have reached the KDD telephone office in
Japan ..." (or words to that effect) is the real, correct result that
you should obtain.


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

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

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 12:53 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Daniel Burstein) wrote:

> When I used AT&T I got connected in about 1/2 second! (was I -really-
> routed to Japan?) and got the recording, in English FIRST, then Japanese,
> which leads me to suspect that there is some local ("somewhere" in the
> USA) intercept for this which is "smart" enough to know what's going on.

No, it was a real connect.  We can reach the same intercept from the
UK, and the quality was so much better than the "Digital Dorothy" that
we're used to over here.

> Guess I'll have to wait for my phone bill ...

We don't get charged for calling intercepted numbers.  Neither should
you !


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail] - PGP2.2 public key available on request

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

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 13:51:48 GMT


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

> There was an article in {Newsday} yeaterday about a man being sued by
> Medphone, a Paramus, N.J.-based medical equipment company.  The charge
> was that he libeled the company via computer using PRODIGY.

  Details of alleged libel deleted for brevity....

> Sitting on the sidelines is Prodigy who has in the past been accused
> of censoring e-mail.  IMHO, if Medphone wins this case, it will give
> Prodigy the tools to censor e-mail.

Unless Prodigy has been named as a defendent in the lawsuit, I see no
reason for Prodigy to view this as a possible rational to begin
censoring email.

> During a three month period DeNegris posted about two dozen messages
> concerning insider dumping among other things and predicted several
> days ahead the upcoming stock price changes.  Said Wachtel "In some
> cases it was scarily correct."

Ditto, my comment above.  Sounds like the only one that "may" be held
responsible would be the poster.  Also, this comment seems to imply
that what was posted was not "email," but was a post to a subject
newsgroup (or whatever such things are called in Prodigy).


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]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 10:47:22 CDT


> Does anyone know whatever became of a Prodigy-related rumor which
> circulated the online world a year or three ago? Briefly (as I recall
> it):

> Some lawyer apparently noticed that his modem lights indicated large
> amounts of data being sent FROM his computer to Prodigy when he hadn't
> initiated an upload. He investigated further, to find that the Prodigy
> software had apparently copied random fragments of the contents of his
> hard disk to a file called STAGE.DAT, and appeared to be uploading
> this file to the Prodigy service. Some of the files copied to
> STAGE.DAT were supposedly client-related files which were definately
> not meant for upload to Prodigy or any other service. I was never
> clear on whether or not the STAGE.DAT file (including private customer
> data) was in fact being uploaded to the Prodigy service.

> At the time this rumor was circulating online, people had been
> theorizing that the Prodigy folks might be using the data derived from
> these, uh, sneak peaks at their user's files as 'market research' to
> determine what computer-related wares Sears might be able to market.
> Others supposed that this behaviour of the Prodigy user software might
> be a simple bug. And naturally, some folks suggested more sinister
> motivations behind the whole thing.

> Please remember, folks, this is old news and perhaps totally unfounded
> -- let's not 'Shergold' this story, eh? I'm just curious to know what
> became of it.

Normally, I would just reply directly to Bryan, as this was covered in
the Digest a while back; however, I am submitting this as it may be a
good idea to publish this so no one gets any wrong ideas about Prodigy
 ... we don't need another round of Prodigy bashing ...

PRODIGY DID NOT STEAL ANY DATA OFF OF ANYONE'S HARD DRIVE  !!

STAGE.DAT is used by the Prodigy program to store various screens that
are commonly or recently used, so as to reduce the time needed to
display them the next time they are used (they needn't be sent to you
at 2.4kbps, they can simply be loaded off your hard disk).

When you delete a file with MS-DOS, the data is not removed from your hard
drive.  Instead, the clusters that were used by the file are marked as unused,
and the file is marked as deleted in the directory.  (Hence, the file CAN be
undeleted, and there are several utilities for doing so).  Those clusters are
then available for use the next time you save a file to the hard disk.

During the Prodigy install process, it is necessary to create
STAGE.DAT of a certain size on your hard disk.  Basically, this is
done by a DOS call that says "create me a file of X KB in size" ...
DOS complies, and allocates the required number of clusters to that
file.  Now, that file consists of those clusters strung together, and
the data contained in those clusters is whatever happens to be there
 ... frequently, contents of files that have been recently deleted.
Thus, if you list out stage.dat, you will see parts of files that have
been recently deleted.  This won't last too long, as Prodigy will
being filling up STAGE.DAT with its own stuff as time goes on.

Prodigy NEVER asked that STAGE.DAT be sent to the service, so they
never got the contents of it anyway.  I don't know what the lawyer saw
when he noticed LARGE AMOUNTS OF DATA going to the service when he was
idle; however, Prodigy normally sends you the next few screens it
expects you to ask for ahead of time (while you are reading the
current screen), so when you ask for the next screen, you will get it
instantaneously.  Since the protocol used by Prodigy for everything is
error checking, the lawyer may simply have been seeing the
acknowledgements from the PC to the Prodigy host.

Prodigy has stated that the software does not currently have any
capability to randomly upload stuff FROM YOUR COMPUTER TO THE SERVICE
(i.e. they claim that it is not simply that their service doesn't ask
the software on your PC to send it random programs, but that the
program on the PC wouldn't comply anyway).  This is probably true,
although they do have the capability to upgrade the software on your
PC automatically, and so they *COULD* send you an upgrade that did
allow them to randomly get programs.  I DO NOT EXPECT THAT THEY WILL
DO THIS.  However, I believe that the best way to put this rumor to
rest is to explain everything FULLY, and tell people what is and is
not technically possible.

In an attempt to quiet this rumor, Prodigy has also modified their
installer program to, after it creates STAGE.DAT, go through STAGE.DAT
and overwrite all the existing data with something else, so that
people will not see old deleted files if they look through STAGE.DAT.
This does two things: (1) reduces paranoia for those who believe that
if its in STAGE.DAT, it must be getting sent to the service, and (2)
makes the install process take a bit longer.

In short, yes, it is technically possible for Prodigy to get the
contents of your hard drive.  They may have to auto-update your
software to do this, but it would be possible.  I don't think they
will do this, and it would certainly be highly illegal.  It would not
be necessary for them to put the stuff in STAGE.DAT before sending it
up either.  Again, this is not to say that they will do this, I just
think the full truth should be known.  At some point, you have to have
a little bit of trust (or put a datascope on the line and watch
everything they send -- had the lawyer mentioned above done this, he
would have seen that STAGE.DAT never got uploaded).

However, there is NO evidence that they have ever uploaded files from
a person's hard drive.

Sorry for the length of this message, but I wanted to be as detailed
as possible to hopefully clear this up before it turns into another
prodigy-bashing session.


Brett   ([e-mail])

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

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 19:12 GMT
From: Bruce Sullivan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy


[e-mail] (Bryan Lockwood) writes:

> Does anyone know whatever became of a Prodigy-related rumor which
> circulated the online world a year or three ago? Briefly (as I recall
> it):

My recollection of this story was something to this effect:

The person in question (it *may* or may not have been a lawyer: I
don't recall) didn't actually see their data being transmitted.
Rather, when they *viewed* STAGE.DAT, they saw much of their own
personal info therein. That caused them (understandably) to be
alarmed.

my recollection further tells me that what actually happened with the
Prodigy software was simply that, when it started up, it allocated a
portion of space on the hard drive. Those of you familiar with how
MS/PC DOS works with files can imagine the rest. Since DOS doesn't
actually delete files but deletes the *reference* to the file, the
data is still there. If another program comes along and wants the
space but doesn't write over it immediately, it *appears* as though
that data is part of that file (and, in fact, I suppose that it is).

I have found the exact same thing to happen with MS Windows 'swap'
file.

Personally, I found the 'conspiracy' theory to be pretty ridiculous.
The liklihood of finding any real usable information that way has
*got* to be pretty slim, particularily for the cost and effort
required to get it. There are plenty of other sources for marketing
information.

Disclaimers: I have no association with Prodigy in any manner
whatsoever and this is only my *recollection* of a story that is well
over a year old. Given my propensity for selective memory failure,
errors are a certainty.


Bruce Sullivan  ([e-mail] *or* [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 15:06:17 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Chris Yoder) writes:

> Hah!!  [e-mail] has never logged in, therefore: He
> probably did not write this article.

> [Moderator's Note: Good point. My investigation of your claim shows as
> follows:

>> delta-telecom > finger [e-mail]

>> [netcom.com]
>> Login name: crunch               In real life: John Draper
>> Directory: /u4/crunch                   Shell: /bin/ksh
>> Never logged in.
>> New mail received Sun Apr  4 22:03:10 1993;
>>   unread since Sun Apr  4 19:51:58 1993
>> No Plan.

> We see that mail was 'unread since Sun Apr 4 19:51:58 1993'. Since
> mail before that has been read, this suggests to me mail is either
> being forwarded or perhaps he is su'ing to this account from some
> other account. Maybe if we ask, he'll confirm or deny.   PAT]

This is one of the pecularities of Netcom's system that has been
discussed on some of the local netcom.* newsgroups.

Netcom has four coupled Sun systems and which one you land on depends on
how you call in.  When I call the Los Angeles POP, I usually get onto
netcom2 or netcom4.  If the finger gets to netcom, netcom1, or netcom3
it would show that I have never logged in also.  But I am logged in to
netcom2 and thats how I am sending you this note.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Yoder)
Subject: Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks
Date: 5 Apr 1993 09:29:37 -0600
Organization: University of Colorado, Health Sciences Center.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Chris Yoder) writes:

>> [netcom.com]
>> Login name: crunch               In real life: John Draper

    It appears that I was mistaken.  This is a Domain Name forward
set up and he actually logs on a different machine.  try fingering
[e-mail].  I apologize for not investigating
thoroughly enough.  And if I spelled thoroughly right I will be
amezed!

Chris Yoder <[e-mail]> use finger for details.

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

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 03:06 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks


[e-mail] (Chris Yoder) writes:

> Hah!!  [e-mail] has never logged in, therefore: He
> probably did not write this article.  Nice joke!

Joke is on you. He did indeed write that article and uses that account
regularly for net access including e-mail.

That is the truth of the matter, regardless of your clever sleuthing.

Amateur detectives should hone skills before embarassing selves in
public.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ketil Albertsen,TIH)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Organization: T I H / T I S I P
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 10:45:53 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen)  writes:

> It IS interesting that signalling thru the telephone microphone can
> simulate coins dropping in the phone.  I'd think they'd make it a
> little more secure than that.

Another good reason for switching to ISDN, with its independent
signalling channel (the D channel), as soon as possible.

Sure, with a PC and appropriate software you may generate the
D-channel messages that indicate that a coin has been inserted, even
if this is not true. A minor problem remains: How to hook that PC up
to replace the pay phone without anyone noticing :-) ...

There is an intermediate solution that I believe is used nowadays with
public pay phones in Norway (I am not sure, though): The voice
bandwidt is 3100 Hz, allocated to a 4000 Hz channel. So there is some
bandwidth available outside the voice band that can be used for
signalling, such as when a coin is inserted. This is often termed
'Out-Of-Band signalling' (OOB).

The previous generation Norwegian pay phones didn't even require a
tone generator -- it was sufficient to scream into the mic (you should
warn the person you're talking to!). The distortion in the phone
would, in most cases, generate a lot of stray frequencies that would
include the one picked up by the detector circuits. Rumours are that
that this doesn't work any more. It could be due to better detection
circuits, but I would think OOB signalling is a more plausible
solution. (I am currently not close enough to the telco to ask them.)


ka.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 05:10:16 GMT


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

> I saw a Chinese student here get a Radio Shack pocket dialer, put a
> different crystal in it, and then by rocking two of the keys on the
> keypad back and forth, could produce the tone of a quarter dropping
> into a pay phone.

This is something that phone phreaks have been doing for some time.  I
believe its called a "red box".  Coins produce short pulses of (I
think) a single tone.  A nickle is one, a dime is two, and a quarter
five.  You (usually) don't hear them when you use coins because the
receiver is shorted by the coin mechanism.

To hear them, call from a pay phone to some other phone, and put coins
in while talking.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....

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

Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
From: [e-mail] (Scott Marshall)
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 93 22:35:17 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX


> The venerable Apple-Cat modem along with a program appropriately
> called _Cat's Meow_ would generate tones (clicks or chirps, more
> accurately) for nickels, dimes, and quarters.  My childhood was too
> conservative to try using it myself, but secondhand reports said it
> worked just fine.

This is true ... however you'll note it was also to create DTMF tones,
allowing Blue Boxing. The Cat's Meow was a desired modem in the
underground back in the 80's. Now adays no-one dares Blue Box from
home ... in the USA anyway.


Cheers,

[e-mail] (Scott Marshall)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, [phone]
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #236
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08826;
          5 Apr 93 22:40 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02582
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 20:30:43 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14064
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 20:30:02 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 20:30:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #237

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Apr 93 20:30:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 237

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Interesting Comparison (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Interesting Comparison (Roger Fajman)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Brad Hicks)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Roger Fajman)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (John R. Levine)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Justin Leavens)
    Re: International Calling Card (David Klur)
    Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Truly Amazing, Truly Amazing; Feds Delay Intro of GSM (Ketil Albertsen)
    Re: Washington Times Blows It (Greg Andrews)
    Re: Disabling *70 (Russ Kepler)
    Re: US NPA/NXX List (James R. Saker, Jr.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Interesting Comparison
Date: 5 Apr 1993 18:18:24 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Marc Siskin) writes:

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

>> Frequently on this forum we have discussed the possiblity of cable
>> companies getting into the telephone business and visa versa. While I
>> certainly have political and economic considerations about allowing
>> LECs in the cable business, I have some very real and solid technical
>> objections to ever allowing cable companies into the telephone
>> business.

> John, you are forgetting that most cable companies at this time don't
> go about changing channel assignments and equipment assignments on a
> regular basis.  Telcos have the luxury of bringing in experienced
> people from their other sites to supervise the cutover.  At CATV
> however, they have usually either fired the person who wired their
> racks in the first place, bought them as a turnkey system, or have
> made many less than fully documented changes that have to be un-done.
> Changing channel assignments is not a matter of just moving wires in a
> terminal block but may in fact involve a virtual re-build of the
> wiring to route audio and video from a dedicated reciever/Descrambler
> to the specific modulator to feed the correct channel.

Are you trying to tell us that completely replacing a telco switch
with tens of thousands of subscribers, with no downtime, is a lot
easier than a "virtual rebuild of the wiring" at the CATV center?  You
reinforce what John said about cable tv folks getting into the telco
business: they have no experience providing telephone service, and
they have no experience providing even their own service with "Bell
System" standards of quality, reliablility, and availability.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: Roger Fajman <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 1993  18:49:35 EDT
Subject: Re: Interesting Comparison


> Changing channel assignments is not a matter of just moving wires in a
> terminal block but may in fact involve a virtual re-build of the
> wiring to route audio and video from a dedicated reciever/Descrambler
> to the specific modulator to feed the correct channel.

Our cable company (Cable TV Montgomery, Montgomery County, MD) changed
channel assignments a year or two ago when they implemented tiered
pricing.  All went smoothly, although the new numbering took quite a
bit of getting used to.  But what puzzles me is why they persist in
having different numbering when you use a converter box and when you
use a cable-ready set?  It's especially annoying when you have some of
each.  Is it just a way to encourage the use of converter boxes, or is
there a valid technical reason for it?  I don't know anything about
the equipment they use.  The channel frequency assignments are HRC.

They don't charge extra for the converter boxes (which you need if you
want any premium channels, such as HBO, or if you want pay for view).
We don't have either of those things, so the converter boxes just get
in the way on a cable ready set.  And you have to pay their monthly
charge for remote control, if you want that (and deal with yet another
remote control box).

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 5 Apr 93 14:43:26 GMT
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?


[e-mail] wrote:

> Can you, however, cite me a law or a tariff that requires a telephone
> subscriber to maintain a log of incoming calls?

TELECOM Moderator replied:

> The lack of keeping such a log would show at worst a conspiracy
> between the sysop and his callers, and at best, an incredible degree
> of naetivity by the sysop.

Now just wait a minute.

OK, it's been a couple years now since I retired from being a sysop,
but I ran a BBS for seven years and I =never= kept a log farther back
than about a day or two.  What for?  Generally, I found problems quick
enough that logs older than that were useless to me.  And a log set to
debug level is a HUGE disk space consumer if you're going to keep them
in perpetuity.

It's attitudes like this that are pushing the amateurs out of BBSing.
If you take an attitude like this, I don't want to hear a =word= of
complaint out of you over what BBSing costs.  (grumble, grumble)


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


[Moderator's Note: Amateurs are welcome; everyone has to begin somewhere
in this field of endeavor. But amateurs or beginners should realize
that when/if the 'authorities' come to visit, whining that "I am just
a volunteer, an amateur, I'm not responsible for the uses made of my
BBS or the people on it" simply won't cut the mustard. The law is rather
plain that (regards connecting to the telephone network) EVERYONE is
responsible for the use(s) made of their instruments ... and we are
long past the days when an 'instrument' was limited in definition to a
black rotary dial phone. We had a decade-long shakedown period in the
field of information-by-computer. It began in 1978 when Randy Suess
and Ward Christianson first put the first BBS in the world on line
here in Chicago, and continued through the end of the 1980's. Like the
amateur radio operators of fifty years ago, sysops trusted everyone
and assumed everyone out there had the same helpful motives, basic
honesty and good nature they did. The best sysops in the world were
the idealistic volunteers who ran their boards with the idea of making
a contribution to the world. I was the volunteer sysop for the first
BBS anywhere operated by a public library -- the Chicago Public
Library -- and ran a BBS of my own in the early 1980's. So, yes, I
know it is hard for the new guys to learn the ropes. But a lot of
people out there paved the way, took all the lumps and caught all the
hell. Fraud and hackery (in the derogatory use of the word) were very
rampant on the early bulletin boards. Many a sysop had to 'learn the
hard way'. So new-comers, assorted amateurs, etc, welcome to the
fraternity. But please, do it *right*, or don't do it at all, and quit
whining about the phone company and the government. Neither of those
entities is going to change, and malicious hackers are unlikely to go
away anytime soon either.  Get used to it.    PAT]

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

From: Roger Fajman <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 1993  18:53:01 EDT
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?


> as friends, not as enemies or ambivilent on-lookers. So let's take a
> responsible attitude in the operation of our BBSs, newsgroups, etc. It
> won't hurt, and may actually help us a lot as a group.   PAT]

What do you think is a reasonable time to keep callers logs for a BBS?
My system currently generates several megabytes of logs per month.  I
keep the set from the previous month and this month's partial set.
They are available somewhat farther back on the backup tapes.


[Moderator's Note: This is purely an applications thing. It will vary
from one BBS to another depending on volume of traffic and other
stuff. I think the fact that you can call up the old records when you
need them is sufficient. The important thing, I think, is that you
verify your users and have a phone number or address of recourse to
them. Users who know that you know who they are tend to be good users,
or at least not troublesome. The user who knows that if he puts something
inappropriate on your BBS one day he is likely to get a phone call the
next day asking 'why would you put up something like that on the board'
 is very likely not to even put it up in the first place ... and what
more do you need? I can't stress enough also the use of Caller-ID when
available to at least initially verify new users, followed by a call
back to them with their password, etc. They can't hide very well from
the little box.  Nothing is perfect of course, but simple efforts to
detect fraud, misuse and abuse will show your intent to the 'authorities'
and keep the garden variety hackers and phreaks from infesting your system.
Telco and the government don't expect you to run a branch of the FBI,
just a reasonably clean operation, and your users will also appreciate
your concern for their well-being when on your machine.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 5 Apr 93 17:56:26 EDT (Mon)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


>I'm just curious to know what became of [claims that Prodigy snarfed
>stuff from people's disks.]

It was totally bogus.  Yes, people found remnants of other files in
their STAGE.DAT file, which turned out to be because neither the
Prodigy software nor MS-DOS iteself bothers to clear out unused parts
of buffers.  STAGE.DAT is used to buffer Prodigy screens, so if you
ask to see a screen you've already seen, it can redisplay it out of
the file instead of receiving it again.  Experiments with line
monitors showed no evidence that the junk in the file was being
uploaded.  Indeed, if you think about it, it's hard to imagine what
use Prodigy could make of it.

It also helps to understand that Prodigy is designed as a
mostly-broadcast system.  You log into a local concentrator which is
connected to the main system.  Screens are buffered in your machine
and at the local concentrator as well as in the main host, and the
design assumed that the buffering would obviate much traffic to and
from the main system.  Users would mostly send tiny requests to see
screen N, and much of the time the desired screen would already be at
the local concentrator or in the customer's STAGE.DAT.  The main
reason that Prodigy started to charge for e-mail is that e-mail
screens are private to each customer and totally screw up their
buffering plan since each screen has to be sent from the main host.
That should be their problem, not the customer's, but you know how big
companies are.

I'm no fan of Prodigy, but there are enough reasons to dislike them
(paternalistic censorship and rigid interface software with mandatory
advertisements) without phony claims of spying.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Date: 5 Apr 1993 11:01:04 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


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

> I think I agree with Patrick on this one. You want phone service? Pay
> a bill.  The logical next step would be to require that any residence
> without a phone be equipped with a 911 only phone at no charge.

I'd would agree with you and PAT on this *if* there was some other
good way to contact the local services (police, fire, paramedic) for
which we all pay a good deal of taxes for. I don't see a lot of 'FIRE'
or 'POLICE' boxes on the street corners anymore.

If you want to add that kind of service to the city budget, fine. Make
rescue calls on those phone a $10 charge, fine. But I think that if
the rescue services, which we *all* pay taxes to maintain, are all
geared to respond to primarily phone calls, then someone had better
figure out what the people without phones are supposed to do.


Justin Leavens    Microcomputer Specialist   University of Southern California

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: International Calling Card
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 13:30:35 EDT


AT&T USADirect service allows you to call back to the U.S.  from about
140 countries around the world.  AT&T WorldConnect service allows you
to call between roughly 50 countries other than the US (i.e., Germany
to England).

Both services are charged directly to your AT&T card and you AVOID
local operators and telephone companies. These calls are MUCH cheaper
than if you were to go through the local country telco.

For more info call (in the US) 1-800-331-1140 extension 727 or outside
the US call collect 412-553-7458.


David Klur   [e-mail]

P.S. That's me talking as a happy AT&T customer, not as an AT&T
employee. I'm not a spokesman for AT&T and AT&T is not a spokesman for
me.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge
Date: 5 Apr 1993 16:54:51 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Alan Boritz) writes:

> In an article written March 30, 1993, MPA15AB![e-mail].
unisys.com writes:

>> GTE insists that one always has to pay the FCC charge, but then I
>> expect them to say that, true or false.

> [Moderator's Note: I am also wondering how they handle this in the
> case of highly restricted phones such as on centrex systems where the
> number cannot make outgoing calls at all and can only receive calls on
> the centrex -- no incoming calls from outside the premises.  PAT]

The situation with Centrex can get complicated for larger installations.
Take for example a customer that has 100 Centrex extensions.  They may only
purchase ten outgoing "lines," such that they can have as many simultanous
internal conversations, but only ten calls to the outside world at a time.
Of course, this is a virtual restriction, as the switch really doesn't care
if the conversation between two of its lines happen to be within the same
Centrex group or not, but that's how it can be priced.

So, in this case, does the customer owe ten FCC access charges, or
100?  I believe the current status quo is ten, but there was an
argument by the PBX industry a few years ago that there should be 100
FCC access charges, as it should be based on the number of extensions
between the customer and the telco.  Telco's stance is that Centrex is
just the provision of a virtual PBX by the telco switch, and thus
should be charged the same way a PBX would be; that is, based on the
number of connections to the outside world, and not the number of
internal extensions.  Altough not a big fan of Centrex, I would have
to agree with telco on this one.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ketil Albertsen,TIH)
Subject: Re: Truly Amazing, Truly Amazing ... Feds Delay Intro of GSM
Organization: T I H / T I S I P
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 10:31:27 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David
E A Wilson) writes:

> From: "The Age" Newsaper (Melbourne, Australia) 31 March 1993

> The new network, called GSM or Global System for Mobile, was due to be
> introduced by both Telecom and Optus from tomorrow.

It may be that in a few years, GSM will be interpreted as an
abbreviation of Global System for Mobile, but as of 1993, it still
comes from the French Group Speciale Mobile (did I get the French
spelling right?), the study group that was responsible for evaluating
the various proposed solutions from a car driving all around Paris.
(Sure they made other tests as well!)

As always in the area of electronics, the acceptance of a 'global'
standard is something you'll find in fairytales. At least there will
be one international and one USA way of doing things (often with
Canada and Japan doing it the US way).  I don't expect USA to adopt
the non-US-developed GSM as The Mobile System, either.  The best we
can hope for is that it will be one of the available alternatives.

Now that I'm at GSM: The last couple weeks there has been a lot of
fuzz around GSM here in Norway, due to the low-frequency electrical
noise emitted by GSM handsets: Users of older models hearing aids may
experience a lot of noise.  Tests indicate that with a maximum power
(20 W) transmitter, some hearing aids will pick up noise if used
closer to the antenna than approx 15 ft. So, the users of hearing aids
want the telco to pay for them all to get brand new models that are
more immune to this sort of noise, so that *if* they *ever* get close
to any *max power* GSM transmitter they won't hear any interference.
Well, I think that was a nice try to have someone else pay for a
modern replacement for their old stuff, with no further questions
asked.

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Andrews)
Subject: Re: Washington Times Blows It
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 07:05:38 GMT


[e-mail] (Dan Hartung) writes:

> [e-mail] (Greg Andrews) writes:

>> (There is a gateway for exchanging e-mail between the Internet and
>> Compuserve.  The domain is "@compuserve.com", and the comma should be
>> changed to a period to form the Internet address.  I.e. 76004.1647@
>> compuserve.com would reach my mailbox from the internet.  The
>> gateway's software swaps the comma and period as necessary.)

> Did they change it? I haven't been on CI$ in a while but I thought it
> was [e-mail] -- must say that the full name makes more sense!

The gateway used to be (and still is, I believe) the CIS department at
Ohio State University in Columbus.  During the initial stages of
getting the e-mail gateway up and running, the address was through
"osu-cis", and I think that's probably the name you remember.  As far
as I know, it jumped straight from that address to the present
"compuserve.com" without any other name changes.  However, I wasn't
involved in the gateway stuff at all (just watching from the sidelines
as a Compuserve account holder), so there could have been a "cis.com"
address that I wasn't aware of.


Greg Andrews, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Russ Kepler)
Subject: Re: Disabling *70
Organization: BASIS Int'l, Albuquerque NM USA
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 16:05:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Breuckman) 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.

[moderator's note deleted]

> This won't help; he can just ignore the call-waiting tones.  What you
> want is some clever box that will do a hook-flash or hangup when it
> hears the tone <grin>.

Heck, I'd just get a private line and place an outgoing lock on it --
let the roommate get his own phone.  That way you'd get *all* your
incoming calls, and the annoying roommate could *70 to his heart's
content while paying his own phone bill.

'course you could always get a new roommate, but this is comp.dcom.
*telecom* and not alt.new.roommates.


Russ Kepler, Basis International Ltd. [e-mail]  phone: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (James R. Saker Jr.)
Subject: Re: US NPA/NXX List
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 16:44:26 GMT


Another good source of NPA/Nxx listings (for those who need to access
the information on a regular basis) would be Bellcore's LERG database.
Naturally, this source not only includes the NPA/Nxx, and end office
location, but indicates the local exchange carrier, tandem, LATA, CLLI
code, vertical and horizontal coordinates of that end office, etc.

We obtain LERG with quarterly updates for a fee of somewhere around
$450/year. If you're interested, I've got a contact number for the
LERG folks at Bellcore.


Jamie Saker            [e-mail]
Network Costing Analyst        Business/MIS Major
Telenational Communications    Univ. Nebraska at Omaha
[phone]  (no affiliation w/ Bellcore -- just use their products!)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #237
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17929;
          6 Apr 93 2:16 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19768
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 23:42:21 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24653
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Apr 1993 23:41:04 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 23:41:04 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #238

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Apr 93 23:41:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 238

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: ISDN (was Phone Line Bandwidth) (Christian Weisgerber)
    Re: Interesting Comparison (Christian Weisgerber)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (Ron Dippold)
    Re: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA (Tom Ace)
    Re: Block-the Blocker CallerID Feature (Dave Niebuhr)
    Siting of Switches and Gateways (Roy Stehle)
    FAX-Machine/FAX-Modem (Alex Okapuu-von Veh)
    SparcStation LX Information Needed ([e-mail])
    Books on Phones Wanted (Eric Tholome)
    The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Laurence Chiu)
    Another Definition for ATM (J Johnson
    Jacking in at the Demarc (Geoff Steckel)
    Help Me Set Up a Local SLIP Service (Paul Robichaux)
    Connecting Work to Home (Terry Lemons)
    Californian Calling ([e-mail])
    TCP/IP and FTP ([e-mail])
    Information Wanted on Sidetones (Jonas R. Klein)
    EAX-2 is a Strange Switch (Charles Buckley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Christian Weisgerber)
Organization: My Individual Private Site
Subject: Re: ISDN (was Phone Line Bandwidth)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 16:32:28 +0200


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

> 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.

Over here in Germany there is no distinction between residential and
business phone/data/ISDN lines.

I have an ISDN phone sitting right beside me and use it on a daily
basis for voice communications. The BRI is DEM 130.- ($81) one time
installation fee and DEM 74.- ($46) each month. Additionally the line
is metered exactly like regular phone service, there is no difference
between data/audio/voice services, I get clear 64kbit/s all the time.

German Telekom intends to have ISDN available in all of Western
Germany by the end of this year and in all of Eastern Germany by the
end of 1995. Also by the end of 1993 Telekom will be able to offer
E-DSS1 (the common European D channel protocol standard) additionally
to Germany's 1TR6.


Christian "naddy" Weisgerber, Germany   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Christian Weisgerber)
Organization: My Individual Private Site
Subject: Re: Interesting Comparison
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 12:01:12 +0200


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

> Can you imagine what would happen if it took Pac*Bell six hours to cut
> in a new 5ESS? Or a radio station six hours to turn up a new
> transmitter? But it is even worse than that: as I write this the cable
> service is still a mess and unusable. Sound for one channel's video is

As a side note: over here in Germany phone and cable TV service is
provided by the same company, the still mostly monopolist, state-owned
DBP Telekom.

Just recently there was a similar channel shift around in the area
where I live. Telekom also started out about this late at night and
took until sometime in the morning. By contrast they manage to
upgrade/modify their phone network without notable outages.

I guess their attitude depends on what market they provide service
for.  Having to explain to business customers that they can't use
their phone for a couple of hours is different from annoying a couple
of residential couch potatoes.

(In all fairness, the cable work had been announced the day before in
the local newspaper and they had it again up and working by the next
day.)


Christian "naddy" Weisgerber, Germany   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 00:16:04 GMT


Bruce Sullivan <Bruce_Sullivan++LOCAL+dADR%Nordstrom_6731691@
mcimail.com> writes:

> my recollection further tells me that what actually happened with the
> Prodigy software was simply that, when it started up, it allocated a
> portion of space on the hard drive. Those of you familiar with how

This is not quite the only thing that was happening, as this was so
obviously the probable cause - but even if you wipe the deleted
portions of the disk clean, "suspicious" stuff could still show up in
the STAGE.DAT, or even on another drive.  The Prodigy software would
also save parts of memory to disk even if it hadn't actually used that
memory.  Any information that was still hanging around there (say, if
you'd used a word processor to view the file, or copied it, etc.)
could end up in STAGE.DAT.

Many a family tree needs trimming.

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

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 13:50:49 PDT
From: awry![e-mail] (Tom Ace)
Subject: Re: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA


[e-mail] (Joel M-for-Vnews Snyder) writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: This is a reminder to the USA readers that Saturday
>> night/Sunday morning marks our semi-annual clock change.

> Speak for yourself.  In the civilized parts of the US, such as Arizona
> and central Indiana, we don't believe in fooling with our clocks twice
> a year.

I take it that you ultra-civilized folks never call anyone in the
uncivilized parts of America that observe DST, thus a reminder of how
we set our clocks is useless to you.

> We're perfectly capable of shifting our schedules and
> noticing that the days have gotten longer without moving around a
> reference point which shouldn't be fiddled with.

You only think the days have gotten longer.  In fact, the day only
gets longer every couple of years, when the NBS inserts leap seconds
to keep Time in sync with the earth's rotational idiosyncrasies.


Tom Ace   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Actually, there was one *very well known, widely
calling* national telemarketer who got *very* screwed up Sunday on
account of the 'dialers' they use not being correctly programmed for
the change to DST and states that do versus states that don't, etc. We
all know the early morning/late evening cut offs for unsolicited calls
made by telemarketers. The 'dialers' use formulas based on area code
and time to decide whether or not to place calls. They were calling
Arizona points up to an hour *earlier* than they should Sunday morning
and east coast places up to an hour *later* than they should Sunday
evening. The Federal Trade Commission is not going to put them out of
business because of technical errors like this, but my source says
they did get reamed out royally Monday morning due to the error. Maybe
they should read TELECOM Digest, eh, or call POPCORN. (See a message
later in this issue).  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 07:49:42 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Block-the Blocker CallerID Feature


In TELECOM Digest V13 Issue 234 [e-mail] (James Gleick) writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dan
> Danz) writes:

>> ... this little sucker (when enabled) will say "This party will not
>> accept blocked calls" and disconnect.  It also records the fact that
>> it received and blocked the call.

> In New York, where Caller ID is being implemented, slowly, Nynex has
> provided the following peculiarity.  If you get a call from an
> exchange that will *soon* have Caller ID enabled, but doesn't yet, it
> shows up as Blocked, not as Out of Area.

I have Caller ID (Area Code 516, Long Island) and during the initial
implementation last year, all of the standard features of CLASS were
enabled and when a call came in from another exchange that had these
features, the message was Out of Area.

I'm curious about which area code and exchange (if in 516) is involved
since some more exchanges on LI are being enabled at this time.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility

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

Subject: Siting of Switches and Gateways
Date: Mon 05 Apr 93 15:13:14 -0700
From: [e-mail]


I am interested in knowing if there are algorithms or models that are
used in the selection of a site for a central office switch, an
international gateway, etc.  It seems like some optimization routine
might be used to minimize the length of copper, but there would seem
to be other constraints (e.g., land zoning, rights of way).

How are sites for COs and GWs chosen?

Are different rules used for crossbar vs electronic switches?

What considerations go into the decision?

Are there international standards or procedures?

Is there documentation available?


Thanks in advance,

Roy Stehle - SRI International, Menlo Park, CA 94025    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 18:12:38 EDT
From: A. Okapuu-von Veh  <[e-mail]>
Subject: FAX-Machine/FAX-Modem


Hi there ... sorry to trouble you, but I have been unable to find
references to the ftp site where the telecom archives are kept in the
past little while.

I'm specifically interested in the recent (one or two months ago)
discussion on connecting a FAX machine to a FAX modem directly, to be
able to use the FAX machine as a scanner/printer.

Thanks for any info...

Alexander Okapuu-von Veh     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The Telecom Archives -- twelve year's worth! -- is
located at lcs.mit.edu and is available using anonymous ftp. If you
prefer you can use gopher or web as well, and there are a few dialup
sites where limited amounts of stuff from the archives are kept.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 5 Apr 93 21:48:16 GMT
Subject: SparcStation LX Information Needed


Hello there,

            We have read with great interest about the SPARCclassic
that is being offered at $3995. We would be interested in knowing more
about it since we see ourselves needing at least two or three of them
in the immediate or near future. If you can help us out please contact
us at the following address : [e-mail] or call us (data)
at 404-270-5522.  You can leave a message for the SysOp. Thank You.

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

From: [e-mail] (tholome)
Subject: Books on Phones Wanted
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 18:03:40 EDT


Hi everybody!

I've just retreived the file books.about.phones from the Telecom
archive and was a bit disappointed as it seems to point only to ATT
related books.

I was wondering if you had other ideas of books dealing with
telephony?

Please reply by email to [e-mail] and I will summarize if
requested to do so.


Thanks for your help,

Eric Tholome

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 04:45:28 GMT


This is not too important but I am wondering ...

Many years ago I was told that you could dial POPCORN in most any area
codes and get the time. This was probably before divestiture. Well I
only recently returned to the US and found it still works in PacBell
(510 anyway) area and it's a free call.

Is is still universally available? I find it very useful.


Laurence Chiu    Walnut Creek, CA [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: 767-2676?  Never heard of it. We got along fine
here for fifty years or so by going off hook and asking the operator
what time it was when she answered ... and did she know what the
weather was like outside. Well you know how the greedy telco is; to
make money on things like this we eventually had to start asking the
operator for (then later, dialing) CAThedral-8000 which was really the
same as DEArborn-8000, but telco liked it better when you connected on
the first number instead. Telco had 25 trunks in rotary hunt handling
those calls. For quite a few years, live people sat there and when
the phone rang would answer by looking at the clock and saying 'the
time is <time>' and hanging up. Finally they automated it.  No more
free weather reports either ... We had to start calling WEAther-1212
but WEATHER worked also. It did not translate to anything else, so
either you paid for the call, by gum, or you did not get the forecast.
932-1212 eventually became 936-1212, then several years ago 976-1212
took over. Not content to merely get 25 cents each time you called,
they started slipping a few advertisements in with the forecast as
well. Then the Time-of-Day quit appearing on 228-8000 and became avail-
able on 976-1414, but considering they announce the time every ten
seconds, they have not yet figured out how to squeeze in a commercial
advertisment as part of the process. I know that in New York City for
many years, the Time-of-Day was available by dialing NERVOUS. It was a
service sponsored by some jewelers, I think.  Perhaps some old time
readers will recall how, when 800 service was first being implemented
back in the 1960's, as a test AT&T hooked up a bunch of 800-999-xxxx
numbers to weather forecasts all over the USA ... then forgot about it
and left the numbers hooked that way for twenty years until some
phreaks found them in the mid 1980's and Mother turned them off.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 05 Apr 93 08:11:31 EST
From: Bonnie J Johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Another Definition of ATM


Pat, et al, may I propose still another defination of ATM?
Asynchronous Transfer Mode.  I for one would be interested in
applications on this one.


ty, bj

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

From: [e-mail] (Geoff Steckel)
Subject: Jacking In at the Demarc
Date: 5 Apr 1993 20:17:07 GMT
Organization: Omnivore Technology, Newton, Mass. [phone]


Today while logged in and working from my home office (:-( I heard
thumping and bumping outside.  There was a New England Telephone truck
pulled up and a telco type with a _monster_ butt set playing with my
demarc box.

"May I help you?" I asked.

"Are you using your computer?"

"Yes, I'm working."

"Well, I just needed to call in"

Of course, he knocked me off the line.

Not that I expect any apologies, but he _could_ have destroyed quite a
bit of work with that -- he only missed by about five minutes.  I'm at
least going to demand a credit on Monday when the business droids are
in, since it was a toll call.

Do all LECs do this?  Or did I get a particularly clueless lineman?


geoff steckel ([e-mail], [e-mail])
Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Sun Microsystems, despite the From: line.
This posting is entirely the author's responsibility.


[Moderator's Note: It is not uncommon at all for linemen, installers
and CO people to use any line they want when they make calls. Quite a
few years ago, a multiple from my pair showed up in the basement of a
large office building next door to me. At the *big* terminal box in
the basement, lots of Bell guys used to hang around in a locker room
they had down there, shooting the breeze and drinking coffee, etc. If
anyone wanted to make a call, they just went on the first pair they
saw in the box with their buttset and alligator clips. They didn't
care. When I got socked one month with several hundred message units
for calls I knew I did not make, I ordered a print out and looked it
over closely when it arrived. There were lots of calls make from the
telco locker room in the basement of the building to other telco fac-
ilities, to their girlfriends, etc. There were 10 to 15 minute 'local
toll' (meaning additional message units) calls to someplace called the
IBT Co. Vehicle Repair Shop in Aurora, IL. There were calls to the
Western Electric Company order desk. When I originally complained, I
spoke with Miss Thing, a service rep who insisted I 'had to have made
the calls, because our new equipment is quite accurate ...'. (This was
in the early seventies; the Wabash CO had just cut over to ESS from
stepper a few months before.) When I called Miss Thing back and had
her go over the print out with me, she started singing a different
tune; her supervisor wrote off all the extra message units on my bill
that month and the month before as well. Later I heard the foreman in
charge of that territory (and locker/supply room) was told to have his
guys use their own line for calls (a line IBT had for its own purposes
down there.)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Robichaux)
Subject: Help Me Set Up a Local SLIP Service
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: New Technology, Inc.
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 15:41:50 GMT


I'm thinking about setting up a SLIP service here in Huntsville. The
two primary Internet connections here are via NASA's Marshall Space
Flight Center and the University of Alabama/Huntsville.

NASA doesn't offer SLIP connections for network performance and
security reasons (or so I'm told), and UAH doesn't offer them due to
lack of demand. However, from talking with coworkers and friends,
there seems to be a substantial demand for such a service. NASA has
fairly strict allowable-use policies, and there are many interested
folks who don't happen to work at connected facilities.

I've presented my basic scheme below; I'd like to hear from Digest
readers who can a) poke holes, b) offer better ideas for implementing
this scheme, c) offer practical experience from having done something
similar. Followups here are fine (subject to PAT's tolerance);
however, I'd appreciate copies via e-mail.

Basic idea: have a cheap {3|4}86 running Linux or 386BSD. IP
connectivity through a provider will be used to regularly move SMTP
and NNTP traffic to/from this mini-host; mail/news will be provided to
users via good ol' uucp. Incoming SLIP connections will cause a
connection to the IP provider to be made, if one's not already in
progress.

Assumptions:
    a) it's cheaper to have an on-demand connection rather than
       a traditional leased-line-style link (thus the above, that
       no connection will exist unless something's being done)
    b) an x86 can support 2-4 v.32bis or v.fast modems in
       addition to IP traffic
    c) I can find SLIP servers adaptable to Linux or 386BSD
    d) sufficient local demand exists


Requirements:

1. ISDN or Switched 56 (tm) connection to an IP connectivity provider.
ISDN appears to have some attractive advantages; its chief disadvan-
tage is that (even though Huntsville is 100% NISDN-1 compliant) there
doesn't seem to be anyone offering IP connectivity over it. I welcome
advice on S56 service equiment and providers, since I know little
beyond the name.

2. Appropriate SLIP service software. This shouldn't be too hard.

3. Routing software, so that the minihost can route packets to
appropriate SLIP-connected devices. As a practical matter, I expect to
have a Class C address, which will restrict me to 255 connected
devices. Shouldn't be a problem :)

That's what I've come up with so far. Comments and suggestions are
most welcome.


Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG    NTI Mission Software Development Div.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Connecting Work to Home
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 15:40:10 GMT


Hi!

What are YOU using to connect systems at home (or small remote
locations) to computers at work?

Traditionally, this has involved:

(1) 300 bps, then 1200bps, then 2400bps and, lately, 9600 bps
modems (one at work, and one at home);
(2) a voice-grade phone line, connecting the modems;
(3) a terminal, or PC with terminal emulation software, at home;
(4) a host system at work.

Nowadays, there are a host of other choices:

    Data Highways
o faster modems (14400bps (V.32bis) and, in future, 56000bps (V.fast)
o switched 56KB data lines (dropping in cost)
o ISDN (it's coming, it's coming, it's ... )
o ETV (Ethernet via cable TeleVision)

    Network Protocols
o asynchronous DECnet
o Serial Line INternet Protocol (SLIP)
o Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)

And, for those of us wanting to display X at home:

eXcursion
PC-Xview
Xvision
PC-Xremote

What mix of these have you found to be attractive, and why?  Or, what
sounds good to you, but you can't do it right now because of <fill in
the blank>?

I'm looking forward to a good discussion, and to learning a lot from it.


Thanks!

Terry Lemons  Semiconductor Engineering Group  Digital Equipment Corporation

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

Date: Mon,  5 Apr 93 15:35:23 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Californian Calling
Organization: AT&T


Since PacBell is not offering Caller-ID to its customers, but the
switches on the SS7 (CCS7) network will still be passing the number
along, has anyone figured out what would happen in the following
scenario:

Person in LA calls person in NYC.  The LA person has made no special
arrangements with PacBell for privacy blocking of their number.  The
call completes over the SS7 network.  Person in NYC has caller ID.

NYC person:

A: Sees the number
B: Sees "Private"
C: Sees something else.

If the number is passed as "private" and the NYC person has "blocked"
incoming "private" calls, is the LA person even able to override the
blocking on a per call basis to make the call?

What if the LA person doesn't want their number displayed, but doesn't
know (or the feature isn't offered?) to block their number?

Pat: if you've got an answer for this?  It's not a question of
"privacy" -- but we have a student in class asking how the machines
would interact.  I know how they *could* -- I don't know what's going
on in the "real world."  Maybe some brave sould from CA would
volunteer to call someone outside the CA area with a Caller-ID box.

Thanks for the help.


[Moderator's Note: The results at the present time are mixed. What is
seen outside California depends on where the call went. Is there any
specific standard planned for the state where interstate calls are
concerned?    PAT]

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 20:45:58 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: TCP/IP and FTP


To anyone who is using TCP/IP and implementing the FTP feature:

Please provide with information on your implementation and performance
of the tranfers (i.e., data transfer rates, response time, etc.)
Also, if possible, let me know which level of TCP/IP you are using.

Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonas R Klein)
Subject: Information Wanted on Sidetones
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 03:59:17 GMT


I just found an instruction manual for a Unity phone.  It mentions a
sidetone adjustment for PBX/CO use.  Just out of curiousity, what is
the sidetone?  Is my idea of a phone line as simple current loop
oversimplified?


Thanks,

Jonas

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

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 18:23:08 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Buckley)
Subject: EAX-2 is a Strange Switch


Here's a wierd switch I've never run across before (ans wouldn't mind
not doing so again).  I just wondered if anyone knew who made it (and
perhaps why -- namely what range of the local office market was it
intended to address)?

Thanks.

Ch. Buckley

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #238
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19085;
          6 Apr 93 2:51 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12458
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 6 Apr 1993 00:22:43 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18313
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 6 Apr 1993 00:21:03 -0500
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 00:21:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #239

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Apr 93 00:21:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 239

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Field Strength Meter (Andrew Robson)
    Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning (A.E. Mossberg)
    Re: Use of #77 on Cellular Phones (A.E. Mossberg)
    Re: Stupid Switch Tricks (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: How to Busy Out a Line? (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Answering Machine Features (Harold Hallikainen)
    Telemarketers, Service Centers, Call Centers (Victor Ortiz)
    FCC Rules on Telemarketing (Compliance Engineering via Harold Hallikainen)
    Leukemia From LF Magnetic Fields? (Compliance Engineering via Hallikainen)
    Groupe Speciale Mobile (John R. Covert)
    Upselling ISDN (John Higdon)
    Motorola Advisor etc. (Brad Reisner)
    COCOT Scam - The Other Side (David Lesher)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Robson)
Subject: Re: Field Strength Meter
Date: 5 Apr 93 23:46:56 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.


Harold Hallikainen ([e-mail]) wrote:

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

>> Please help me. Someone know about field strength meters?  I'm
>> interested in getting one to fix antennas.  Leader Instruments has
>> one, but it's much expensive, about US$900.00.

>> [Moderator's Note: Well, you get what you pay for (or at least you are
>> supposed to get more if you pay more) but it seems to me $900 is a bit
>> steep for these instruments.  The $29 units at Radio Shack may not
 ..

It seems to me that what he needs to buy (and pay for) depends
entirely what he wants to do with it.  Relative strength (not very
linear) at one frequency is easy to measure with junkbox parts, and
probably what that Radio Shack unit would give.  Perfectly good for
adjusting an antenna.  Repeatable measurements, especially across a
range of frequencies is more expensive, and calibration tracable back
to standards will add a lot more.

>> has been reached. The SWR will show if some part of the signal is
>> going back down the coax to the transmitter, thus causing spurious
>> radiation which manifests itself on your neighbor's television set

 .. [good description of SWR omitted]

> [Moderator's Note: Is the importance of SWR over-rated? Back in my CB
> radio days (about ten years during the 1970's) I had a Cobra-142 XL,

 .. [description of CB-DXing omitted]

Pat, you really missed out by not getting your ham licence while you
were involved with making international contacts on your CB (DXing in
ham parlance).  Not only could you have continued your fun when the
sunspots stopped cooperating, but to pass the licence test you
probably would have gotten straightened out on the relationship
between SWR and field strength.

SWR makes a lot of difference to the transmitter which wastes power
and gets hot if the load is not right. You get the same effect hooking
4ohm speakers to an audio amplifier meant for 16 ohm speakers.  Many
modern radios will reduce power if SWR is bad to protect themselves.
SWR, however, can often be fixed with some extra coils and capacitors
(an antenna tuner) between the radio and the antenna.

Field strength is how much radiation is going through the place where
the measurement is made.  It will (for many antennas) vary with which
direction it is measured from, as well as with distance.  Instead of a
single number, you end up with a three-dimensional graph of field vs.
direction if you make all the measurments on a sphere centered on the
antenna.  The measurements also need to be made from some distance
away as the fields in the immediate area of the antenna will often be
distorted.

Many antennas are designed to have really bad SWR, but give very good
performance.  They are meant to be used with a tuner.  On the other
hand there is a gadget called a dummy load that has a near perfect 1:1
SWR, but will not radiate much of anything no matter how much power
you pour into it.

BTW I suspect that the word "radiation" is a major cause of the (IMHO)
nonsense about cancer from cell phones.  The radiation from a radio
transmitter has only the *word* in common with radiation from fallout
or cosmic rays.  The scare stories that have used so much media (and
net) bandwidth seem to be based on a bad pun.


73 de Andy(N6VRP)    uunet!uswnvg!arobson
(contents are personal opinion only)

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

From: [e-mail] (a.e.mossberg)
Subject: Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning
Date: 5 Apr 1993 17:25:37 -0400
Organization: Symbiosis Corporation, Miami, Florida  [phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Johnson Smith has been in business since 1914 selling pretty much the
same sorts of stuff. I have a catalog from the 20's. Up until 15 or 20
years ago they were in Indiana, I think, then relocated to Florida.

Whoopee cushions and X-ray glasses seem to be their mainstays.


andrew mossberg           systems specialist         symbiosis corporation
[phone]            fax [phone]         miami, florida 33166-6202
[e-mail]     uunet!symbi1!aem           SPAN: UMIGW::AEM


[Moderator's Note: Don't forget the artificial vomit and artificial
dog mess you can leave on your neighbor's carpet as a practical joke.
They've also got lots of magic tricks, unusual books, etc.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (a.e.mossberg)
Subject: Re: Use of #77 on Cellular Phones
Date: 5 Apr 1993 17:21:23 -0400
Organization: Symbiosis Corporation, Miami, Florida  [phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (mark chartrand) writes:

> I have seen, in only two sources, the symbol # called "octothorpe."
> Everyone else calls it "pound" "number" ro "tictactoe".  Does anyone
> know where "octothorpe" comes from.  It is not in the Oxford English
> Dictionary. The # symbol does indeed have 8 ("octo-") points to it,
> but "thorpe" according to the OED, is ancient Anglo-Saxon for village.

I've seen octothorpe in Bell System documents, including a brochure
for an early touch tone phone (well, maybe not that early, it did have
# and * unlike the really early ones.)


andrew mossberg           systems specialist         symbiosis corporation
[phone]            fax [phone]         miami, florida 33166-6202
[e-mail]     uunet!symbi1!aem           SPAN: UMIGW::AEM

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Stupid Switch Tricks
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 02:27:04 GMT


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

> The phone will function normally up until its last usage at night
> (about 10:00 PM), and then the first time it is used the next morning,
> it will not work.  The phone is picked up, and battery is present (and
> the phone can generate DTMF), but no dial tone is received, and any
> attempt to dial is ignored.  This has occurred about three times so
> far (all this past week, but not on three consecutive days).  The
> first two times, I called the line from another line in the house, and
> the problem line rang as expected, and when answered it, it was a
> perfect connection, as would be expected.  After this, the line worked
> perfectly for incoming and outgoing calls.  The third time, I just let
> it sit, and after somewhere between ten and sixty minutes, it
> corrected itself.

I suspect a wet phone line somewhere between your home and the CO.  Or
a weak short.  Your theory about the ringing voltage burning through
the obstruction is actually quite apt.

Of course, you _should_ have already installed network interfaces and
entrance bridges, so that you could readily figure out whether the
problem is inside or outside.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza   New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: How to Busy Out a Line?
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 02:30:55 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Roy Smith) writes:

>> Jeff Oasis asks:

>>> I need to make one of our lines busy [...] Can I simply install a switch
>>> that shorts tip and ring together?

>> Personally, I'd suggest using a 2W resistor somewhere around
>> 600 to 1000 ohms.  It needs to be small enough to make sure it looks
>> like a phone off hook, but large enough that you don't draw an
>> unreasonable amount of current.

Yes, that's good advice.

> There isn't really much difference between a 0 ohm resister across the
> line and something larger.

Yes, there is.  Many COs will flag a zero-ohm line as needing repair,
and have no difficulty distinguishing between a 600-ohm short and a
0-ohm short.

> The best advice is don't make the phone off hook at all, just disable
> the ringer or whatever other equipment you have attached to the line.

Well, yes, if all you want is a quiet house.  But sometimes the desire
is to trigger bouncing the call to the next position in a hunt group,
or making the caller think (gasp) that the line is busy.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza   New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Features
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1993 01:52:49 GMT


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

> Ah, fergit all the creeping featurism hardcoded answering machine
> feechurs.  Just give me an answering machine I can plug a terminal
> into and program in my own features in REXX!

    Or, you could have a DTMF access code that drops the processor
into a monitor, then you could program in all the features you want in
machine language (probably octal) using the DTMF keyboard on your
phone.  Maybe we could have object oriented answering machines where
you can redefine the various functions and operators to whatever you
want ...


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] (Victor Ortiz)
Subject: Telemarketers, Service Centers, Call Centers
Organization: Andrews University
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1993 18:43:34 GMT


Is there anyone out there who works for:

1. A call center;
2. An inbound or outbound call center;
3. A Service center;

Any or all of the above.

If so, what kind of computer system (hardware + software) are you
using to handle your calls and/or mailing.

Please e-mail me directly.


Thanks,

Victor    [[e-mail]]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: FCC Rules on Telemarketing
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1993 00:32:16 GMT


FCC Curbs Telemarketers:

     Here's a summary of an interesting item in {Compliance
Engineering Magazine}, Winter 1993 issue.  CE covers safety,
electromagnetic radiation and telco interconnect international
regulations.  You can request a free subscription qualification card
at [phone].

     According to {Compliance Engineering}, the FCC has adopted rules
(under Docekt 92-90) that modify parts 64 and 68 of the rules to
control telemarketing cold calls, automatic message dialers and junk
fax mail.

     Under the new rules, telemarketing companies will be limited to
calling between 8am and 9pm.  They will have to maintain lists of
residential customers who do not want to be called.  An industry-wide
list is not required.  A telemarketer can use an in-house, regional or
industry list.  If a consumer continues to get unwanted calls, he can
take the telemarketer to court for damages of up to $500.

     Automatic calls will be prohibited to emergency phones,
health-care facilities or numbers where the called party is billed
(cellular, 800, etc.).  Homes receive some protection from automated
calls, though the article does not say what.  Pollsters (political or
market research), political fund raising, and non-profit organizations
are exempted.

     Marketing fax transmissions must identify the sender and
unsolicited fax advertisements are banned.


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


[Moderator's Note: One very large national telemarketer got very
screwed up Sunday with the time change. Their dialers were not
programmed correctly, resulting in Arizona getting calls quite early
Sunday and the east coast getting calls quite late.  PAT]
------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Leukemia From LF Magnetic Fields?
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1993 00:28:06 GMT


     Here's a summary of an interesting item in {Compliance Engineering}
Magazine, Winter 1993 issue.  CE covers safety, electromagnetic
radiation and telco interconnect international regulations.  You can
request a free subscription qualification card at [phone].

Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields Cause Cancer?

     A report in {Microwave News} summarized in CE states that
Sweden's National Board for Industrial and Technical Development
(NUTEK) announced that it will act on the assumption there is a link
between exposure to power frequency magnetic fields and cancer,
especially childhood cancer.

     This decision was based on two major studies by Swedish
scientists.  These studies showedthat children exposed to magnetic
fields of 3 mG contracted leukemia at a rate four times that of those
exposed to fields less than 1 mG.  There was a slight increase in
leukemia among adults living in the elevated field, but not strong
enough to form a definite conclusion.  The study did not find a link
between high fields and brain tumors, as had been hypothesized after
previous studies of children exposed to elevated fields.

     The second study found workers regularly exposed to fields of 4.1
mG or higher had three times the rate of chronic lymphocytic leukemia
compared to those exposed to less than 1.6 mG.  The article goes on to
explain the interesting tradeoffs to be made in economic concerns
versus safety concerns.  It is suggested that housing be a specified
distance from high voltage power lines, perhaps establishing wide
corridors of land around the lines.  Although, according to the
studies, a cause and effect relationship can be made, it appears the
leukemia rates are still rather low.  We may wish to make a list of
the various risks we face and estimate a cost per life saved for each
of the risks.  Since we have limited resources, we would concentrate
on the areas where the least dollars save the most lives.  We may,
however, wish to consider these effects in future land zoning.

     Finally, although there seems to be a cause and effect
relationship, no one knows how the low frequency electromagnetic
fields actually affect the body.


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, 5 Apr 93 21:55:26 EDT
From: John R. Covert  05-Apr-1993 2155 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Groupe Speciale Mobile


While GSM does stand for Groupe Speciale Mobile, the story about "a
car driving around Paris" is rather fanciful.  In fact, it is the name
of the international CCITT study group in Geneva which developed the
standard.


john

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

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 19:29 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Upselling ISDN


While talking to a Pac*Bell technician today about an ongoing problem
with modem use on my lines from locations outside the LATA, he told me
how difficult it would be to track down the problem since it is
intermittant. Then he apparently put on his Sales Hat. He suggested
that rather than have seven high-speed modems on standard voice
channels I should investigate ISDN!

"I don't want to sound as though I am trying to sell you something,
but our new single-line ISDN tariff is probably something that you
should look into. It provides a voice channel and two high-speed data
channels..." etc., etc. So there you have it, folks. All this talk
about not being able to find someone who knows what you are talking
about when you mention ISDN notwithstanding, Pac*Bell repairpersons
now actually PUSH the product!


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Brad)
Subject: Motorola Advisor etc.
Organization: University of Vermont -- Division of EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 03:26:48 GMT


Can anyone give me any hints on purchasing an alphanumeric pager? I'm
looking into the Motorola Advisor/Notify! combination, and I'd like to
know any positive or negative comments you might have. Mainly, I'd
like some advice on what type to purchase (if other than the Advisor),
where to find the best price, and the best service to use for the
Boston/NYC region. Of course, any comments you can offer on pagers in
general would be appreciated.

If it's more convenient, respond to [e-mail]


Brad Reisner   Apple Computer Student Rep
#include(std.disclaimer.h)   [e-mail]

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: COCOT Scam - The Other Side ...
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 0:30:54 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


UPI reports that Indiana Secretary of State Joseph H. Hogsett said
that COCOTs are being peddled in ponzi/pyramid scams in that state.

The 'pitch' promises annual returns of 120% of the "investment".

And to think us CDTers worry about the folks on THIS side of the
coinslot ...!


[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #239
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29647;
          6 Apr 93 7:28 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13451
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 6 Apr 1993 05:16:13 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31587
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 6 Apr 1993 05:15:31 -0500
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 05:15:31 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #240

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Apr 93 05:15:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 240

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (John Higdon)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (TELECOM Moderator Replies to John Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 93 22:30 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?


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

> OK, it's been a couple years now since I retired from being a sysop,
> but I ran a BBS for seven years and I =never= kept a log farther back
> than about a day or two.  What for?

That is a very good question. Just exactly where is it written that
BBS sysops are required to keep any logs whatsoever? Just as there are
currently no laws protecting sysops from governmental action regarding
their systems, the law is equally silent regarding sysop obligations.

> [Moderator's Note: Amateurs are welcome; everyone has to begin somewhere
> in this field of endeavor. But amateurs or beginners should realize
> that when/if the 'authorities' come to visit, whining that "I am just
> a volunteer, an amateur, I'm not responsible for the uses made of my
> BBS or the people on it" simply won't cut the mustard.

This is complete baloney. Please site applicable case law or statute
that requires BBSes to keep logs for the examination of law
enforcement, much less AT&T or any other private concern. If there is
suspected abuse of facilities or services, it is up to the complaintant
to prove his allegations -- not the other way around.

> The law is rather plain that (regards connecting to the telephone
> network) EVERYONE is responsible for the use(s) made of their
> instruments ... and we are long past the days when an 'instrument' was
> limited in definition to a black rotary dial phone.

No, as a matter of fact, the law is very vague about this. You seem to
be adopting a knee-jerk "let-me-see-your-papers" attitude here. If
people call into your number by fraudulent means, that is a matter
between the calling party, his LD carrier, and possibly law
enforcement. It is NOT your concern if you are not a knowledgable
party.

I have many modems and a "voice BBS" here in the house that receive
literally thousands of calls PER DAY. I have no idea how those calls
reach me, nor do I care. Detailed logs are kept for my own protection
and my own administrative use. NO ONE other than myself will ever have
access to them except by court order.

If AT&T called and wanted my cooperation in tracking down some
fraudulent calls, I would give that company the same amount of help it
gave me in tracking down the bogus calls to the UK that it tried to
charge me for. I would tell them to go to hell. If they tried to push the
issue legally, they would find some formidable opposition from some
very sharp lawyers who owe me some favors.

> But please, do it *right*, or don't do it at all, and quit
> whining about the phone company and the government. Neither of those
> entities is going to change, and malicious hackers are unlikely to go
> away anytime soon either.  Get used to it.    PAT]

So please, tell us how. What logs are required? What logs are
optional? Who has authority to examine them? Why? Feel free to quote
any applicable state or Federal laws (or paraphrase them).

I think you are reaching here. If there are no specific laws protecting
BBS operators from liability generated by third parties, there are
certainly no laws requiring any law enforcement assistance. BBSes are
entitled to the same privacy as anyone else. Unless you are under
subpoena, no one can force you to reveal information concerning your
phone calls. Unless you can cite laws to the contrary, I believe BBS
operators enjoy the same protection.

> Nothing is perfect of course, but simple efforts to
> detect fraud, misuse and abuse will show your intent to the 'authorities'
> and keep the garden variety hackers and phreaks from infesting your system.

You don't "owe" the 'authorities' any such indication of intent. You
do not operate a BBS by any government's sufferance; you do so by
implicit right. Until and unless BBSes are prohibited by law or
licensed, your right to operate one in any manner you see fit is not
dependent upon your appeasement of law enforcement officials or AT&T.

> Telco and the government don't expect you to run a branch of the FBI,
> just a reasonably clean operation, and your users will also appreciate
> your concern for their well-being when on your machine.  PAT]

Telco and government have no right to expect you to run your BBS any
way at all other than the way you see fit. As long as you are not
breaking any laws or perpetrating any fraud, you may do what you like.
It is not up to you to be Miss Millie Monitor and "encourage" your
users to be nice children.

AT&T, Pacific Bell, Illinois Bell, et al, do not run the world. And
government enforces laws. Cooperation with any of these entities
guarantees you nothing, as we have seen from the seizure of computer
equipment from individuals who were, in fact, cooperating with "the
authorities".

No, I am not "whining" about all of this. I do what I like and I could
not care less what Pac*Bell, AT&T, or the government thinks about it.
I am not breaking any laws, so I have no interest in bowing and
scraping and assuring any of these public or private concerns
regarding the worthiness of my intent. If someone is phreaking his way
into my voice BBS, I could not care less. It is not my problem, and no
contortion of reality can make it so.


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

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 03:00 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?


Whew! John Higdon really got in an uproar about my response to Brad,
and my rebuttal is far too long to include in a Moderator's Note, thus
this reply message.

[e-mail] wrote:

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

>> OK, it's been a couple years now since I retired from being a sysop,
>> but I ran a BBS for seven years and I =never= kept a log farther back
>> than about a day or two.  What for?

> That is a very good question. Just exactly where is it written that BBS
> sysops are required to keep any logs whatsoever?

There are no such laws. I suggested it was a matter of good practice
to do so, and that said logs served other good side effects as well.

> Just as there are currently no laws protecting sysops from
> governmental action regarding their systems, the law is equally silent
> regarding sysop obligations.

This is not entirely true. 'Laws protecting sysops from government
action' are implied by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. We
are publishers, and as such have the rights of publishers and the
obligations of publishers.

>> [Moderator's Note: Amateurs are welcome; everyone has to begin somewhere
>> in this field of endeavor. But amateurs or beginners should realize
>> that when/if the 'authorities' come to visit, whining that "I am just
>> a volunteer, an amateur, I'm not responsible for the uses made of my
>> BBS or the people on it" simply won't cut the mustard.

> This is complete baloney. Please site applicable case law or statute
> that requires BBSes to keep logs for the examination of law
> enforcement, much less AT&T or any other private concern.

To repeat, there is no such law, just as there is no law which
requires you to have a spare tire in your automobile; but there may
come a time when you find it was / would have been in your best
interest to do so. I am saying that one can catch more flies with
honey than with vinegar. I am saying that from a purely pragmatic, or
practical standpoint, it is better to have organizations like AT&T or
the federal government remain neutral to us -- if not necessarily
friendly with us -- than it is to have them as enemies or antagonists.

> If there is suspected abuse of facilities or services, it is up to
> the complaintant to prove his allegations -- not the other way around.

Of course it is, and if you don't mind -- I've got a warrant here --
we'll seize all your equipment *which even resembles something electronic*
while we set about proving our case. Give us six months, a year or two
years to work on it, won't you?

>> The law is rather plain that (regards connecting to the telephone
>> network) EVERYONE is responsible for the use(s) made of their
>> instruments ... and we are long past the days when an 'instrument' was
>> limited in definition to a black rotary dial phone.

> No, as a matter of fact, the law is very vague about this. You seem to
> be adopting a knee-jerk "let-me-see-your-papers" attitude here. If
> people call into your number by fraudulent means, that is a matter
> between the calling party, his LD carrier, and possibly law
> enforcement. It is NOT your concern if you are not a knowledgable
> party.

The key here is 'knew or should have known how the equipment was being
used.'  To say you know nothing about the fraud going on on your system
is quite silly when the nature of your BBS -- its messages and general
eppearance, etc -- invite fraudulent use of the telephone network. You
may not have specific knowledge of any one instance of fraud, but John,
you are a smart man, and taking an overview of your user base and the
messages they are posting, *you know* what is going on. And because
you know what is going on, you have an obligation to attempt to
mitigate the damage. And, you could be considered a co-conspirator.

> I have many modems and a "voice BBS" here in the house that receive
> literally thousands of calls PER DAY. I have no idea how those calls
> reach me, nor do I care.

Maybe you should start caring, at least a little. I mean, don't stay
up all night worrying about it, but give some care to whether or not
fraud is the prevelant way of calling into your systems.

> Detailed logs are kept for my own protection and my own administra-
> tive use.

Ah, so you do find it prudent to keep some records of who does what
when they are connected to your equipment. That's all I'm saying, that
it makes better sense to be in control of your systems' activities at
all times. Knowledge is power. You're a smart man; other readers who
operate public systems over telephone lines should follow your example.

> NO ONE other than myself will ever have access to them except by
> court order.

All the world loves a smart-ass, including every cop I know. If 'certain
people' come to your door, I'm sure their papers and authority will be
in order.  But let's say for the sake of argument they do not have
their papers in order:

Police officer comes to your door with AT&T man (purely a hypothetical
example, you understand) ... it only happens somewhere in these United
States once every couple weeks or so ...

"I know my rights!" you loudly proclaim, "get a warrant to come in my
house."  Most people would not say that, but from what you are saying,
you probably would.

Police officer and AT&T man look at each other and snicker. If the
police officer *suspects or has reason to believe that a crime is in
progress at that moment*, he does *not* need a warrant to enter, but
the cop says "okay, we'll get a warrant." They don't leave; they just
stand there in your doorway.

He calls on his radio and asks the office to have the assistant pros-
ecutor on duty go upstairs to the judge to get a warrant, and have him
fax it to the 'paper car'.  Sure enough, five or ten minutes later,
the 'paper car' pulls up and a couple more officers come up and give
our man his warrant. Now before, when maybe all they wanted to do was
talk to you; see if you had any information on a given user; warn you
about something that needed to be corrected, you can be sure they will
now take a much harder line. Why? Because in the cop's estimation,
you're an asshole; you know your rights and he certainly knows his as
an officer.

> If AT&T called and wanted my cooperation in tracking down some
> fraudulent calls, I would give that company the same amount of help it
> gave me in tracking down the bogus calls to the UK that it tried to
> charge me for. I would tell them to go to hell.

As you wish.

> If they tried to push the issue legally, they would find some
> formidable opposition from some very sharp lawyers who owe me some
> favors.

Not all of us have sharp lawyers to offer formidable opposition, nor
do all of us feel it is worth our time. There is a bottom line, you
know. Do you really feel that strongly about defending the anonymous
callers who use your system?

>> But please, do it *right*, or don't do it at all, and quit
>> whining about the phone company and the government. Neither of those
>> entities is going to change, and malicious hackers are unlikely to go
>> away anytime soon either.  Get used to it.    PAT]

> So please, tell us how. What logs are required? What logs are
> optional? Who has authority to examine them? Why? Feel free to quote
> any applicable state or Federal laws (or paraphrase them).

What logs you would be wise to keep must be in context with what you
are doing. You said yourself you have what you believe is adequate
'for your protection'. Why you bother with that much in view of the
fact that you 'know your rights' and have 'sharp lawyers to give
formidable opposition' is of interest to me. Maybe you approach it
pragmatically also? There are no laws which say 'keep logs'. There are
laws which say the authorities can act in a rather heavy handed manner
when they want to prosecute you if they choose to do so. The less they
view you as a threat (rightly or wrongly) the less likely they are to
be heavy handed in dealing with you. But then, in your case, your
lawyers will worry about it for you, won't they?

> I think you are reaching here. If there are no specific laws protecting
> BBS operators from liability generated by third parties,

But there are such laws. You can apply for common carrier status; a
common carrier is never responsible for what its customers do. Even
without common carrier status, you can mitigate the misuse of the
system by taking reasonable precautions.

> there are certainly no laws requiring any law enforcement
> assistance. BBSes are entitled to the same privacy as anyone else.

No there are not, and yes, any professional sysop (as opposed to an
amateur) would agree that BBS users deserve privacy and protection.
That is why a professional sysop *never* allows conditions to exist
which jeopardize his other users.

> Unless you are under subpoena, no one can force you to reveal
> information concerning your phone calls. Unless you can cite laws to
> the contrary, I believe BBS operators enjoy the same protection.

Of course, of course. We are not having an elementary class in civics
here, although you contradict yourself from earlier in your message
when you said that 'there are no laws protecting sysops from government
actions'. Yes, BBS operators get First Amendment and Fifth Amendment
rights. They also get to have their equipment seized and sit in jail
if it comes to that ... they're nobody special.

>> Nothing is perfect of course, but simple efforts to detect fraud,
>> misuse and abuse will show your intent to the 'authorities' and keep
>> the garden variety hackers and phreaks from infesting your system.

> You don't "owe" the 'authorities' any such indication of intent. You do
> not operate a BBS by any government's sufferance; you do so by implicit
> right. Until and unless BBSes are prohibited by law or licensed, your
> right to operate one in any manner you see fit is not dependent upon
> your appeasement of law enforcement officials or AT&T.

Of course not, because you have your lawyers to look after all those
things for you, right?  As long as 'the way you see fit' is legal,
then you have no problems at all. I thought Steve Jackson ran a legal
operation, but that did not prevent him from having many months of
grief and worry. Yes, he won the case ... but what a price! I'm not
saying he should have done things differently; I don't know what he
did or did not do.

Where your advice, John, is very irresponsible is because of the large
number of young people running BBSs who are naive enough to think
their knowledge of the constitution will protect them from the govern-
ment. They know their rights ... but they have yet to be bopped over
the head with a policeman's billy club for their impudence. ('Resisting
arrest' and 'disorderly conduct' are the two nice catch-all crimes
police can charge anyone with.) I do not have the time, or money, or
inclination to argue with the government. I'd prefer they ignore me.
If/when they do come to see me, I'll have my papers in order ... and
it sounds like you will also. Your lawyers will look after you, but
unfortunatly most of us have to look after ourselves.

So as a practical, purely pragmatic, bottom line thing, I work along.
If all your computers, modems and other equipment were seized tomorrow
as 'evidence', you'd go out immediatly and buy all new stuff and be
back on line a few hours later. If my terminal and my modem were
seized, I'd be off the air until further notice; and you know
something? I know my rights as well as you know yours.

> Telco and government have no right to expect you to run your BBS any
> way at all other than the way you see fit. As long as you are not
> breaking any laws or perpetrating any fraud, you may do what you like.

The trouble is, historically BBS operators have always been approached
this way (that they were partues to fraud) by telco and the government.
Things are only barely starting to change.

> It is not up to you to be Miss Millie Monitor and "encourage" your
> users to be nice children.

It is until/unless I gain common carrier status. Why do radio stations
put seven-second delays in their on-air phone conversations? Because
they are realistic enough to know someone is going to say something
they should not say over the air.  Sysops need to be realistic enough
to know that some users will ruin things for everyone given a chance
and that it isn't worth losing their equipment and possibly harming
the good users just because they have no legal obligation to be Miss
Millie Monitor.

> AT&T, Pacific Bell, Illinois Bell, et al, do not run the world.

No, but they come very close to it where telephone networks are
concerned.

> And government enforces laws. Cooperation with any of these entities
> guarantees you nothing, as we have seen from the seizure of computer
> equipment from individuals who were, in fact, cooperating with "the
> authorities".

What is the likelyhood of getting your equipment seized when you
do not cooperate?

> No, I am not "whining" about all of this. I do what I like and I could
> not care less what Pac*Bell, AT&T, or the government thinks about it.

You've made that very plain.

> I am not breaking any laws, so I have no interest in bowing and
> scraping and assuring any of these public or private concerns
> regarding the worthiness of my intent.

I did not say 'bow and scrape'; I said take a pragmatic approach and
work along with people. It can't hurt and it may actually help. I do
think sysops who work along by 'showing intent' if you want to call it
that are helping to gradually change the public image of BBSs.

> If someone is phreaking his way into my voice BBS, I could not care
> less.

I'm sorry to hear that. Toll fraud winds up costing all of us money in
the long run through rate increases. It lends itself to the public
perception of BBSs as a place for a bunch of cheats to gather. It
fortifies what people *in a position to make trouble for us as a group*
think about us.

> It is not my problem, and no contortion of reality can make it so.

It is very much your problem, but then, you hire lawyers to deal with
your problems.  With rights come responsibilities, and you should not
be telling the younger, newer sysops that they can exercise the former
without exercising the latter.  They might believe you.


Patrick Townson

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #240
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00532;
          6 Apr 93 21:40 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04430
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 6 Apr 1993 19:18:56 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04492
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 6 Apr 1993 19:18:03 -0500
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 19:18:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #241

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Apr 93 19:18:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 241

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Bill Walker)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Mike Olson)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (John Higdon)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Mike Whitaker)
    Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!? (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!? (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Gary W. Sanders)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Brad Hicks)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Justin Leavens)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? ([e-mail])
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Nick Sayer)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Henry Mensch)
    The Pat and John Show (Joshua E. Muskovitz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bill Walker)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc.
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 20:31:19 GMT


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

> This is not too important but I am wondering ...

> Many years ago I was told that you could dial POPCORN in most any area
> codes and get the time. This was probably before divestiture. Well I
> only recently returned to the US and found it still works in PacBell
> (510 anyway) area and it's a free call.

> Is is still universally available? I find it very useful.

> [Moderator's Note: 767-2676?  Never heard of it. {stuff about other
numbers the Moderator is familiar with deleted}].

POPCORN works in the San Francisco Bay Area on PacTel, or at least it
did when I was growing up there.  It works in Sacramento, too.  In
fact, 767-xxxx worked.  I was very surprised to discover that it
didn't work in San Diego when I moved here.  Here, it's 853-1212.


Bill Walker - [e-mail] - QUALCOMM, Inc., San Diego, CA

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

Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1993 14:27:57 -0700
From: Mike Olson <[e-mail]>


In fact, POP-XXXX gets you time-of-day in 510 for all XXXX.  One of
the few joys in subscribing to Pac*Bell is in thinking up good endings
for phrases beginning with POP whenever my watch stops.


Mike Olson, UC Berkeley, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 05:34:11 GMT


I just tried it from 310-649 (also Pa Bell) and got 3 beeps, 10-15 seconds
of silence, and a reorder.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 01:14 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch


The ONLY place that I know of where this works just happens to be the
SF Bay Area, where you are located. Actually, anywhere in 415, 408
(Greater San Jose), 510, and 707, 767 plus any four digits will get
you the time lady. You can reach it from outside the area using 415.
And it is a "local" call, not a "free" call -- an increasingly
important distinction.

But now that you brought it up, I would like to sound off about
something Pac*Bell did within the last couple of years here. The time
comes from a machine that used to be located in Palo Alto. Dedicated
circuits were installed to each and every Bay Area central office that
carried nothing but the time lady, droning on and on.

When you called "POPCORN", a connection was made from your telephone
to a distribution amp in your local office that was connected to that
dedicated line from the time announcer. However, in its zeal to
abolish all point to point dedicated circuits including its own,
Pac*Bell simply set up routing tables to the machine. Now when you
dial "POPCORN", a call is made over the normal, common facilities to
the office that houses the time announcer.

So what, you say? Well, here's what. Three times a year find the
service heavily used: New Year's, start of PDT, and end of PDT. Even
during these times it was very rare to ever be blocked from hearing
the time. But last Saturday evening around midnight, two hours before
the PDT witching hour, I got an "all circuits busy" recording.
Obviously, only a limited number of trunks are allotted for this
service.

A Pac*Bell "improvement" strikes again!


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

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

Date: 06 Apr 1993 04:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike Whitaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch


> [Moderator's Note: ... some text omitted ...
> Then the Time-of-Day quit appearing on 228-8000 and became avail-
> able on 976-1414, but considering they announce the time every ten
> seconds, they have not yet figured out how to squeeze in a commercial
> advertisment as part of the process.

It's not impossible.  British Telecom speaking clock (dial 8081 from
here) does this:

"At the third stroke, the time, sponsored by Accurist, will be..."


Mike Whitaker +44-223 | [e-mail] (preferred)
Shape Data/EDS 371565 | [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!?
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 02:23:13 GMT


In comp.dcom.telecom is written:

> I was just told that using, say, my Sprint calling card, via their 800
> number to call next door (within the same LATA), was illegal.

> Is this (nonsense) really true?  Is it enforced?

The states vary on this.  Some say it is illegal (I seem to recall
that SNET, the Connecticut telco, enjoys a monopoly in-state) while
others says it's okay if you have a tariff, and others (probably
rate-cap states) probably explicitly don't regulate it.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza    New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!?
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 6 Apr 93 17:38:23 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


Sprint does have intrastate tariffs on file in California, but I think
the local phone company still has the intra-LATA monopoly.

I don't think it's enforced, however.  I'll check my next phone bill
for whether an intra-LATA LD call through my Sprint card appears on my
Sprint bill or on my PacBell bill.

Does "The Orange Card" have intra-state tariffs on file for California?


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


[Moderator's Note: The Orange Card only claims to handle interstate
calls for 25 cents per minute. In fact, local calls are possible.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue,  6 Apr 93 13:14:39 GMT
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?
Organization: AT&T


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

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

>> OK, it's been a couple years now since I retired from being a sysop,
>> but I ran a BBS for seven years and I =never= kept a log farther back
>> than about a day or two.  What for?

> That is a very good question. Just exactly where is it written that
> BBS sysops are required to keep any logs whatsoever? Just as there are
> currently no laws protecting sysops from governmental action regarding
> their systems, the law is equally silent regarding sysop obligations.

Why should a BBS operator be required to keep of log of who is calling
Do you keep track of every phone call you receive on your voice line?
Do you archive your answering machine tapes monthly? I doubt it for
most so why is a BBS so special?

I have been running a BBS about 12 years. In the begining I knew most
of the people calling my board. Now I personally know few. Most are
not only out of town but many out of the state and some out of the
country.  Calls are logged on a rolling monthly window and is used
just as an activity guage not a log of who is calling. I rarely verify
a caller as doing so would be very expensive. I don't call back
everyone who left a message on my answering machine and make sure it
was who they said they are.  Since I run a specific topic BBS (ham,swl
radio) I haven't had to deal with the hords of callers looking for
games and such, however I do ocassionally get calls from Mickey Mouse
and friends.  Again, why does having a computer connected to the phone
mean I must keep logs?


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

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 6 Apr 93 19:19:52 GMT
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?


All quoted remarks are from TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>:

> So new-comers, assorted amateurs, etc, welcome to the fraternity.
> But please, do it *right*, or don't do it at all, and quit whining
> about the phone company and the government.

In other words, Pat, you're saying, "My way, or the highway!"  There
is only one right way to run a BBS and that's the way Pat Townson
says.

Nettiquette forbids that I tell you just how strongly I disagree; the
profanity, capitalization, and punctuation abuse would surely trigger
somebody's flame-suppressors.

At the very least, I think your attitude, if you have expressed it
accurately and I have understood it accurately, sucks.  (Not to
mention the implication that it is Wrong to criticize either the phone
companies or the governments; an Evil thing to say, period.  NO ONE is
or should be "above" criticism.)

This is no idle chatter; whenever sysops get dragged into court one
issue that is going to come up is whether or not the sysop took the
precautions that a "resonable" sysop would take.  So it behooves all
of us who are, have been, or are friends to sysops to have a voice in
those "reasonable" standards, because what is "obviously reasonable"
to one person may look like a large load of fertilizer to another, and
like unreasonable restraint of trade to another.

That being said, let me address a few things that you think are
reasonable requirements to lay onto sysops, over which you and I
disagree:

> I think the fact that you can call up the old records when you
> need them is sufficient.

The sysop who posted this owned a tape drive.  I didn't.  My former
co-sysop (and ex-wife), who owns the hardware and runs a different BBS
at the same number, still doesn't.  I repeat: an Opus BBS log can run
several hundred kilobytes per day.  How much expense is she =as a
hobbyist= going to be legally required to carry just so that (months?
years?) later, the phone company can determine which logon ID was used
during a particular incoming phone call?

Considering the low utility of that information (after all, if
somebody uses a stolen access code for the call, they could just as
easily be using a stolen logon ID, no?), I think that it is
unreasonable to impose this expense on the sysop.  In fact, in blunt
economic terms, it is AT&T imposing the costs of doing their business
on somebody else: rather than pay to beef up their own security or
absorb the losses therefrom, they "downstream" the cost of securing
the system to others.  I'm still libertarian enough to consider
downstreaming of costs to be Evil.

> The important thing, I think, is that you verify your users and have
> a phone number or address of recourse to them. Users who know that you
> know who they are tend to be good users, or at least not troublesome.

In seven years of running a system, retiring only about two years ago,
I never voice-validated a user.  And every argument that you've ever
seen for anonymous mail applies just as well to the sometimes very
real need for an anonymous user id on a BBS.

Examples?  WeirdBase, being largely occult-oriented, had a large
number of callers who had very real fears of injury, loss of
employment, etc. if their religion became known.  A Woman's Place,
being largely feminist-oriented, may have users who are victims of
discrimination or even abuse who need a safe place to discuss their
hurts.  Anonymous logon IDs is =not= a theoretical issue to me.

> I can't stress enough also the use of Caller-ID when available to at
> least initially verify new users, followed by a call back to them with
> their password, etc. They can't hide very well from the little box.

Aside from the above arguments in favor of anonymity, I hope we
haven't already reached the point where a service that is
less-than-universally available, and one that large numbers of people
are morally opposed to (not that I am, but I acknowledge their
existence), is considered a minimum pre-requisite to electronic
publishing.

> ... simple efforts to detect fraud, misuse and abuse will show your
> intent to the 'authorities' and keep the garden variety hackers and
> phreaks from infesting your system.

And here's the kicker.  "Innocent until proven guilty" may be only
common law, not written into the Constitution, but try this: "No
person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous
crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury."  (There
are exceptions written into the 5th Amendment, and others in case law,
but they don't apply here.)

It. Is. Not. My. Responsibility. To. Protect. AT&T. Period.

I. Am. Not. A. Volunteer. Policeman. Period.

If sometime in the future I end up running a BBS (it could happen; mid
next year I'll have another old CPU lying around) and AT&T calls me
and accuses one of my users of being a criminal, I'll tell 'em, "Go
get a subpoena. My user files are =my= business."  (I should care
about THEIR needs?  Try this: call an IXC or a Baby Bell and tell 'em
you suspect that somebody who called you at such-and-such a time was
trying to rip you off and ask for their phone number, see what
happens.  They'll tell you the same thing.)  And I very much doubt
that I'll keep user logs for much longer than is useful to me.

Believe it or not, Pat, there are other ways to keep people from
posting credit card numbers or copyrighted software to your BBS than
voice validating them.  I'm no criminal, and I have no interest in
encouraging users to be criminals.  (Though if I did, I'd be within my
1st Amendment rights to do so, so long as I wasn't plotting =specific=
crimes.)  I'm just a semi-retired self-publishing hobbyist with a
strong desire to get the word out and do it at a low cost to me or my
"customers"/friends.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?
Date: 6 Apr 1993 15:36:50 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


TELECOM Moderator replied:

> The lack of keeping such a log would show at worst a conspiracy
> between the sysop and his callers, and at best, an incredible degree
> of naetivity by the sysop.

and then later stated:

> But amateurs or beginners should realize that when/if the
> 'authorities' come to visit, whining that "I am just a volunteer, an
> amateur, I'm not responsible for the uses made of my BBS or the people
> on it" simply won't cut the mustard. The law is rather plain that
> (regards connecting to the telephone network) EVERYONE is responsible
> for the use(s) made of their instruments ... and we are long past the
> days when an 'instrument' was limited in definition to a black rotary
> dial phone. We had a decade-long shakedown period in the field of
> information-by-computer.

[early BBS stories deleted]

> Fraud and hackery (in the derogatory use of the word) were very
> rampant on the early bulletin boards. Many a sysop had to 'learn the
> hard way'. So new-comers, assorted amateurs, etc, welcome to the
> fraternity. But please, do it *right*, or don't do it at all, and quit
> whining about the phone company and the government. Neither of those
> entities is going to change, and malicious hackers are unlikely to go
> away anytime soon either.  Get used to it.    PAT]

So should I keep a log of everyone who comes to my door, in case the
'authorities' come looking for someone who's been going door to door,
and would my lack of such a log constitute a conspiracy on my part? Or
should I keep track of license plates of all the cars which park in
front of my house, since city street are often used in criminal
activities?

Individuals are legally obligated to produce any information which
they have when presented with legal documents requiring them to, or if
asked specific questions under oath. I might even say that most of the
time, individuals should be morally obligated to share any information
they may have regarding criminal activity, even when not asked. But
*NEVER* should anyone be implicated for not producing information they
don't have. Your attitude is no better than that of the Secret
Service, which generally assumes criminal activities associated with
any gathering of more than two computer literate people in any forum.
People are swindled over the phone every day -- should I be required
to tell The Phone Company the names of all the people who have called
me in the last week, just because they ask? Would they give *me* the
same help trying to find out who was threatening my girlfriend over
the phone in the middle of the night? Uh uh ...

It seems to me that if an AT&T, MCI, Sprint, or whoever, really wanted
to find out who was on my BBS, they could find out themselves,
following the proper legal channels. Squeezing the information out of
a sysop, under whatever pretense, seems like an easy way to get what
they want without having to do the work themselves or provide *real*
justification for the information.


Justin Leavens   Microcomputer Specialist   University of Southern California

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

Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?
Organization: The Lab Rats
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1993 17:17:09 EDT
From: tom <[e-mail]>


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

>> If there is suspected abuse of facilities or services, it is up to
}> the complaintant to prove his allegations -- not the other way around.

} Of course it is, and if you don't mind -- I've got a warrant here --
} we'll seize all your equipment *which even resembles something electronic*
} while we set about proving our case. Give us six months, a year or two
} years to work on it, won't you?

Unfortunately, the situation is far worse even than this. The feds, and
many state and local police agencies have realized that they don't need
to prove their case at all. In fact they don't even need to charge you
with a crime to take your property! The standard of proof required under
the civil forfeiture statutes is *probable cause*. Lately probable cause
is as minimal as a police officer going before a judge and swearing that
an *anonymous informant* reported that your BBS was being used to make
drug deals, or exchange child pornography, or phreaking, or ...

The judge then issues a warrant to search your house for computers,
electronic equipment, etc. and the cops kick in your door at 5am, hold
you at gunpoint while they're ransacking your house and confiscating
anything with a cord coming out of it, all your manuals, floppies,
your cd collection, and the money in your wallet. If they're really
out to get you they may also inform you that you also just forfeited
your house, cars, and bank accounts.

To have any chance of getting your stuff back, you have to post a
bond (usually about 10% of the estimated value) for the right to sue in
civil court and attempt to prove by a preponderance of evidence, which
is a higher standard of proof than the cops needed to seize it, that
none of your property was in any way ever connected with any crime
(including before you bought it, if you got it used).

Worse yet, many jurisdictions have explicit arrangements about how the
loot is to be divided, most of which include a cut for the officers
making the seizure and/or the *anonymous* informant. This can do
nothing but actively encourage incredible abuses of an already
hopelessly corrupt situation.

This is happening to normal people like you, not just to far away
drug users, or wierd cults, or Jews, or witches and heretics.

Don't wait until it happens to you or someone you know before you call
or write to all of your elected officials from city councilman all the
way up to President to remind them not too long ago you remember
hearing them swear to uphold the Constitution, "yeah, that oath of
office thing", and then politely but firmly *demand* that they do
something to get the forfeiture laws irepealed or changed so that they
can't be abused, _and_ that they keep you informed of what they are
doing.


[e-mail]                                ...!{gateway}!udel!tom
[e-mail]   UDel: School of Life and Health Sciences


[Moderator's Note: I'm not sure I agree entirely with your dire
outlook.  I don't think things are *quite* that bad, but I must say
you did a great job of helping me make my point: knowing that the
government in this country will pull that kind of thing, *some of us
don't want to bother*. Things are not like they were written in the
books you studied in high school. There are bottom line, pragmatic
considerations. You can scream about your rights all you want to while
your computer stuff is being carted away and a cop is bopping you on
the head with a stick. Get snotty with them and they will surely do a
number on you. Be nice, and there is a good chance you will be left
alone.  Take your pick; that's all I'm saying. If it comes down to me
(as a sysop/publisher) keeping my equipment, my freedom and sanity
versus defending the rights of an anonymous user who is afraid or
unwilling to give out his/her name, leaving me in the trick bag
instead, then I'll look out for myself first. Really, why should I
care if your electronic commentary ever sees the light of day and a
broad distribution or not? As a sysop, if the feds seize all your
stuff, then none of your users get published.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nick Sayer)
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: [phone], log in as 'guest'.
Date: 6 Apr 1993 17:45:55 UTC


Actially, some of what our Esteemed Moderator suggests may in fact be
illegal. I am unsure of the details, but the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act may make turning over data on your users OTHER than due to
a court order a crime.

I have to agree half way with both of you. I run a public Unix.  I
require written registration forms for accounts, which I retain in
case they are needed, but I will not disclose any information on those
forms except under court order -- when I will happily hand them over
and provide any other relevant assistance.

In short, I'm not protecting my rights here. I'm protecting my users
rights under the ECPA. If I didn't, I'd be guilty under that statute.


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


[Moderator's Note: That's all I'm saying, Nick. If it comes down to a
choice of your neck on the chopping block or that of a user, make sure
it is a user. Keep records however you think best; produce them on
demand and don't get to technical or problematic with the people
asking for the records. The requirements of the ECPA are met as long
as you do not frivilously display your user files and records.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 09:38:07 -0700
Subject: AT&T Blacklisting?
Reply-To: [e-mail]


PAT: Can you cite legal precedent for this last bit, where you say
that sysops are, in the eyes of the law, publishers?

>> Just as there are currently no laws protecting sysops from
>> governmental action regarding their systems, the law is equally silent
>> regarding sysop obligations.

> This is not entirely true. 'Laws protecting sysops from government
> action' are implied by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. We
> are publishers, and as such have the rights of publishers and the
> obligations of publishers.


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


[Moderator's Note: Look at the First Amendment. If a publisher can type
at a keyboard, produce a sheet of printed paper with writing on it and
be protected by the First Amendment, then why can't I type at a
keyboard, produce electronic writing and be protected? As a matter of
fact, there is a printed version of TELECOM Digest each day, a single
copy I send to my printer for my files. I fully support the extension
of the complete Bill of Rights to electronic publishers, but even I --
the infamous blabbermouth, creator of 100 line moderator notes -- know
when to shut up. Its just easier to work along with the system.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 13:51:53 EDT
From: Joshua E. Muskovitz <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Pat and John Show


Thank you, and Welcome to "The Pat and John Show"!  I'll be your host
for this edition ... tonight we've got a really hot show for you
folks!  Pat and John will be cat-fighting to the death over BBS sysop
rights, and the general deterioration of our society!  Stay tuned, and
we'll be right back after these important messages from the Orange
Card!

Really guys ... get off it.  Sheesh.  (Sorry, no :-)

Josh


[Moderator's Note: I hope all sides in this issue have been aired,
and invite the moderators of our cousin-publication, Computer
Underground Digest to continue the thread if they wish to do so. Or
perhaps Dennis Rears would like to run it awhile in his privacy forum.
Thanks to everyone who wrote on the topic.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #241
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10496;
          7 Apr 93 2:08 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03239
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 6 Apr 1993 23:37:05 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29104
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 6 Apr 1993 23:36:02 -0500
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 23:36:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #242

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Apr 93 23:35:45 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 242

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (John Higdon)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Jack Decker)
    Re: Interesting Comparison (R. Kevin Oberman)
    Re: Interesting Comparison (Robert J. Woodhead)
    Re: Interesting Comparison (Don Wegeng)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (Ron DeBlock)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (Marc Unangst)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (A. Padgett Peterson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 18:20 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?


[Moderator's Note: I had said the thread would be closed out here; but
in transit to me were two more items with different angles to them
than previously expressed here. In addition, John Higdon wanted to
make a final rebuttal to my earlier comments. Here they are.   PAT]

I certainly do not intend to enter a pissing contest here, but there
are a couple of points that do need clarification:

On Apr 6 at  5:15, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> Ah, so you do find it prudent to keep some records of who does what
> when they are connected to your equipment.

But that is for MY protection, not the convenience of AT&T, law
enforcement, or anyone else. Recent case in point: AT&T billed me for
calls I did not make. My records were most helpful in fighting that.

> Of course, of course. We are not having an elementary class in civics
> here, although you contradict yourself from earlier in your message
> when you said that 'there are no laws protecting sysops from government
> actions'.

My assertion was that sysops enjoy the same rights as everyone else.
What I should have said was, "there are no SPECIAL laws protecting
sysops from government actions..." As you even pointed out, no amount
of stepinfetchit, yassa boss, or shufflin' with head bowed will save
you from an agency that "gets it in for you".

> I thought Steve Jackson ran a legal operation, but that did not
> prevent him from having many months of grief and worry.

Yup!

> Where your advice, John, is very irresponsible is because of the large
> number of young people running BBSs who are naive enough to think
> their knowledge of the constitution will protect them from the govern-
> ment.

Please be clear on what I am saying. Nothing, but nothing, will
prevent "the authorities" from taking your property if they have a
mind to and can flimflam some dottering old judge. It is wrong, and it
is unfortunate. But putting out that "face of cooperation" is a
complete waste of time and effort.

> The trouble is, historically BBS operators have always been approached
> this way (that they were partues to fraud) by telco and the government.

As long as BBS operators tiptoe around acting like society is doing
them a favor in allowing their existence, the situation will never
change. There need to be some test cases and law enforcement needs to
have its nose rubbed in it a few times. The Steve Jackson Games case
is a good start.

> > AT&T, Pacific Bell, Illinois Bell, et al, do not run the world.

> No, but they come very close to it where telephone networks are
> concerned.

This is changing, thankfully.

> What is the likelyhood of getting your equipment seized when you
> do not cooperate?

About the same as if I do. I forget the actual case, but there was a
BBS operator that cooperated fully the the FBI -- helped them set up
traps, gave them names, etc., etc. This went on for some months. Then
they took his equipment and shut him down. So much for cooperation.

If the authorities come gunning for me for whatever reason, I will
trust my lawyers rather than rely on any demonstration of "good
intentions". I think many would agree.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?
Date: 7 Apr 1993 00:31:57 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


I ask the general questions of users on my system when they first
logon.  But as I have said I only check the local users and spot check
a few of the LD callers. I have also been known to dial a number when
a user was on line. Most of the time it is busy, but there are always
the users that have a different line for their computer or even a
smaller bunch that have Call Waiting and don't turn it off.

As to Caller ID I wish we had it, but until the State Assembly and
Senate get off their buts and do something about the way the PUC
wanted the system ran we will not have it. I have nothing on my system
that would cause hackers to call a lot. All the files that I have for
D/L which are not that many are PD or ShareWare for the Apple II. My
message base are the general type plys Support for the Apple and it's
SysOps. We are also networked so the bases can be picked up in other
cities. I guess there will always be hackers if for no reason just to
hack the network. My logs go back up to 4 days and I do have a list of
user names, city and phone number and I'm sure that most are real.

As I have said if there is a request I will look at it and go from
there. I have only been asked twice since 1987 and in both case I gave
them what was needed and nothing further was heard.  By the way in
both those cases the users had only called once and it was weeks
before I was asked. One in a feedback to me had said he was Hacking
Sprint. I gave that data to them and never heard nor cared what
happened. Should problems crop up I will just take the system down
rather then deal with them.

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

Date: Tue, 06 Apr 93 20:21:52 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?


Regarding the recent exchange between Pat and John Higdon, I think
that both make some valid points.  The problem here is that you are
dealing in the field of human relations, and unfortunately, there are
no hard and fast rules that work 100% of the time.  I recall royally
chewing out a State Police officer when I was about 19 for stopping me
while walking in my own neighborhood at 12:30 in the afternoon ... and
this was an area with virtually no crime problem (it turned out that
the officer had recently moved into the neighborhood and was
suspicious of anyone walking near his home, but I didn't actually go
past his house, and I was about a block away from his home when he
stopped me).

I told him in no uncertain terms that he had no business stopping me
under the circumstances and threatened to call his supervisor and
report him, and believe it or not, he just sort of hung his head.  I
can think of circumstances where my brashness might have had a very
different result.  I sort of gather that you wouldn't dare talk to an
officer like that in Chicago, no matter how right you were, but I
lived in a small town where the cops were expected to act like decent
human beings toward honest citizens.

Here you have a case where John says he would not cooperate with AT&T
and/or the police if they wanted to see his caller logs.  The best way
to handle that would depend on the circumstances.  I do know that if it
were me and I were approached with anything other than extreme
politeness, I would decline to cooperate (on the other hand, if the
investigators were polite, I can think of no reason I would not
cooperate, but that would be my personal choice).  In addition, John
has what I would think is a good reason: AT&T refused to help him when
he was having problems and needed their help.  Turnabout is fair play,
after all.

What I sense in Pat's message is a deep paranoia that the police MIGHT
in turn do something that's probably questionably illegal, like
seizing equipment.  To some extent, it's not entirely a groundless
fear, because such things have happened.  But, it's not common for the
police to go hog wild like that, and when it does happen it often
makes headlines.  That wouldn't be the case if we expected that sort
of behaviour from the police; it's only because it is so unusual that
we hear about it when it happens.  I'm sure it doesn't make headlines
in China when someone who opposes the government is taken away in the
night on trumped-up charges, because that's the norm there.  But it
would be front page news if it happened here, because we still believe
that we have certain inalienable rights.  Confiscated BBS's make news
here because we still consider that to be outrageous behavior by the
police.  Yes, it could happen to you, but then you could get struck by
lightning too.  Pat, do you religiously avoid going outdoors during
thunderstorms?

It bothers me that Pat feels that we should have to give up our rights
in order to prove our innocence, when in fact we are doing nothing
wrong.  If enough people take this attitude, we are well on our way to
a police state.

I fully understand Pat's point about catching more flies with honey
than with vinegar (one of those strange old sayings ... who wants a
sticky mess of flies anyway?)  :-) but our Constitution protects those
who have bad attitudes as well as those with good ones.  Having a bad
attitude is not a crime, and anyone who is doing nothing illegal
should not have to give up their basic rights.

My attitude is, and has always been, that if you talk nice to me I'll
try to cooperate fully with you.  Threaten me just once, and depending
on my mood you just may hit a brick wall more impenetrable than the
one at Fort Knox, especially if I know with certainty that I'm in the
right.

I can especially sympathize with anyone who does not want to cooperate
with a long distance carrier who has in the past stonewalled them
about bogus toll charges on their bill ... I've had it happen to me
and have experienced the frustration of dealing with some business
office droid who INSISTS that the calls HAD to have been made from my
phone (right up to the moment I said that I would contact the Public
Service Commission and let THEM investigate the matter, upon which
said droid did further checking and discovered that the calls in
question had been made from an eight party line, while my service was
private).  Long distance carriers and telephone companies do not have
any inherent right to insist that folks cooperate with them in their
investigations (though in the past they have had the attitude that
they do, which is doubtless one reason some folks applauded the
breakup of the Bell System).

I think both of Pat and John should consider that your response in a
situation like this might very much depend on the circumstances at the
time, and the manner in which you are approached.  But I do not think
that it is wrong for John to refuse to kowtow to the authorities if
he's not doing anything illegal, any more than it's inherently wrong
for Pat to freely release certain information even though he may not
be legally compelled to do so.  It's a judgement call in both cases.


Jack Decker | Internet: [e-mail]
Fidonet: 1:154/8 or [e-mail]
Note: Mail to the Fidonet address has been known to bounce. :-(


[Moderator's Note: With these three late-arriving articles, we'll now
close the thread here and let other groups pick it up if desired.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Interesting Comparison
Date: Tue,  6 Apr 93 16:14:39 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


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

> Our cable company (Cable TV Montgomery, Montgomery County, MD) changed
> channel assignments a year or two ago when they implemented tiered
> pricing.  All went smoothly, although the new numbering took quite a
> bit of getting used to.  But what puzzles me is why they persist in
> having different numbering when you use a converter box and when you
> use a cable-ready set?  It's especially annoying when you have some of
> each.  Is it just a way to encourage the use of converter boxes, or is
> there a valid technical reason for it?  I don't know anything about
> the equipment they use.  The channel frequency assignments are HRC.

This probably belongs on rec.video.cable-tv, but ...

There are no official "numbers" assigned to most cable channels that
are not used for broadcast (2-13). The only official assignments are
letters (A-Z,AA-?), made worse by things like A1 and A2 which were
added after the initial assignments and fall between some of those
channels. Cable companies and TV manufacturers had no use for the
added expense of alpha displays and consumers did not deal well with
"Tonight on J", so almost everyone now uses numbers.

The assignments are pretty consistent. A=14, B=15, C=16, ... The
problems arose from the "odd" ones, expecially A1, A2, ... These had
no obvious place to go, so are sometimes mapped to 0 and 1 (but that
limits the map to A1 and A2) because single digit channels tend to be
more popular. This is almost alway done by cable equipment since TVs
and VCRs need to handle all channels and have no financial stake in
what is watched.

Most TVs and VCR map them to high numbers (97, 98, 99), although some
put them right after the end of the standard alpha channels (starting
at about 71 or 72). With no standard it is up to each manufacturer to
decide how to do the job. As you might expect, they don't all do the
same thing.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: Interesting Comparison
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 13:32:15 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> Are you trying to tell us that completely replacing a telco switch
> with tens of thousands of subscribers, with no downtime, is a lot
> easier than a "virtual rebuild of the wiring" at the CATV center?

No, he's saying that they are two very different things.  Putting in a
new switch involves (basically, very simplified, and don't beat on me
for it) installing a NEW switch, wiring them up side-by-side, then
cutting the inputs to the old switch while enabling them on the new
switch.  The preparatory work is long and detailed but the changeover
is quick.

In the cable company case, they don't have the luxury of having a
duplicate of all the components (in this case, the modulators).  The
task is not the equivalent of installing a new switch, it's more like
reassigning the phone numbers of everyone on a step-by-step exchange.

However, this whole thing gives me the idea that maybe there is a
market for modulators that are programmable and have an Appletalk (or
similar cheap network) port ... grin.


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]
AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Wegeng)
Subject: Re: Interesting Comparison
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Xerox Corp., Henrietta, NY
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 17:25:16 GMT


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

[Description of the local tv cable tv station switching channel
assignments deleted.]

> Can you imagine what would happen if it took Pac*Bell six hours to cut
> in a new 5ESS? Or a radio station six hours to turn up a new
> transmitter?

I don't know much about these systems, but would it not be reasonable
to assume that it would cost the cable tv company more money (in
wages, if nothing else) to make a nearly instantaneous switch over?

Pac*Bell is motivated to do this quickly because the public demands
constant phone service.  A radio station is motivated to switch
transmitters quickly because it only gets advertising revenue when
it's on the air.  Can the cable tv company financially justify the
extra expense of making such a rapid switch over?


Don    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue,  6 Apr 93 11:04:06 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy
Organization: AT&T


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

> PRODIGY DID NOT STEAL ANY DATA OFF OF ANYONE'S HARD DRIVE  !!

A while back (1.5 years?) an AT&T employee found copies of proprietary
files in his/her STAGE.DAT file.  AT&T Corporate Security
investigated, and members of my organization were told not to use
Prodigy until the investigation was complete.

Security came back with the same explanation as Brett, and anounced
that they were satisfied.  Prodigy promised to clear any sectors
allocated for STAGE.DAT to avoid problems in the future.

AT&T Security takes things like this VERY seriously.  If they are
satsified with Prodigy's explanation, I don't think there is anything
to worry about.


My opinion, not AT&T's.

Ron DeBlock  [e-mail]  (that's a number 1 in rdb1, not letter l)
AT&T Bell Labs   Somerset, NJ  USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy
Date: 6 Apr 1993 02:00:26 -0400
Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI


[e-mail] (Bryan Lockwood) wrote:

> ... the Prodigy software had apparently copied random fragments of
> the contents of his hard disk to a file called STAGE.DAT, and
> appeared to be uploading this file to the Prodigy service.

This is a false rumor.  Here's why:

Due to the low bandwidth of the connection used by Prodigy (until
recently, 2400bps or less) and the large size of the graphics files
used by Prodigy, the Prodigy software caches recently-viewed graphics
and screens on the local hard disk.  The file STAGE.DAT in the main
Prodigy directory is used for this, at least on MS-DOS machines.  When
Prodigy starts up, it creates the file and "pre-extends" it by seeking
to a location at the desired new end-of-file, and then writing one
byte.  Under operating systems that have at least a modicum of
security, the OS zeros out blocks from the freelist before
reallocating them to another file.  MS-DOS does not qualify as such an
OS (or even an OS at all, but we won't get into that here), and
therefore doesn't bother to zero-fill blocks that it allocates to new
files; that includes blocks allocated for the Prodigy STAGE.DAT file.
So, when the STAGE.DAT file is created, it can contain blocks from
*deleted* files on the hard disk; that includes old versions of active
files.  Prodigy didn't bother to zero-fill the file themselves because
it can take a significant amount of time, and because they probably
didn't even notice what was in there until one of their users pointed
it out.

Prodigy has said many times that their software does *not* look at the
contents of the STAGE.DAT file, other than those contents that it
writes itself.  The fact that the STAGE.DAT file has fragments of
deleted files in it is simply an artifact of the way block allocation
is done under MS-DOS, and is not in any way intentional on Prodigy's
part.  Prodigy has offered to distribute a software patch that *does*
zero-fill the unused portion of STAGE.DAT to anyone who requests it;
by now they may have integrated it into their software as a standard
feature.  The "unnecessary" TX flickering is probably the Prodigy
software ACKing the data sent to it by the main Prodigy computer.
People who watch their modem lights religiously will probably notice
RX flickering when they're not doing anything, too; that's mostly
Prodigy automatically downloading software updates to your machine.


Marc Unangst, N8VRH   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 09:43:28 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy


I used to have P* but found it was taking up too much of my time. The
"official" explanation was a posted here -- it simply allocated space
that may have been used before without erasing it. My check at the time
showed a major problem with this explanation:

Before installing P* I had run SCAN to check the installation disks. Now
SCAN is a packed file that expands in memory. As a consequence the
virus names are not kept in clear on the disk; this only exists in memory.
When I looked at STAGE.DAT, the virus names were found in two separate
places on the disk. I was not using disk cacheing or Windows. There
never has been a good explanation for this.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #242
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11818;
          7 Apr 93 2:49 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20334
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 7 Apr 1993 00:21:39 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02318
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 7 Apr 1993 00:19:12 -0500
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 00:19:12 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #243

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 7 Apr 93 00:19:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 243

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning (Steven King)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Paul S. Sawyer)
    Re: Leukemia From LF Magnetic Fields? ([e-mail])
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Mark Brader)
    Re: Californian Calling (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Information Wanted on Sidetones (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Stupid Switch Tricks (Fred Schimmel)
    911 Service for Deadbeats (Mike Coyne)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Mike Van Pelt)
    Re: International Calling Card (John R. Levine)
    Re: Groupe Speciale Mobile (Adam Ashby)
    Re: Dialing Codes in France, UK (Matthias Hanft)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: Practice Safe Cell Phoning
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 16:16:07 GMT


[e-mail] (Rich Greenberg) publicly declared:

> Its got all sorts of novelties and gags.  The one in particular of
> interest to TELECOM Digest readers is # 5829, which is a phoney
> handheld cellphone, complete with sound effects (ringing etc).  Cost
> is $5.98 + shipping.  Can't get much safer.  :-)

Oh yeah?  What about all that nasty EM radiation from the *ringer*?
Ha, didn't think about that, did you Mr. Smarty?

Dave Leibold reported about the "Callguard" device sold to cut down on
harmful radio emissions.  Great!  I've been worried about my cellphone
igniting all that radon gas building up in my basement.  I hope this
helps ...


Steven King, Motorola Cellular  ([e-mail])

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

Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Date: 6 Apr 93 11:58:43 EDT (Tue)
From: [e-mail] (Paul S. Sawyer)


A few points concerning this:

1. Through the efforts of The Phone Company (now companies), and others
such as William Shatner, most people have been trained to call 911,
even when their area is NOT served by 911.

2. Many cities which HAD independent fire, police, or emergency alarm
systems maintained by the city were convinced by TPC to remove them.


Paul S. Sawyer    - University of New Hampshire CIS - [e-mail]
Telecommunications and Network Services             - VOX: [phone]
50 College Road                                     - FAX: [phone]
Durham, New Hampshire  03824-3523

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Leukemia From LF Magnetic Fields?
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 12:31:39 CDT

This is in reply to the article stating two studies that claimed to
show a link between Low Frequecy Magnetic Field and Cancer.  The post
was quite long and I'll not quote it here ...

While I don't claim that there is *NOT* a link between Magnetic fields
and cancer, I do not believe that a link has been conclusively shown.
Every time I turn off the light switch in my office, about 20
flourescent light bulbs go off simultaneously, yet if I told you that
one of the bulbs going out caused the other to go out, you would tell
me that I am wrong, and that the light switch is causing them all to
go out by interrupting the current.  There is a very high *CORRELATION*
between one light going out and the other going out, but there is no
*CAUSATION* between the two.

Similarly, I do not believe the studies mentioned in the above
referenced message show any causation.  One claims children exposed to
fields greater than some limit had a three times higher incidence of
leukemia.  This could mean that:

  (1) the fields caused the cancer ... OR
  (2) that poorer families tend to live near power lines, and poorer
families also have other characteristics that cause leukemia ... OR
  (3) Lots of other things ...

Also, no mention is made as to how the threshold level was picked.  I
suspect it was picked to show the largest difference between cancer in
children exposed to fields below the limit and children exposed to
fields above the limit.

Another study mentioned picks a *DIFFERENT* cutoff limit and shows
that adults exposed at work to fields above that limit has a four
times increased risk of some cancers ... but again, the study does not
show that the ONLY difference between the workplaces of the
lower-field group and the higher-field group is the field strength ...
maybe the higher-field group also worked in an industry where there is
more cancer causing chemicals, or maybe they smoked more, or ...

Again, I don't claim to prove that there is NOT a causation ... I just
want to point out that the evidence that there *IS* a causation is
certainly open to question ...

Finally, a reference was made to avoiding high voltage lines ... there
is not a whole lot of correlation between the voltage on the line and
the field ...  much more important factors include current on the
line, and the configuration and type of the line (a balanced 3-phase
line has much less EM field strength that a single phase distribution
line (all other things being equal)) ...

Don't believe everything you read ... it can be shown statistically
that smoking reduces the risk of heart-attacks.  (It doesn't really
 ... but through careful manipulation of numbers you can show it).


Brett     ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 06:35:59 GMT


> The number to try is [phone].

Using Bell Canada from Toronto, I got a Bell intercept: "We're sorry,
because of technical difficulties we are unable to route your call.
416 22."  However, the accents were still interesting.  The sentence
was said with a *very faint* accent which I took to be French --
probably the speaker is a highly bilingual Quebecois.  The numeric
code was in a different voice and "22" was clearly "twenny-two".

For a considerable period which ended a few years ago, all Bell Canada
recordings that I heard were done by a single speaker, named something
like Carole Gault if I correctly remember the newspaper article about
her retirement.  Now some of them are quite poor, sounding offhand and
amateurish.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Californian Calling
Date: 6 Apr 1993 17:42:03 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> Since PacBell is not offering Caller-ID to its customers, but the
> switches on the SS7 (CCS7) network will still be passing the number
> along, has anyone figured out what would happen in the following
> scenario:

> Person in LA calls person in NYC.  The LA person has made no special
> arrangements with PacBell for privacy blocking of their number.  The
> call completes over the SS7 network.  Person in NYC has caller ID.

There have been some changes recently as far as this goes.  In the
beginning, Pacific Bell was doing what every other telco does -- they
just pass the calling number in the SS7 setup message, even though
they don't offer Caller ID themselves.  Since all three major IXC's
now have SS7 connections with Pacific Bell, it is quite likely that a
call leaving California will travel over SS7, and at least have the
capability of having the number delivered.

For the past couple of years, Pacific Bell customers have been able to
use *67 to invoke per-call blocking.  This fact has not been
advertised by Pacific Bell, since Caller ID is not offered in the
state.  So, for awhile, calls leaving California and terminating
somewhere else, where the called line has Caller ID, and there was an
end-to-end SS7 call path, would have the calling number displayed
(unless the caller used *67 of course).

Well, the California PUC was not happy about this, because they don't like
Caller ID.  Not being satisfied to just regulate in-state calls, they had
to have their way with inter-state traffic as well.  They struck a deal
with Pacific Bell, telling them that they would have to prevent the
delivery of California numbers for inter-state calls, if they wanted to
have *any* CLASS services tariffed for in-state use.  Pacific Bell
caved in on this one.  So, for a period of time, all calls leaving
California were set with blocking turned on, so they would show as
PRIVATE to their recipients.

This solution had two problems: first, if the terminating number had
'block blocking', it could not be called from any SS7-equipped
telephone in California (unless perhaps the caller used *67 to enable
per-call unblocking.  This was not likely to happen, as since Pacific
Bell does not offer Caller ID, the *67 business was not published
anywhere).  Second, the California PUC does not trust the telcos in
other states.  By their way of thinking, once the number leaves the
state, even if it has the privacy bit set, the terminating telco could
choose to ignore the bit, and pass the number along to the customer
anyway, and the PUC would not be able to control this.  Of course,
this is entirely correct -- it would be inter-state commerce, and not
only would the CPUC not have any say, it should not even concern them,
as it is not part of their charter to deal with inter-state commerce.
Also, I can't imagine any telco doing this without swift action from
the FCC coming shortly thereafter.

So, Pacific Bell implemented a third solution, which is in effect
today.  Now, all calls leaving California have the 'calling number'
field filled with all zeros.  The terminating switch, upon seeing the
zeros, treats this as 'out of area', even though there is an
end-to-end SS7 call path.  So, the recipient sees OUT OF AREA on their
display, and any 'block blocking' is not triggered.  There are some
big problems with this plan, though.  By zeroing out the calling
number, none of the CLASS features work, such as Call Return, Priority
Ringing, or even Call Trace.  Yes, you heard correctly, not even Call
Trace works!  (Makes me wonder just who's side the CPUC is on, when
not even harassing or threatening calls can be traced by the police,
all in the name of protecting the caller's privacy).  So, at least
California residents can call outside of the state, and not have to
worry about their calls being blocked.  (BTW, if they use *67 to
invoke blocking, their call arrives as OUT OF AREA PRIVATE).


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on Sidetones
Date: 6 Apr 1993 17:51:09 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> I just found an instruction manual for a Unity phone.  It mentions a
> sidetone adjustment for PBX/CO use.  Just out of curiousity, what is
> the sidetone?  Is my idea of a phone line as simple current loop
> oversimplified?

Sidetone is the 'echo' of what goes in the transmitter (microphone) that
you hear in the receiver.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Schimmel)
Subject: Re: Stupid Switch Tricks
Organization: Gandalf Data Ltd.
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 18:45:38 GMT


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

> On the second line at my parent's house, an interesting problem has
> recently started occuring on the second line.  (This is in St. Louis,
> MO (314) 355-).
[ description of frustrating phone problem deleted]

> I have considered the possibility that the wiring is the problem.  It
> is definitely in the jury-rigged category (60Hz hum is readily heard
> on the line), and maybe something in the connection is so borderline
> as to cause the switch to not always register a seizure on the line.
> Perhaps the ringing voltage 'cleans' a contact or something and fixes
> the line (remember, calling the phone fixes the problem for at least
> the rest of the day -- not just for that one call), but that doesn't
> explain the spontaneous fix that occurred on the third try.  I also do
> not think this is the problem, because all the connections are clear
> and there are no spontaneous disconnections.

Of course, this problem could be caused by anything, but wiring should
not be ruled out, especially since you mention hum. Poor splices
somewhere can oxidize. Faulty wire sheathing can leak and draw
moisture. Squirrels have been known to chew into cables. One other
possibility is an adjunct piece of equipment. My parents had a problem
once with their phones where they couldn't even get dial tone. Yet
calls to their phone would ring and ring and ring like the line was
open. My father traced the wiring in the basement til he came across
something suspicious. The water meter had a fancy new remote readout
device which the water company could poll when the line was idle. He
found that the meter had condensation on it from the cold water, which
dripped down the cable to the connecting block, and formed an ugly
grey/black substance. When he clipped the cable he got dial tone. He
promptly called the water company to fix their connection, and all was
well.

Don't know if this is your problem, but I wouldn't rule out wiring
without testing it.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: 911 Service for Deadbeats
Date: 6 Apr 1993 21:47:37 GMT
Organization: At The University Of Texas? That's a Joke.  Right?


The thread about free 911 service suggests a possible new class
"feature."  I'll call it DEBTline.  DEadbeat By Telephone.  It should
be real popular with bill collectors, parole officers, skip tracers,
bounty hunters, and similar professionals.  With this feature you can
dial or receive calls from phones that have been "disconnected" for
nonpayment for a 25 cent surcharge.  The same as picking up the pay
phone charges.  Except that they don't get to say, "don't call me;
I'll call you."

A former bill collector of my acquantaince says he was required to
call his list of deadbeats and dun them every day.  That would be a
good start toward paying the monthly fee.  If the deadbeat has lots of
bills, it could be a money maker.

I suspect it would assist the phone company greatly in bill collection
also.  Imagine how annoying it would be to have a nuisance call only
phone.  I read an article one time about a power company that replaced
deadbeat's meters with a 15 amp circuit breaker.  It was much more
effective than cutting off power as a collection device.  You cannot
do much of anything with 15 amps except lights.  It is just enough to
remind you how nice electricity really is.  Now we have a telecomm
equivalent.

Stage two of this would enable calls from teleslime as well as bill
collectors.  Truly the seventh circle of tele-hell.


Mike Coyne    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I could see that as a very interesting feature on
incoming calls to a phone on credit disconnect. But as far as dialing
out for a premium goes, how would you get the person to pay it when
they have thus far not paid the rest of their bill?  This would be a
good service for calls *to* the person, however.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 00:24:47 GMT


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

> Many years ago I was told that you could dial POPCORN in most any area
> codes and get the time.

> [Moderator's Note: 767-2676?  Never heard of it.

I had never heard of it until moving to the San Francisco Bay Area.
POPCORN (or 767-anything) gives you the time in area codes 408, 415,
and 510 at least.  I don't know if this is all-California or not; I
know it does not work in a lot of the rest of the country.

Years ago, I dialed it and tuned my radio to WWV at the same time, and
POPCORN was accurate to as close as I could detect by ear.


Mike Van Pelt  [e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: International Calling Card
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 6 Apr 93 10:55:06 EDT (Tue)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> Both services are charged directly to your AT&T card and you AVOID
> local operators and telephone companies. These calls are MUCH cheaper
> than if you were to go through the local country telco.

Well, sometimes.  AT&T Direct is usually cheaper than going through
the local operator, but not always -- from some countries, there are
night discounts on locally billed calls but not on AT&T Direct.  The
cheapest way to call the U.S. from France, for example, is to buy a
phone card at the post office and then dial direct from a payphone at
off-peak hours.

WorldConnect (and its MCI and Sprint equivalents) are never a bargain
compared to local rates because you have to pay both for a call from
where you are to the U.S.  and from the U.S. to the destination
country.  It makes sense where the alternative is to pay a 500% hotel
surcharge on a locally billed call.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 09:25:03 +0000
From: Adam Ashby <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Groupe Speciale Mobile


"John" == John R. Covert 05-Apr-1993 2155 <John> writes:

> While GSM does stand for Groupe Speciale Mobile, the story about "a
> car driving around Paris" is rather fanciful.  In fact, it is the
> name of the international CCITT study group in Geneva which developed
> the standard.

Now, however, GSM stands for Global System for Mobile Telecommunications.

And just for laughs, I'll add this little "problem" with GSM that I
heard on the radio yesterday.

Apparently the GSM mobiles operate in the same frequency range as the
small behind (or in) the ear hearing aids.  The radio report had a
microphone set inside a shop dummy that was equipped with an aid so
that we could hear what the problem was -- not pleasant.

The GSM Mobile manufacturers have spent money to modify all the larger
hearing aids but not the small behind-the-ear ones.  They now claim to
be meeting all the various interference specs that they need to and
that it is now up to the hearing aid manufacturers to get their act
together.  However, as only about 2% of hearing aid wearers in Great
Britain actually use the bigger hearing aids, this will leave
approximately two million suffers in Britain alone.  Of course, the
chances of a hearing aid wearer actually coming into contact with a
GSM user are fairly remote, and I would have thought that there are
more hearing aid wearers than potential GSM users -- at least for the
forseeable future:-)

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthias Hanft)
Subject: Re: Dialing Codes in France, UK
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 15:32:49 +0200
Organization: LRS, University of Erlangen, Germany


Linc Madison <[e-mail]> writes:

> I have a couple of questions about dialing inland calls in France.  As
> diligent readers of this Digest are well aware, France has abolished
> "area codes" with the exception of Paris.

> In France:

> FROM      TO       Dial
> Paris     Paris    8 digits
> Lyon      Lyon     8 digits  (for "Lyon" read "any city other than Paris")
> Lyon      Paris    ???    01-XX.XX.XX.XX ?

16-1-XX.XX.XX.XX

> Paris     Lyon     ???     0-XX.XX.XX.XX ?

16-XX.XX.XX.XX

> Lyon      Calais   ???    just the eight digits, or prefixed with 0?

Just the eight digits. (There is no "0" prefix at all in France - it's
16, used as above, or 19 for international calls.)

In fact, the first two digits of the "out-of-Paris" numbers include
some kind of area code, but you have to dial these two digits even if
you dial from the same area.

BTW, all Paris numbers start with 4.


 Matt

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #243
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17989;
          7 Apr 93 5:41 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18082
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 7 Apr 1993 03:07:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13829
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 7 Apr 1993 03:06:01 -0500
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 03:06:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #244

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 7 Apr 93 03:06:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 244

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded? (Bruce J. Miller)
    MCI Ruins my Cellphone Service! (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Humorous Relay Story (misc.handicap via Ken Weaverling)
    MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls? (P. J. Holsberg)
    Moving to Same Phone Number (Arthur Rubin)
    Moderator's Response to Response to His Response to Anonymous (G. Wollman)
    Information Wanted on Plex (Alexy Chandy)
    Routing Calls via Alternate Providers (Eric Jacksch)
    "Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete"? (Jon Gauthier)
    Interesting Time Service (Doug Faunt)
    CompuServe Gateway (Linc Madison)
    NYNEX Call Delivery Update (Boston Cellular) (David E. Sheafer)
    Line Busy Out (Harold Hallikainen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bruce J. Miller)
Subject: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded?
Organization: Paramax Systems Corp, Valley Forge Labs, Paoli, PA
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 17:59:18 GMT


My wife has been trying to place a catalog order with Sears for the
past four days (since 4/1), and has gotten nothing but a busy from
their number (1-800-366-3000).  We live in suburban Philadelphia, and
I believe that calls from here are routed to North Carolina.  A call
to the local Bell of PA repair brought the response that there have
been many complaints, but that Sears 800 calls are handled by Sprint
(Sprint's customer serivice number was then furnished).

A call to Sprint brought the response that they had had lots of
complaints, checked them out, and found no problems except for an
excessive number of calls -- and to keep trying.  We have tried as
late as 1:30 AM and as early as 6:30 AM, and still been unable to get
through.  A call to a local Sears store brought about the same story
as Sprint's, with a few more details -- there is a five day sale (we
were never informed of such a sale in this area), and the 30 incoming
lines Sears has are overloaded.  We were advised to redial "every
seven seconds" until we get through.  (This can really blow away your
leisure time).

If Sears is really booking this volume of catalog orders 24 hours a
day, I'm happy for them and their shareholders.  On the other hand, I
can't seem to buy this story at face value.  Anyone out there know the
real scoop?  Is the problem nationwide or just in this area?
Inquiring minds want to know ...


[e-mail] (Bruce J. Miller)  (or [e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: I just now tried it from Chicago (2:55 AM Wednesday)
and got a busy signal.  PAT]

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

Date: 6-APR-1993 17:45:33.88
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI Ruins my Cellphone Service!


Well, OK, not exactly, but it seems that MCI has been its usual
whining self: When it found out that No-Answer-Transfer (NAT/*71)
calls which crossed LATAs were not paying MCI its full cut, MCI pushed
for a strict interpretation of the MFJ, forcing many mobile companies
to turn off the NAT feature outside their service area.

As a Metro Mobile customer who has NAT/*71 active, and who is in a
market where there is auto-call delivery but crosses a LATA, I can no
longer get NAT to work. Previously, a CT customer who went to NY,
Rhode Island, Pittsfield or Franklin County, Mass, could have *71 set
up to voicemail (a very useful service combination, I feel), and if a
call for some reason went unanswered, it would "bounce" back to
voicemail.

The auto-roaming system which Metro Mobile's EMX switches use
apparently can pass a call TO another market via MCI (or some other
IXC that the customer selects), yet can not pass it BACK to the home
switch for treatment if the customer does not answer in the remote
market. Thus, previously, the call would be sent FROM the remote
switch to the home switch WITHOUT the use of an IXC, and MCI, fearing
that it would lose too much revenue from this, (indirectly?) forced
Metro Mobile to discontinue this practice. (MM can still have the call
sent from CT to a customer in RI, and if it is not answered in RI,
have the RI switch send the call to the NAT destination at MM's
expense, but I am not sure if they are going to do this. If they do,
*71 will work in all of *MM's* properties.)

MM claims that it will be a while before this is fixed, and are
waiting for IS-41 RevA (or higher?) to be installed so that they can
get around this MFJ problem. In the meantime, then, for the second
time in a year NAT has been removed for Metro Mobile's customers who
roam, and not for any technical reason, but simply because the MFJ
allows slime like MCI to assert a claim for a meager amount of "lost
revenue" (assuming anyone selects them as an IXC) without any
consideration for the inconvenience and loss of functionality which
cellular subsribers must suffer as a result.

I envy Canada's system, where the lack of such inane MFJ restrictions
has allowed for a significantly higher degree of functionality without
the need for awkward and expensive "patches" such as IS-41RevA (at
least in terms of call delivery), and allowed full networking be a
reality while the US still has a long way to go.

On a more positive, I've been told that NYNEX/Boston now delivers
calls to NYNEX/NY. For once, it seems, the B side in the northeast is
out ahead of the A; there is no A call delivery (or even Nationlink)
between NY and Boston. NYNEX/NY customers now get call delivery from
Delaware to southern New Hampshire! Also, SNET is getting call
delivery to Albany soon, as well as Orange County/Newburg. SNET's
recent newsletter also states that by the third quarter of 1993, there
will be a national auto call delivery network of the "B" side known as
"Mobilink". I think this is the result of a CTIA effort to set up a
seamless US/Canadian network, although I'm not sure how or if it will
be implemented on the "A" side.


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

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 22:40:01 -0400
From: Ken Weaverling <[e-mail]>
Subject: Humorous Relay Story


Below is a repost of an article that originally appeared in the
misc.handicap newsgroup.  It describes some interesting twists of
Relay service. I found it amusing and educational. It is interesting
to learn that services provided for the disabled are often designed by
non-disabled persons. For example, ATM machines with Braile
instructions, but with screen prompts that are obviously impossible to
read by a person who can't see.

The article was posted by [e-mail].
She copied it from a publication that I am not familiar with, noted
below.

Source:  Vincent Holmes, District Director, Wisconsin Div of VR
         Hearing Health, The Voice on Hearing Issues, Dec/Jan '93

The magic date came.  It was August 1, 1992 in the far Northern Never,
Never lands.  A miracle of sorts was about to occur.  I approached the
telephone with heart pulsing, vein popping anticipation.  The almighty
Telephone Messiah, in the form of the Telecommunication Relay Service
(TRS) had arrived to rescue us deaf souls from a century of
telecommunication silence.

I dialed the magic number.  I got disconnected.  Dialed again and got
disconnected again.  Dialed again, where upon an anxious-to-help
Communication Assistant (CA) answered by saying, "This is the TRS, CA
Number 246XW."

Am I calling the CIA or am I trying to make a simple relay call?

The person I was calling, Dennis "The Bap" Baptiste, answered the
phone.  This is a relay call, so naturally The Bap is hearing.  He's
also from Tampa.  He hung up.  I tried again, but this time told the
CA not to go into that idiotic TRS identifier which seems to take five
FULL minutes and $3 worth of toll charges.

"Yo, Bo!  I thought youse was someone selling something, so I hung
up the damned phone.  Howzit, Bo?  Why do you sound like a woman,
Bo?  Have a sex change, Bo?"

Since all of the CA's know my nickname, I guess people reading this
can too.

The next day, I decided to call my favorite Greek restaurant, where
I've spent so much money that the manager has a table with my name
carved on it.

"This is the Grecian Gardens, and no, we don't want to buy any,"
answered whoever answered the phone.  Obviously another intelligent
being like The Bap.

"Hold on.  Let me speak with Tasso" I typed furiously.  I was merely
trying to order a Gyro Supreme.  The world has definitely gone to hell
when my cousins think I'm selling things rather than buying.

But this is all simple stuff.  Suppose you are a single deaf man
(since I am a man, I can take a man's perspective) and you are looking
to go out with the new sales director who works for the company that
rents offices in your building.  The woman's got the looks, the moves
and all the other stuff that single men dream about.

The telephone is no longer the deaf electric doughnut of the past that
limits your calls only to deaf people.  The Telephone Messiah arrived
August 1, 1992.

Fearing the humiliation that occurs from being rejected in person, you
decide to use the relay service to ask this woman out to lunch.

"Hello," says the prospective lunch date.

The CA informs you that a "(female)" is on the line.  I have no idea
why they have to identify everyone's sex, but I just think it's an
obsession in this line of work.

"Hi, my name is T. Clifford Brownhurst."  The chicks love those yuppie
names.

"Huh?" she responds.

"Well, since we see each other so often, I thought we could have a
bite at Slick's Bar-B-Q and redefine our relationship."  That's the
way a stud would put it.

The CA comes on again with information that your dream luncheon date
has hung up the phone and if you call again, she'll call the cops.
Hearing guys get away with this stuff every day.  HADN'T THE TELEPHONE
MESSIAH ARRIVED?

"She said she only date males," the CA mentioned.  You look down to
insure that you're still male, then find that the CA was a woman.  You
should have requested a male CA or at least a woman who spoke like a
man.

All sorts of things happened when the Telephone Messiah came.  Deaf
people who can speak were introduced to the long-awaited Voice Carry
Over (VCO).  The VCO is a process by which a deaf person is able to
speak into a telephone, then read the other party's responses on the
TDD screen.

The biggest problem with using the VCO, however, is finding a CA who
knows how to work one.  It's not always the CA who is at fault; the
VCO equipment supplied by the Telecommunication Relay Service parent
company is about as reliable as the Russian economy.  It's always
broken.  Well, actually, I wonder if it ever worked.

When it does work, there's no one who knows how to control it.  Using
the VCO, I tried to call another Tampa buddy, Leo, the other day:

"Whatzat you say, Bo?"

I screamed "Hello" into the phone.

Who is going to straighten things out?  Seems like people are too busy
arranging their offices for incoming plaques to pay much attention to
what's actually happening.

When they get the thing working right and stop telling us deaf folks
that they delivered the Telephone Messiah and that we ought to praise
the ground they walk on, maybe then I will start singing the gospel.

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

From: [e-mail] (P. J. Holsberg)
Subject: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls?
Organization: The College on the Other Side of U. S. 1
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 17:24:32 GMT


Is there a communications program for MS-DOS that limits the number of
digits it sends to the modem during dialing, or in some other way
prevents a user from making a toll call?

We are in the process of setting up a "modem communications" lab at
the college and have found that buying "toll access blocking" (or
whatever they call it) is pretty expensive.


Thanks,

Prof. Peter J. Holsberg      Mercer County Community College
Voice: 609-586-4800          Engineering Technology, Computers and Math
FAX: [phone]            1200 Old Trenton Road, Trenton, NJ 08690
Internet: [e-mail]       Trenton Computer Festival: April 17-18, 1993


[Moderator's Note: It is simple enough to write a little script which
does this. You simply have the user enter the number to be dialed and
then count the length of the string. More than seven places in the
string, you reject it and make the user start over. Somewhere I even
saw a little patch for Procomm you can install doing the same thing.
It checks for more than seven digits and 1 as the first digit. Seeing
those, it aborts and prints a little message, 'restricted from dialing'.
If you insert a password when you first bring up Procomm, it ignores
those restrictions and dials as requested.   PAT]

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

Date: 06 Apr 1993 11:11:26 -0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Moving to Same Phone Number


I am to be moving (about one mile) shortly, and I would like to know
what intellectual amunition I can use to get the same phone number, or
to find out if I _can_ get the same phone number.  (Not just what
marketing/service will tell me.)  I'm a PacBell area; Brea,
California.

I haven't called the PacBell yet because, among other reasons, escrow
has not actually opened.  The binder has been signed, though.


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


[Moderator's Note: If you are within the same central office, it
should be no problem at all, just ask the rep. If you are outside the
CO area serving you now, then what you want can't be done unless you
are willing to pay for 'foreign exchange' service. Check out the
houses on the block where you will be moving. Is the phone exchange
number there the same as yours? That is one easy way to tell.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Moderator's Response to Response to His Response to Anonymous
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 19:32:29 GMT


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

> Do this with all sites in the envelope.

There's only two sites in the envelope of a normal message: the
sender's and the recipients.  (If there are multiple recipients, the
envelope might -- or might not -- contain all of them, depending on
the mail transfer agent involved.)  Or, perhaps, PAT has got his
terminology wrong.  The "envelope" of a message refers to the
addresses named in the MAIL FROM and RCPT TO commands of the SMTP
session, which indicate precisely which of the (possibly numerous)
senders and recipients are being handled in this instantiation of the
message.  This is separate and distinct from any fields in the message
itself, although some mail software (notably sendmail) tries to be
helpful by writing extra headers giving this information.

> Now, first things first: *which site* gave it to my site?  I look at
> the log here at eecs.nwu.edu: who gave you <message-ID> at <time>?
> <Site> says <message-ID> at <time> came to me from <site2> as
> <message-ID>.

Ok, <site2> is now [132.198.101.151].  Oops.  This doesn't tell you
anything, because 132.198.101.151 is a terminal server.  No logs, no
tracing.

Or how about this one ... <site2> is now tsornin.emba.uvm.edu.  I'm in
a mean mood, so I simply refuse to respond to mail from PAT.  Oops.
No tracing here, either.

Or how about this one ... <site2> is now [132.198.7.101].  Oops.  This
is a PC running PC-NFS.  Dean Pinder or his secretary probably
wouldn't have the foggiest idea what to with your message, so it gets
sent to this office, and we respond that there is nothing we can do.

At this point, if you are really persistent, you look up `net 132.198'
in the WHOIS database.  Whoops, back to the same people.  OK, try `dom
uvm.edu'.  "Oh, that's an EMBA subnet, talk to <the same people>."
Or even better, "I don't know who you are, Mr. Townson, but I don't
have time for this.  If you have any further problems, send <someone
else> E-mail and he'll look into it.  Maybe."

> User A also has a .plan, let's finger him. A long, drawn out, very
> stupid .plan and look!

finger: connection timed out.

Aren't firewalls fun?

> Obviously [e-mail] can also be fake.

Especially if it's the administrators of `real.host.dom.ain' who wish
to be anonymous.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Alexy Chandy)
Subject: Information Needed About Plex
Organization: SMU - School of Engineering & Applied Science - Dallas
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 20:02:21 GMT


Hi,

Could somebody give me some information on Plex?  I think it is used
for programming switches and may resemble Pascal.


Alex

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

Subject: Routing Calls via Alternate Providers
From: [e-mail] (Eric Jacksch)
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 23:11:18 -0400


We've finally come out of the dark ages and the past few months have
seen a number of non-bell companies begin to provide long distance
services.  In order to use these services, residential customers are
provided with a local seven digit access number and a ten digit or so
PIN.  While it is simple to get the computer to dial this, it is a bit
of a nusiance for voice calls.

Does anyone know where to get a box which will route the calls?  The
company I deal with makes them availible for business customers, but
not residential.  They are connected between the phone and the line,
detect off-hook, simulate dialtone, and then when dialing is complete,
they dial local calls direct and long distance calls via the service
provider.

What are these boxes called?  Who sells them?  What do they cost?

Mail replies appreciated -- I will post a summary.


Thanks,

Eric Jacksch   [e-mail]   Data/Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Gauthier)
Subject: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1993 21:09:42 GMT


 From the April 5, 1993 issue of {PC Week}, article entitled 'Gates
pledges lowball NT costs':

" ... Gates touched on several other NT-related topics, including ...
strategies to make central telephone switches obsolete ..."

"Gates boldly predicted that NT servers running multimedia
applications over ATM WANS, PBXs, cable TV and high-speed backbones
would make central telephone switches obsolete."

Hey -- can we port NT over to the Ericsson AXE platform?

Someone get me a barf bag - and quick!!!


Jon L. Gauthier   Ericsson Network Systems, Inc
EXU/IS/TP Systems Programme     P.O. Box 833875
[phone]       Richardson, TX 75083-3875

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

Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 15:36:43 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Doug Faunt N6TQS 510-655-8604)
Subject: Interesting Time Service


In the SF Bay area (415 and 510) time service is tarditionaly been at
POP-CORN.  This turns out to be 767-xxxx.  I tend to use 767-8888.

There's an "different" time service at 510-676-1111.  It's not very
accurate, but ...

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

Date: Wed, 07 Apr 93 00:21:58 BST
From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: CompuServe Gateway


The gateway host for CompuServe is now iha.compuserve.com [149.174.
128.1], which is directly connected to the Internet.

The host they used to use was saqqara.cis.ohio-state.edu, which has
some really trippy answerback messages in its SMTP config.


Linc Madison  ==  [e-mail]   [e-mail]
59 Stourcliffe Close, London W1H 5AR  U.K., Tel. [phone]

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

From: David E. Sheafer <[e-mail]>
Subject: NYNEX Call Delivery Update (Boston Cellular)
Date: 6 Apr 93 18:42:50 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA, USA


Nynex Boston now has call delivery to Conneticut and the New York
Metro area.

They sent out a flyer this week stating that all calls will now reach
you automatically reach you should you roam in CT (including
Springfield, MA) and the New York Metro area.

I don't know what geographic area New York Metro is.

They also have eliminated the 3.00 daily fee for receiving calls in
the New York Metro area.  (It doesn't say, but I think the 3.00 charge
still applies for outgoing call).

In addition there are no daily fees for roaming in CT, and the per
minute charge is 75 cents.


David E. Sheafer
internet:  [e-mail]   or  uucp:      samsung!hubdub!nin15b0b
GEnie:     D.SHEAFER             Cleveland Freenet:    ap345

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Line Busy Out
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1993 00:30:56 GMT



     Here's a summary of an interesting item in Compliance Engineering
Magazine, Winter 1993 issue.  CE covers safety, electromagnetic
radiation and telco interconnect international regulations.  You can
request a free subscription qualification card at [phone].

     There has been a little discussion here recently on how to force
a line to busy.  According to Compliance Engineering, part 68 of the
FCC rules prohibit make-busy operation.  The only legitimate reason
for a device to go off hook is to originate or answer a call.  Some
telephone operating companies assume that a long-term busy indicates
line trouble.  These companies take the line out of service and send
repair personnel to investigate.

     Some telephone companies offer a special make-busy jack that
provides an additional contact pair.  This pair signals the telephone
company that the line was busy for a good reason.  Few telcos made the
service available.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #244
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15556;
          7 Apr 93 18:56 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10318
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:10:11 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18859
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:09:40 -0500
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:09:40 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #245


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 7 Apr 93 16:09:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 245

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine (Robert J. Woodhead)
    Re: Connecting Work to Home (Wil Dixon)
    Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work (Ameritech's FAX Motel) (Derek Andrew)
    Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks (Eric Berggren)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Marc Blackwood)
    Re: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Rob Knauerhase)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Eric Weaver)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Richard Cox)
    Re: Dialing Codes in France (Jean-Bernard Condat)
    Re: Phonejak Transmission System (Randy Gellens)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Mark Brader)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Roy M. Silvernail)
    Answering Machine/Voice Mailbox With a Sound Card (Jilles Groenendijk)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: Pretty Amazing New Answering Machine
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 13:38:43 GMT


[e-mail] (David H. Close) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: I'd be interested in knowing how Ameritech (for
> example) operates its 'Fax Mailbox' service. Like a voicemail service,
> it stores a seemingly infinite number of fax messages for people who
> subscribe to the service and pick up their faxes on the fly, from the
> public machine in the hotel lobby, etc. It must take a lot of storage
> space. I subscribe to the 'Overflow Mailbox' part. My fax line has
> 'forward on busy/no answer' to the mailbox, then Ameritech starts
> trying to pass the message to me and keeps trying until the line is
> open or answered.   PAT]

Actually, it's not that much space, much less space than for a voice-
mail message of the same duration.  Fax is (usually) 9600 baud, so a
page, at maybe 30 seconds, can be stored in about 40k.  A 400meg disc
would thus store about 10,000 pages, probably enough capacity for all
the pending faxes in Chicago.  Cheap, and more than fast enough to
handle fifty or so simultaneous calls (more with a few meg of ram as a
buffer).

And, although fax is compressed already, you could probably do some
extra compression if you needed to.


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]
AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wil Dixon)
Subject: Re: Connecting Work to Home
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 14:41:50 GMT


We have several ISDN applications running, off campus sites to campus,
local elementary and high schools to campus, and homes to campus.

I am using ISDN from my home to campus with various degrees of success.
The link is using Digiboard's IMAC as a 'bridge' to campus.  I am able
to use any of the three pc's on my Lantastic network to access the
link and campus/internet services.

I have found that ipx (Novell) is doggy, real doggy.  X windows, I use
Hummingbird's eXceed, is also doggy.  Netmanage's Chameleon is used for
telnet, tn3270, pop mail client, and ftp.  I get decent through put.

We are looking at some of the newer ISDN devices that offer compression.
With these the through put should improve and potentially add some
justification to ISDN (it has been hard for us to justify the 64k of
ISDN against v.32 with compression).

The major problem we are having with ISDN is the tariffs in our area.
The lines here are billed in pieces; basic line, voice channel, swithced
data, b channel packet, d channel packet, repeater ( I have 3 at something
like $27.00 per month!) and usage (3.5 cents for the first minute, 2 cents
per minute thereafter).  The installations charges range from under a
hundred bucks to over a thousand.  Very difficult to predict, IBT has
not been able to give us any guide lines on this either.

Terminal equipment is expensive, IMACs are $2100.00 each -- two
required, NT1s are about $300.00 -- two required.  There are some less
costly items, may not be as feature rich as the Digiboard.  Then the
Digiboard has its problems, I have the idle timer set at 45 seconds
otherwise RIP broadcasts will keep the connection alive.  If you
choose to use manual setup and tear down a terminal of some fashion
needs to be connected to the control port on the Digiboard.  I ended
up buying an exotic i/o card with four ports that can be programmed to
a variety of interrupts.  That enabled me to use my mouse, my v.32
modem and attach to the control port.

ISDN works, it is available, it is not everywhere, and it is costly.


Wil    217-244-1321     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Derek Andrew,,,)
Subject: Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work (Ameritech's FAX motel)
Date: 7 Apr 1993 02:21:50 GMT
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I can see how the Ameritech FAX mailbox service can receive FAXes, but
how does one get the FAXes out?


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.


[Moderator's Note: In the case of 'overflow mailbox' you don't get the
Fax out; it keeps testing your (Fax) line, and when it finds it open
for calls, it tries to call and deliver it. In the case of a regular
Fax mailbox, you call from a Fax machine with a phone attached and
listen to the voice prompts.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (FurryLogic)
Subject: Re: Cap'n Crunch Speaks
Date: 7 Apr 1993 02:43:29 GMT


[e-mail] (Chris Yoder) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
> Draper) writes:  (text omitted here)

> Hah!!  [e-mail] has never logged in, therefore: He
> probably did not write this article.

> Nice joke!

> Other than that, there was mostly truth in the article.

> [Moderator's Note: Good point. My investigation of your claim shows as
> follows:

>> delta-telecom > finger [e-mail]

>> [netcom.com]
>> Login name: crunch               In real life: John Draper
>> Directory: /u4/crunch                   Shell: /bin/ksh
>> Never logged in.
>> New mail received Sun Apr  4 22:03:10 1993;
>>   unread since Sun Apr  4 19:51:58 1993
>> No Plan.

> We see that mail was 'unread since Sun Apr 4 19:51:58 1993'. Since
> mail before that has been read, this suggests to me mail is either
> being forwarded or perhaps he is su'ing to this account from some
> other account. Maybe if we ask, he'll confirm or deny.   PAT]

  Knowing netcom.com, probably the average hacker (I mean cracker!
Don't shoot!). They often nuke their login entries from utmp, wtmp,
and lastlog using a Q&D program (usu Zap2).


Eric Berggren    Portland State University   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Blackwood)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Date: 7 Apr 1993 01:46:02 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


Radio Shack makes a tone dialer that can be modified easily.
Replacing the crystal inside to make the device run faster yield the
correct coin signaling tone.  The tone requirements are:

5 - quarter
3 - dime
1 - nickel

This is called a "red box".  I saw one demonstrated recently.
Interesting stuff.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1993 05:51:55 GMT


    I'm generally not in favor of messing with the clock.  If we
want to go to work an hour earlier in the summer, we can do that
without messing with the rotation of the earth.  I did hear, however,
a clever response to an argument against using DST.  Apparently
farmers said adopting DST got the cows upset.  The response was,
"Don't tell them."


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: Rob Knauerhase <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 0:33:48 CDT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Illinois @ Urbana


In <[e-mail]>, Mike Olson <[e-mail].
EDU> writes:

> In fact, POP-XXXX gets you time-of-day in 510 for all XXXX.  One of
> the few joys in subscribing to Pac*Bell is in thinking up good endings
> for phrases beginning with POP whenever my watch stops.

Growing up in Columbus, I always learned that the Time and Temperature
service was at 281-wxyz, where any four digits sufficed.  It was
published, however, as 281-8211.  When Ohio Bell got out of the
business, the service was available _only_ at 281-8211.  To my
knowledge, there are no other numbers in the 281 exchange.

Does anyone know the reason for dedicating a whole exchange for
Time/Temp, or know why Columbus ended up with 281 rather than 767
(POP) as others have mentioned?


Rob Knauerhase, University of Illinois @ Urbana, Dept. of Computer Science


[Moderator's Note: Why did anyplace have any exchange for this other
than the most logical one which we used here in Chicago 'WEATHER'. I
think London used WEATHER for a long time also, maybe they still do.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1993 06:01:34 GMT


    I also learned POPCORN as a kid, but in general found that
767-xxxx where xxxx is anything you want worked.  Here in 805-land,
767 is still unassigned (766 gets you Cuyama, 768 gets you Taft), so
it may still work.  Since it's approaching midnight here, I probably
otta not start dialing random phone numbers to see who answers ...

    I also remember the weather line in the SF bay area when I was
in high school.  I seem to remember there being a PacBell strike, so
we got different people doing the weather on the phone.  One guy ended
the weather by saying "peace".  That caused quite a stir.  Peace was
not very popular then (late 60's).

    Checking the white pages in my PacBell book (in the business
listing section), I find Time Announcement Service -- Pacific Bell 767
8900.  Under Weather is Weather Hotline, a free ad supported service
run by a local radio station.


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] (Eric Weaver)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Organization: SONY Advanced Video Technology Center San Jose, CA USA
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 17:38:45 GMT


767-anything is the standard "time" number in every Pac*Hell office in
Northern California that has the facilities to support it (i.e.
excluding small sxs systems, if any remain).  This from a pretty
extensive survey in my youth ...

Thanks, John, for the bit about the machine being in Palo Alto!  When
I lived in Redding, it definitely sounded "long distance" but I always
wondered whence it came.  I expect that in many outlying places, they
still use the dedicated-line-and-distribution-amp method, at least on
a regional basis.


Eric Weaver  Sony AVTC  677 River Oaks Pkwy, MS 35  SJ CA 95134  408 944-4904
& Chief Engineer, KFJC 89.7 Foothill College, Los Altos Hills CA 94022

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

Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 12:09 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch


[e-mail] (Mike Whitaker) said:

>>  British Telecom speaking clock (dial 8081 from here) does this:
>>  "At the third stroke, the time, sponsored by Accurist, will be..."

At least that is a "local" call (for most (but not all) people in the
UK.  Fortunately Mercury (BT's competitor) will tell you the time on
123 for the same price -- but without the commercial !


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail] - PGP2.2 public key available on request

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 07 Apr 93 23:59:59 GMT
Subject: Re: Dialing Codes in France


In article <[e-mail]>, Matthias Hanft <mhanft@
lrs.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de> writes:

> BTW, all Paris numbers start with 4.

Wrong!  Since Dec. 15, 1992, a lot of new Paris phone numbers will be
open with ZA=15, starting with 5 (look at [e-mail]
for my complete explanation of this French telecommunications
abbreviations).

Dec 26, 1992, a big reunion of all telecommunications manufacturers
working in France (Alcatel, Matra, Northern Telecom, etc.) with France
Telecom had plan all the future numbering problems for 1993. The
summary of this reunion will be soon available.


Bonne journee :-)

Jean-Bernard Condat
Chaos Computer Club France [CCCF]    B.P. 8005
E-Mail: [e-mail]         69351 Lyon Cedex 08, France
Phone:  [phone]               Fax:  [phone]

Editor of  _Chaos Digest_            French computer security e-journal
Available on request at:             [e-mail]
or by:      ftp.eff.org,  in /pub/cud/chaos/chaos.1-xx   (xx=issue nbr)

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 07 APR 93 03:52
Subject: Re: Phonejak Transmission System


A while back there was some discussion of the Phonejak system, with an
anecdote about one family buying one, and everyone in the neighborhood
enjoying use of their phone :-)

I happened to see an ad for such a system the other day, and because
of the discussion here, read it to see if they indicated any range or
privacy features.  The best I could come up with was the phrase "...
Because it terminates at your electrical meter, any outlet in your
house can use the system, even if it is on a different circuit [as the
master]."


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] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 06:35:59 GMT


> The number to try is [phone].


Using Bell Canada from Toronto, I got a Bell intercept: "We're sorry,
because of technical difficulties we are unable to route your call.
416 22."  However, the accents were still interesting.  The sentence
was said with a *very faint* accent which I took to be French --
probably the speaker is a highly bilingual Quebecois.  The numeric
code was in a different voice and "22" was clearly "twenny-two".

For a considerable period which ended a few years ago, all Bell Canada
recordings that I heard were done by a single speaker, named something
like Carole Gault if I correctly remember the newspaper article about
her retirement.  Now some of them are quite poor, sounding offhand and
amateurish.


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

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

Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
From: [e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 00:10:08 CST
Organization: The Villa's most exclusive annex


In comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] writes:

> On a call to Japan I got a very interesting recording when dialing a
> wrong number.  I thought I'd share this recording for those of you
> interested.

That's a very neat recording.  What amazed me was the quality!  It
sounded better than some calls made just across town.


Roy M. Silvernail |+|  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jilles Groenendijk)
Subject: Answering Machine/Voice Mailbox With a Soundcard
Organization: Nedlloyd Computer Services
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 07:59:54 GMT


Facts (almost):

 - everybody has a (sort of) modem/fax on his PC.
 - everybody in this group has a sound-card.
 - everybody has/or like to have a answering machine.

I was working on some sort of Voicemail facility (cheap) together with
Johannes Kiehl (Trier). This piece of equipment had to do the
following:

 - Work as a voice-mailbox, just the same way as banks, erotic lines
do. "Press 1 if you want..."

 - Work as a answering machine. "bla bla bla, leave you name after the
beep ..."

- Work as a line selector "Press 1. for voice 2. for fax 3 for modem ..."

Johannes worked on the DTMF recognition, I worked on the hardware. In
a test enviroment everything worked just fine, But everything had to
be tied up together. And since this was just some spare-time project,
We let it rest for a while ...

Than all of a certain, in a German magazine c't ("Magazin fuer
Computertechnik")there was a project called MacAnswer which did
exactly what we wanted but for the Macintosh. It came with
hardware-scheme's and FFT sources in Assembler & 'C'.

My idea is to put the scheme into OrCad or UltiBOARD and convert it to
a PC-Based print. And use Soundcard and Serial port instead of
mac-port. But my problem is I don't have OrCad or UltiBoard. (Is there
someone who can help me, do it or supply the software)

Any ideas, comments are more than welcome ...


Regards,

Jilles Groenendijk

[e-mail]     Nedlloyd Computer Services
P.O. Box 2454   3000 CL Rotterdam (The Netherlands)  +31 10 - 4007310

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #245
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15867;
          7 Apr 93 19:07 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11567
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:26:05 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31860
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:25:16 -0500
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:25:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #247


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 7 Apr 93 16:25:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 247

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Pacific Bell to Build California Broadband Super Highway (Mark Boolootian)
    Need Help With CRC Algorithms (Stephen Friedl)
    Modem Recommendations Sought (John Slater)
    NY Telecom Conference - June 16 and 17 (Peter Bachman)
    One-Time Unblocking Code (was Californian Calling) (Bob Clements)
    Toll Fraud Information Request (Sean Malloy)
    Can I Get a Modem Jack For My NORSTAR? (Jason Scott)
    NPA-NXX by County Database (Michael R. Kenny)
    Research Information Needed on Alternate Routing (Fan Lee)
    Re: Information Needed About Plex (Michael Salmon)
    Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded? (Zealand R. Hatch)
    Re: Line Busy Out (John Higdon)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Phydeaux)
    Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!? (John R. Grout)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Phydeaux)
    Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls? (Ron Dippold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: Pacific Bell to Build California Boradband Super Highway
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 12:04:53 -0700 (PDT)


 Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 11:22:03 -0700
 From: [e-mail] (Geoff Goodfellow)

SAN FRANCISCO (APRIL 7) BUSINESS WIRE - Pacific Bell's goal is to have
a fully capable communications super highway available to nearly half
of all Californians within the next decade, and to all California
homes by 2015.

The broadband network will transport voice, interactive video and data
services, said Pacific Bell President Phil Quigley, during a speech at
TEXPO 93, the company's annual telecommunications exposition.

The company expects to have several trials up and running within the
next 18 months which test the demand for such services as video on
demand, video telephony, video games, home shopping and
tele-education.

By the end of next year, Pacific Bell expects to: -- Begin building a
broadband network in several new residential developments; --
Collaborate with at least one cable industry partner in providing
broadband services; -- Finalize plans for bringing broadband
capabilities to to half our customers within the next decade; and
Select between fiber-to-the curb and fiber-coax networks, based on
laboratory and field tests of telephony over coaxial cable.

"By 1997, California's infrastructure will be second-to-none when we
complete our modernization to an all digital network," said Quigley.
"This will position us for a broadband future where customers have
access to an unlimited array of healthcare, education, entertainment,
social service, business enhancement, government and consumer services
and information."

Potential broadband applications include: -- Work-at-Home -- Where
workers use communications technologies to interact with co-workers
and clients, thereby decreasing commute traffic and pollution. --
Virtual House Calls -- Where doctors interact with patients and
conduct home diagnostic tests communicated immediately with video
links. -- Tele-education -- Where students and lifelong learners gain
access to interactive video libraries, collaborate using groupware and
multimedia teleconferencing to link with students and schools around
the world, and participate in a variety of geographically dispersed
classes through distance learning. -- Home Shopping -- Where consumers
control what merchandise they electronically view, then send orders
directly back to vendors via the network. -- Electronic Citizenship --
Where consumers participate in the electronic process through
electronic petitions and town meetings, and have increased access to
more detailed information about issues and candidates, as well as a
rich variety of governmental information. -- Interactive News -- Where
viewers focus in on the stories of particular interest to them, and
are able to get expanded information and visuals that don't ordinarily
fit into traditional news time slots.

While Pacific Bell is committed to bringing a broadband super highway
to California, the company believes a collaborative approach will
allow that state to reap the economic and social benefits of an
advanced communications infrastructure faster and at less cost.

"By this time next year, we'll have talked to most of the cable
companies in our territory to determine their level of interest in
cooperative ventures," said Quigley.  "In some areas, perhaps no
partnership will be possible.  In such cases, we'll probably ally with
others, and offer customers an alternative service."

The company will also pursue creative alliances with information
providers and high tech businesses interested in pursuing a
communications superhighway.

Pacific Bell recently announced the California Research and Education
Network (CalREN), a project aimed at speeding the development of
broadband applications.  CalREN will be offered on a pro bono basis
for two years to university campuses, research laboratories and
hospitals, and to high tech companies that are willing, also on a pro
bono basis, to put their hardware and software on it for applications
development.

With CalREN, the company is taking a major first step to ensure that
broadband technology will be practical from the first day customers
get access to it.

"We're setting a stake in the ground for achieving a broadband network
to every business and home in California by 2015 because we believe
it's important for the state's economy and quality of life, " said
Quigley.  "We urge policymakers, including the state legislature, the
governor's office, and the Clinton/Gore administration, to continue
placing a high priority on communications infrastructure, and to
encourage increased investment," said Quigley.

Pacific Bell is a subsidiary of Pacific Telesis Group, a worldwide
diversified telecommunications corporation based in San Francisco.


CONTACT:  Pacific Bell; Linda Healey, 415/542-4719

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Friedl)
Subject: Need Help With CRC Algorithms
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 93 22:55:01 PDT


Hi folks,

     I hope I can enlist the advice from the net.at.large on this.  A
customer is using the 16-bit CCITT CRC (with the polynomial of x^16 +
x^12 + x^5 + x^0) but is unsure of a key property of this algorithm.
We need one where the sender runs <n> bytes through the CRC algorithm
yielding a two-byte CRC that is sent to the other end.  The reciever
runs <n+2> bytes through the algorithm that yields zero if all is
well.  We thought that CCITT CRC had this property but have not
observed this.

     We would love to find out if we are out of our minds or whether
this algorithm should work this way.  We've seen the standard CRC
tables from the net (from the zmodem package) and have not been able
to learn anything.

     Pointers to good descriptions of these algorithms or C could
would be really welcome.  I am particularly interested (for my own
edification) in a non-mathematical background on redundancy checks.


     Thanks much,

Stephen J Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA |     [phone]
3B2-kind-of-guy  | I speak for me ONLY |   KA8CMY   | uunet!mtndew!friedl

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

Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 11:44:17 BST
From: [e-mail] (John Slater - Sun UK - City of London SE)
Subject: Modem Recommendations Sought


I'll be visiting the US in May, and I'm thinking of buying a modem by
mail while I'm there (they're cheaper over there, and it's less hassle
than trying to mail-order across the Atlantic).

I'd like to order the catalog in advance so that I can order the modem
as soon as I arrive in the US. Phone numbers of suitable catalog
companies would be very useful to me. 800 numbers will be fine as I
can get my relatives to make the calls for me. POTS numbers are OK too
of course -- I can dial those from the UK.

Modem recommendations are welcome too. My budget is up to $200 (less
if possible).  The faster the better -- I've looked at the SupraModem
2400 Plus which does 2400 baud with V42bis and MNP-5 for about 130
pounds ($190) -- any comments on this or similar models? What does it
cost in the US?  How much are 9600 baud devices these days? BTW it
must be an external device, not a PC card.

Fax capability would be nice, but is not essential.


Thanks in advance,

John

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

From: [e-mail] (peter bachman)
Subject: NY Telecom Conference -  June 16 and 17
Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 14:32:20 GMT


For information contact:

Empire State Conference Group
Karen A. Cunningham, Managing Director
100 State St.  Suite 920
Albany, NY 12207    518-465-5502

This is the Governor's Telecommunications Conference that will be held
at the Empire State Plaza, Convention Center in Albany NY, Sponsored
by the Telecommunications Exchange.

Usual disclaimers, PB

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

Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 10:38:06 EDT
From: Bob Clements <[e-mail]>
Subject: One-Time Unblocking Code (was Californian Calling)


In an article on PacBell's CLID implementation, [e-mail] mentions:

> [...] unless perhaps the caller used *67 to enable per-call
> unblocking. [...]

This reminds me to ask something about the Boston area CLASS/CLID
feature.

I seem to recall reading here in the Digest that when the
Massachusetts DPU held hearings on allowing CLASS/CLID, the argument
was made AND ACCEPTED BY THE DPU that the per-call unblock code should
be different from the per-call block code (*67).  This so that you
could always enter *67 to block without worrying whether the
particular line might be blocked by default, causing you to
unintentionally unblock a call.  (And of course the inverse to
unblock.)

I believe the report was that NET would be required to use a different
code if CLID was tariffed.  There was a long sub-thread here on
"toggles as a lousy interface design".

Anyhow, I never heard any more about this.  But CLID is now
implemented and offered in parts of the Boston Metro area (not in my
part, though).  I wondered whether any Digest reader has the service
in this area and whether *67 as a toggle is used or whether there are
two different codes for block and unblock.  For that matter, does any
telco elsewhere in the country implement separate codes?


Bob Clements, K1BC, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Sean Malloy)
Subject: Toll Fraud Information Request
Date: 7 Apr 1993 12:55:25 -0500
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX


I'm an undergraduate telecom student doing a paper on toll fraud and
am having some difficulty in finding recent sources.  Unfortunately,
_Toll Fraud and Teleabuse_ is a bit out of my price range, and no
library within a day's drive seems to have a copy, so I'm limited to
interviews and journal articles.

I would appreciate any information that can be passed on to me, either
suggestions for articles, or personal experiences in this area. (For
personal experiences, information such as how the system was
compromised, how it was detected, and how you managed to secure the
system would be most helpful.)

I am most interested in current methods of toll fraud (DISA abuse,
entry through maint. ports, voice mail entry) rather than 'historical'
methods such as boxing, demon-dialing IXC's for valid codes, etc.

Any help would be appreciated.  Please send email to [e-mail] or
to the originating address of this article.


Thanks,

Sean C. Malloy  -  Texas A&M University  -  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jason Scott)
Subject: Can I Get a Modem Jack For My NORSTAR?
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:10:32 GMT


I have a Norstar in my office. My modem won't work in the jack.  Can I
get a splitter, or something to allow my modem to work on it?


[e-mail] (Jason Scott)
Western Business School  --  London, Ontario

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

From: [e-mail] (michael r..kenny)
Subject: NPA-NXX by County Database
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:07:09 GMT


Does anyone know of a database commercial or other that has the
NPA-NXX's that are within a county?


Thanks,

Mike Kenny, [e-mail]   708-697-2551

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

From: [e-mail] (Fan Lee)
Subject: Research Information Needed on Alternate Routing
Date: 7 Apr 1993 06:49:10 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle


I am currently doing a research project about computer network
routing.  One problem which seems very interesting to me is how to
find alternative paths.  Can someone tell me what is currently being
done?  That is, if the least cost path is congested, how people decide
which path is a "good" alternative path.

I would appreciate if someone can give me pointers to key research
papers in alternate routing problems.


Thanks.

Frank

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Salmon)
Subject: Re: Information Needed About Plex
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael Salmon)
Organization: Ericsson Telecom AB
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 09:33:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alexy
Chandy) writes:

> Could somebody give me some information on Plex?  I think it is used
> for programming switches and may resemble Pascal.

PLEX stands for Programming Language for EXchanges, it is the
programming language of AXE-10. It was modeled on PL/1 originally but
has developed over the years into a completely independant language. A
recent development called High Level Plex (HLPlex) is based upon more
modern languages, primarily Ada but also EriPascal and Erlang, the
former Pascal modified for real time and the later an entirely new
functional language developed for programming exchanges (switches).


Michael Salmon

#include <standard.disclaimer>  Ericsson Telecom AB   Stockholm

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

From: [e-mail] (Zealand R. Hatch)
Subject: Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded?
Date: 7 Apr 93 18:30:23 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA


My wife was able to get through Monday, She said that she listened to
the music for over an hour before talking to an order taker.  They are
having a sale, 30 percent off every thing in the catalog.


Zealand Hatch       - 408 746-8720 -      {where_ever}!amdahl!zrh
Amdahl Corporation                    -or-  [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 11:01 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Line Busy Out


[e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> The only legitimate reason for a device to go off hook is to
> originate or answer a call.  Some telephone operating companies assume
> that a long-term busy indicates line trouble.

And then maybe not. I frequently have hunt groups in which I do not
need one or more lines operating. Over the past decades, and even to
this day the method of choice is to punch a short down on the block
(and if the lines are ground start, ground the shorting wire). No one,
ever, at any time, in hundreds of situations such as this has ever
said a word at Pac*Bell.

Oh, and what happens after the short is removed after being in place
after a couple of years? The line instantly starts working again. I
think much too much fuss is being made about this. My experience would
indicate that if you want to busy out a line -- short it out. When you
are through, take the short off. Pretty easy, eh?

If your telco does not like it, it will tell you. Otherwise, do not
worry about it.

By the way you, as an end user, are not bound by, or even need to read
Part 68.


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

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

Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 11:38:56 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives


[e-mail] (Paul S. Sawyer) writes:

> A few points concerning this:

> 1. Through the efforts of The Phone Company (now companies), and others
> such as William Shatner, most people have been trained to call 911,
> even when their area is NOT served by 911.

I recall cases where children have tried to call 911 but could not
because they could not find the 'eleven' button on the phone ...
someone had taught them to dial "nine-eleven."  I cringe when I hear
people refer to it as that, yet I hear TV 'reporters' doing it all the
time.

<sigh>

reb
-- *-=#= 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

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Grout)
Subject: Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 18:41:40 GMT


[e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl) writes:

> The states vary on this.  Some say it is illegal (I seem to recall
> that SNET, the Connecticut telco, enjoys a monopoly in-state) while
> others says it's okay if you have a tariff, and others (probably
> rate-cap states) probably explicitly don't regulate it.

This would be possible for _most_ of Connecticut if the large portion
of Connecticut served by SNET is in one LATA (which I believe ... but
don't know for sure) ... but it _isn't_ possible for _all_ of
Connecticut because portions of Greenwich are served by New York
Telephone and are in the New York City LATA.  The FCC wouldn't allow
Connecticut (or any other state) to grant a company a monopoly on
intra-state, inter-LATA calls.

Of course, the exciting prospect of handling calls for not too many
thousands of Greenwich customers to and from the rest of Connecticut
may not be much reason for anyone but AT&T to file intra-state LD
tariffs ... I'm sure the equipment is there already (of course, on the
Greenwich end, it would be across the border in NY ... which shouldn't
make any legal difference) ... but the regulatory paperwork involved
might not be worth it for the relatively small number of calls most LD
companies could expect to carry.

I am curious about how many LD companies provide service between most
of Connecticut and the NYC LATA ... both the portion of it in
Greenwich and the rest of it in New York State.  New Jersey Bell is
allowed to provide limited competitive inter-LATA toll service to the
New York City and Philadelphia LATA's ... is SNET allowed to do
something similar?


John R. Grout    INTERNET:  [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 11:45:20 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept


I got a strange intercept when I tried [phone].  There was
music in the background and the message said "This is the KDD
International telephone office in Japan.  The number you have dialed
is not in service.  Please check the number and dial again. This is a
recording."  It's followed by (presumably) the same message in
Japanese.  Then the music fades out, there's a brief pause and the
whole thing starts again.

I tried again and got "Your International call can not be completed as
dialed.  Please call the AT&T operator if you need assistance."


reb
-- *-=#= 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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)
Subject: Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls?
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 19:18:51 GMT


[e-mail] (P. J. Holsberg) writes:

> Is there a communications program for MS-DOS that limits the number of
> digits it sends to the modem during dialing, or in some other way
> prevents a user from making a toll call?
> We are in the process of setting up a "modem communications" lab at

There are lots of ways to fake this ... For example, using scripts,
using Procomm Plus with the local dial only patch.

However, all terminal programs that I know of will let you talk
directly to the modem when you're not on line (just try typing "ATZ"
and see if you get back an "OK" or "0").  Unless the modem itself can
block any dialing of long distance numbers, I can't see anything that
would prevent a slightly knowledgeable user from doing an
"ATDT1-900-HEY-BABY".  You could have a script watch for something
like this (good luck writing it) and try to abort it, but scripts are
easy to disable.

And, if you manage to find modems that do long distance call blocking,
some enterprising soul will find a manual or ask on comp.dcom.modems
and figure out which flag to set to turn it off.

The only secure way I can see is through the phone company.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #247
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15916;
          7 Apr 93 19:08 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09138
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:20:50 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10811
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:19:41 -0500
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:19:41 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #246


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 7 Apr 93 13:22:02 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 246

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded? (David Singer)
    Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded? (John S.Maddaus)
    Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded? (Paul Robichaux)
    Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls? (David G. Lewis)
    Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls? (Gary Breuckman)
    Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls? (Carl Moore)
    Re: Moving to Same Phone Number (Jean-Bernard Condat)
    Re: Moving to Same Phone Number (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (Carl Moore)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (Gary Breuckman)
    Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete? (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Jacking In at the Demarc (Russell Nelson)
    Re: Routing Calls via Alternate Providers (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Stupid Switch Tricks (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!? (Gary W. Sanders)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David Singer)
Subject: Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded?
Date: 7 Apr 93 18:08:31 GMT
Reply-To: <[e-mail]> (David Singer)
Organization: IBM Almaden Research Center


Earlier this year, Sears announced that they would be discontinuing
their catalog operation -- could it have already happened?  (I just
tried the number (11:10 AM PDT) and got a busy, too.)


David Singer -- Internet: [e-mail]   BITNET: SINGER at ALMADEN
                Voice: [phone]              Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Wed,  7 Apr 93 12:13:46 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded?
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
com (Bruce J. Miller) writes:

> My wife has been trying to place a catalog order with Sears for the

> past four days (since 4/1), and has gotten nothing but a busy from
> their number (1-800-366-3000).  We live in suburban Philadelphia, and

Overloaded.  Since they are closing up catalog sales this year, they
are offering 30% off everything except electronics and tools/hdw.
This is on top of existing sale prices.  Toys are 50% off (MERRY
CHRISTMAS!).  Their call volume is extensive.  If you do get through,
you might get the message where they ask odd area codes to call on odd
numbered days and even on even days.  They are also reportedly looking
into adding 1,000-2,000 temporaries to get through the crush (somehow
I find this number hard to believe).  Be persistent, they do have some
good deals.  My wife has gotten through several times and the orders
were delivered by UPS in a timely fashion.  My wife went to the store
to check equivalent prices and the savings appear to be real (at least
for what we ordered).  Good luck!


John S. Maddaus   Product Manager  Secure Cellular Communications
AT&T Bell Laboratories        [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Robichaux)
Subject: Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: New Technology, Inc.
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 13:20:25 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bruce
J. Miller) tells a tale of being unable to reach Sears.

As of 3/28, the Sears store here in Huntsville received a telegram
whose basic wording was:

    We're very busy with orders. If customers call to beef,
    tell them to keep calling back.

I don't know what type of ACD system (if any) they're using, but it is
evidently cheaper for Sears to give callers a busy rather than
queueing them. OTOH they do appear to be doing some queueing; the
helpful lady at Sears who told me about the telegram said she had to
call in at 4am and wait *15 minutes* for an ordertaker.


Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG      NTI Mission Software Development Div.

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 14:33:34 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (P. J.
Holsberg) writes:

> Is there a communications program for MS-DOS that limits the number of
> digits it sends to the modem during dialing, or in some other way
> prevents a user from making a toll call?

> We are in the process of setting up a "modem communications" lab at
> the college and have found that buying "toll access blocking" (or
> whatever they call it) is pretty expensive.

To which our esteemed Moderator replies:

> [Moderator's Note: It is simple enough to write a little script which
> does this. You simply have the user enter the number to be dialed and
> then count the length of the string. More than seven places in the
> string, you reject it and make the user start over. Somewhere I even
> saw a little patch for Procomm you can install doing the same thing.
> It checks for more than seven digits and 1 as the first digit. Seeing
> those, it aborts and prints a little message, 'restricted from dialing'.
> If you insert a password when you first bring up Procomm, it ignores
> those restrictions and dials as requested.   PAT]

Let's see if I can be the first person to tell you that this doesn't
work.  Because, as you should know living in the Chicago area, a ten
digit call isn't necessarily a toll call, nor is a seven digit call
necessarily a local call.

Even ignoring for the moment intra-LATA toll (which any administrator
could tell you can be hazardous to your budget), there are numerous
places where seven digit inter-LATA and/or ten digit intra-LATA calls
are common.  Here in New Jersey, for example, the Delaware Valley and
Atlantic Coastal LATAs are both in NPA 609, while the North Jersey
LATA encompasses NPAs 201 and 908.  So a call from, say, Camden to
Atlantic City is a seven digit inter-LATA call, while a call from,
say, Holmdel to Fort Lee is a ten digit intra-LATA call.

And that doesn't even get into corridor and privileged traffic ... (If
you have to ask, you don't want to know.)

The only really accurate way to locally implement toll restriction is
to purchase a rate database or something like the Bellcore LERG and
for every call look up the called NPA (NPA-NXX if necessary) to
determine if it's a toll call.  If you feel the data is static enough,
you could build it once, but if the telco changes the local calling
area, or if a nearby NPA splits, or if new CO codes are added to a
nearby NPA, you could end up killing a lot of calls.  Now you see why
toll restriction costs so much ...


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation


[Moderator's Note: So you look for more than seven digits or one as
the first digit then you say if this is the case then if '708' (to use
Chicago as an example) is the first to third digits (or second to
fourth if there is a leading '1' then if the next cluster of three
digits is not equal to one of several you put in your table, then deny
the call.  If the first to third digits are 800 then allow the call,
etc. An administrator's password allows modifications to be made to
the list of allowed three digit prefixes, and other passwords could be
allowed to bypass these conditions. Something like that can even be
written easily in BASIC. The little patch for Procomm was a 'home-brew'
thing which worked okay in a number of area codes.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Breuckman)
Subject: Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls?
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 15:19:07 GMT

I would not do this in software, the reason being that someone could
easily circumvent your precautions by bringing in their own software
or boot disk.

There are not-too-expensive toll blocking hardware devices available
from places like INMAC, HELLO DIRECT, and likely others who would be
less expensive, that connect in the line between the computer and your
telco (you should HIDE it in the telephone closet or other location
the user cannot get to).  These devices can be programmed to restrict
toll calls, specific prefix calls, and have passwords (dialed digit
codes) that let YOU make these calls if you need to.

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

Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 9:50:21 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls?


You're in New Jersey, where it's only seven digits to call long
distance within your area code.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 07 Apr 939 13:59:59 GMT
Subject: Re: Moving to Same Phone Number


In article <[e-mail]> Arthur L. Rubin <a_rubin@
dsg4.dse.beckman.com> writes:

> I am to be moving (about one mile) shortly, and I would like to know
> what intellectual amunition I can use to get the same phone number

I have had the same problem for my company two years ago.  S V P SA is
a well known TV company that answer hundreds of hundreds phone calls
for all reality shows on all major French TV channels. The phone
number use is the same from 58 years: 14-SVP-11-11.

Normally, S V P we be near the Champs-Elysees, on an old PBX.  For
moving in your new locations, we have had a lot of problems.  France
Telecom had create a new ZABPQ that prevent numeric PBX to crash.
Hundreds of hundreds of phone calls at the same time is extremely
difficult to manage.  The solution have being found: the creation of
14-999-1111.

But, the old ladies that have compose 14-SVP-11-11 for a long time,
don't like this new phone number ... and France Telecom have deplace
the 14-SVP-11-11 to your new locations.

At this time, we have all phone numbers beginning with 14-SVP and
14-999. The results will be hard to solve (six months) and extremely
expensive!

The solution in France for a private to have the same phone number
don't really exist. Dialing

                        *21*<new-phone-number>#

on your old phone, give a command to the PBX to transfer all the phone
calls of your old phone number on the new one. But it costs 12 cents
pro transfert!


Jean-Bernard Condat
Chaos Computer Club France [CCCF]    B.P. 8005
E-Mail: [e-mail]         69351 Lyon Cedex 08, France
Phone:  [phone]               Fax:  [phone]

Editor of  _Chaos Digest_            French computer security e-journal
Available on request at:             [e-mail]
or by:      ftp.eff.org,  in /pub/cud/chaos/chaos.1-xx   (xx=issue nbr)

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Moving to Same Phone Number
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:32:31 GMT


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

> I am to be moving (about one mile) shortly, and I would like to know
> what intellectual amunition I can use to get the same phone number, or
> to find out if I _can_ get the same phone number.

> [Moderator's Note: If you are within the same central office, it
> should be no problem at all, just ask the rep. If you are outside the
> CO area serving you now, then what you want can't be done unless you
> are willing to pay for 'foreign exchange' service. Check out the
> houses on the block where you will be moving. Is the phone exchange
> number there the same as yours? That is one easy way to tell.   PAT]

The moderator is right.  I have a neat map on my wall showing the
central office service boundaries for Manhattan.  Thick lines separate
the CO areas.  So if one's proposed move crosses a thick line, the
phone number will have to change (unless one pays lots for FX
service.)  Got it by invoking a little-known law in NY that the telco
must make available maps showing exchange boundaries to anyone who
asks.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza  New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 9:21:10 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy


On the Unix operating systems under which I run, I understand that
"removing" a file merely clears the directory pointer to it; the data
is still there until the space is initialized/overwritten for other
use.  But for the normal, non-systems user, the file AND the data in
it are gone for all practical purposes as soon as that "remove"
command is done.

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Breuckman)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy
Organization: Organized?? me?
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 15:02:58 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

> Before installing P* I had run SCAN to check the installation disks. Now
> SCAN is a packed file that expands in memory. As a consequence the
> virus names are not kept in clear on the disk; this only exists in memory.
> When I looked at STAGE.DAT, the virus names were found in two separate
> places on the disk. I was not using disk cacheing or Windows. There
> never has been a good explanation for this.

Sure there's an explanation.  It's almost the same explanation as
reusing disk blocks, and having old data there.  When you allocate
memory space for buffers, that space isn't cleared either.  Prodigy
and other software will allocate a memory page for a disk buffer, put
something in the first part of the page (perhaps including a byte
count of how much they actually used, even) and then write the block
to disk.  The end portion of the block will have random "junk" in it,
from whatever was there before in memory.

Ever look through hard disk sectors with a program like NORTON's
DISKEDIT?  The ends of blocks (usually the last cluster of the file)
often have random, recognizable contents.  It should not be
interpreted as some sinister plot, just poor housekeeping.  Everything
is a tradeoff, and clearing that unused space before writing the block
takes time.

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 14:38:12 GMT


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

> "Gates boldly predicted that NT servers running multimedia
> applications over ATM WANS, PBXs, cable TV and high-speed backbones
> would make central telephone switches obsolete."

> Hey -- can we port NT over to the Ericsson AXE platform?

> Someone get me a barf bag - and quick!!!

I feel I must agree with my distinguished colleague from Ericsson ...
When someone shows me an NT server/LAN/WAN/Cable TV network that can
handle 150 million calls per day and will have < 4 minutes per year
downtime, I'll start believing it.


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation

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

Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1993 09:05:16 EDT
From: Russell Nelson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Crynwr Software
Subject: Re: Jacking In at the Demarc


On 5 Apr 1993 20:17:07 GMT, "Geoff Steckel" <[e-mail].
Sun.COM> wrote:

> Do all LECs do this?  Or did I get a particularly clueless lineman?

> [Moderator's Note: It is not uncommon at all for linemen, installers
> and CO people to use any line they want when they make calls.

That happened to me also.  I have a two-line set with in-use
indicators on both lines.  I saw that someone was using one of the
lines and it couldn't be anyone in the house.  I picked up on the
line, and asked the lineman what was going on.  He said that he was
just calling back to the office.  Since I pay flat rate, I didn't
care.


russ <[e-mail]>  Crynwr Software
11 Grant St.              315-268-1925 Voice
Potsdam, NY 13676         315-268-9201 FAX

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Routing Calls via Alternate Providers
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 16:36:33 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Eric
Jacksch) writes:

> We've finally come out of the dark ages and the past few months have
> seen a number of non-bell companies begin to provide long distance
> services.  In order to use these services, residential customers are
> provided with a local seven digit access number and a ten digit or so
> PIN.  While it is simple to get the computer to dial this, it is a bit
> of a nusiance for voice calls.

> Does anyone know where to get a box which will route the calls?  The
> company I deal with makes them availible for business customers, but
> not residential.  They are connected between the phone and the line,
> detect off-hook, simulate dialtone, and then when dialing is complete,
> they dial local calls direct and long distance calls via the service
> provider.

This post reminds me of 1980 or so, when all non-AT&T carriers were
stuck offering their service this way.  It was called feature group D
or B access; the former if the call cost money, the latter if the call
was a 950-XXXX free call.

I can't believe that now, in 1993, any carrier is still stuck with
this.  It should be a straightforward matter for any carrier to get a
10XXX prefix that would route calls to it.  And it should be possible
for any customer to simply call up the local telco and ask that all
calls go to any particular carrier.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza   New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Stupid Switch Tricks
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1993 11:55:30 -0500
From: Martin McCormick <[e-mail]>


The problem may also be a partial open, rather than a short.  The
mention of hearing humming sounds may or may not be important, here,
but it is possible that oxidation has set in at one or more wire
junctions, especially if they are installed in a place that is damp or
exposed to the weather.

    I, once, had a similar situation in which the telephone
sounded like it was getting loop current, but there was no dial tone.
Just for fun, I got on amateur radio and had somebody call me while I
had the receiver off the hook.  I heard a burst of ringing current and
then got a perfectly good connection.  The phone would ring if given a
chance and would work for a while afterward.

    After calling Southwestern Bell, a technician came out the
next day and said that he had given us a new pair due to corrosion of
the original wires.  The interesting thing was that the whole
neighborhood was only about 15 or 20 years old, at the time, so we
aren't talking about the kind of things that half a century or more
can do to a wiring plant.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed,  7 Apr 93 12:09:22 GMT
Subject: Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!?
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Arthur Rubin) writes:

> Sprint does have intrastate tariffs on file in California, but I think
> the local phone company still has the intra-LATA monopoly.

Regardless of what the tariffs are for wherever you are, how would it
be illegal for an end user? Isn't it up to the various telcom
facilities to enforce whatever tariffs they have?  Most people don't
know a NPA from an NXX.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #246
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05206;
          8 Apr 93 3:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22463
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 8 Apr 1993 01:40:42 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18761
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 8 Apr 1993 01:40:00 -0500
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 01:40:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #248

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 8 Apr 93 01:40:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 248

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Spaf Announces 'Retirement' From Net! (TELECOM Moderator)
    ISDN Goes Hollywood! (Lynne Gregg)
    AT&T Partner II SMDR Pinout? (Marc Unangst)
    First Cellular Telephones Go Into Service In Cuba (Nigel Allen)
    Pac Bell Caught Red Handed (Los Angeles Times via Rich Greenberg)
    BC Tel Applies For Local Rate Increases (Globe & Mail via David Leibold)
    Artificial Diseased Voice Generator (Globe & Mail via David Leibold)
    Interesting Use of Call-Yourself (Leonard P. Levine)
    Re: ISDN in Residential Use (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Mike Godwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 00:43:13 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Spaf Announces 'Retirement' From Net!


On Wednesday, April 5, Gene Spafford announced his 'retirement' from
Usenet. As one of the guiding forces behind Usenet for several years,
Spafford was responsible for the monthly postings which indexed the
numerous moderated groups on the net and how to contact the moderators,
etc. He gave a tremendous amount of time to new moderators, helping
them learn the ropes. He answered sometimes dozens of questions daily
about the operation of the net from people who wrote him, having been
referred to him as the expert of record on Usenet operations.

In the mailing list which circulates among moderators, Spafford said
'it was no longer fun for him' ... and he noted that his own
educational goals had probably been delayed by a year (in aggregate
over a several year period) because of time spent on Usenet matters
instead of his own studies.  Spafford has been affiliated with Purdue
University in Lafayette, Indiana for several years.

In his remarks to the moderators on Wednesday, Spafford expressed his
belief that the future of Usenet lies in the moderated groups, a point
with which few could find disagreement.

He'll continue his net duties for the remainder of this month, and
'turn over the reigns' where his monthly postings are concerned
beginning later this month.

All the moderators will miss his input, and I hope users of Usenet who
have benefitted from the moderated groups over the years will realize
the contributions Spafford made which help things run as smoothly as
they do today.

Best wishes in your 'retirement', Gene!


Patrick Townson
TELECOM Digest Moderator   Usenet: comp.dcom.telecom

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: ISDN Goes Hollywood!
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 93 13:04:00 PDT


SAN FRANCISCO (APRIL 5) BUSINESS WIRE - At TEXPO 93 this week, Pacific
Bell will demonstrate how an emerging technology could revolutionize
audio entertainment for the home.

   Working with singer-songwriter Graham Nash, the company will show
how CD-quality music can be delivered over the phone lines,
potentially allowing tomorrow's audiophiles to shop for recordings and
listen to live concerts without leaving their living rooms.

   The telecommunications technology called ISDN (Integrated Services
Digital Network) that lets businesspeople send each other computer
files, documents and pictures through the phone network also can send
sound with the audio quality of a compact disc.

   How musicians like Nash and others in the entertainment industry
have begun using ISDN will be demonstrated Tuesday and Wednesday at
TEXPO 93, Pacific Bell's annual telecommunications exposition, at San
Francisco's Moscone Center.

The demonstration will use Pacific Bell ISDN facilities in California
and GTE Hawaiian Tel's digital network from Kauai to Honolulu.  AT&T's
Accunet Switched Digital Service is being used to connect Hawaii and
California.  Other companies contributing to the demonstration are
PictureTel, AdTran and Audio Processing Technology Ltd., which are
providing some of the equipment for the demonstration.

   ISDN lines already are being used today by some businesses for high
quality audio transmission.  For example, a major entertainment
company has started using ISDN to audition recording artists across
the country or around the world.  Rather than having a performer in
Europe record a song and ship it by express delivery to a studio in
Hollywood days later, the studio can have the singer audition live,
through the ISDN line, or transmit a digital tape or disc through the
ISDN line to them.

   ISDN technology is increasingly available to more customers as
telephone companies upgrade their networks.  Nearly half of Pacific
Bell's lines today can get ISDN, and the company predicts nearly all
of its lines will have access by 1997.  In addition, ISDN is
compatible with switched 56 service, offered today by both Pacific
Bell and GTE, which means that some form of advanced digital
facilities are available nearly everywhere in California.

   Although studio-quality audio is the newest ISDN capability to be
demonstrated, the TEXPO 93 event also will show other ISDN
capabilities, such as the ability to transfer large digital files and
images as well as edit documents on computer screens in different
locations.

   Soon, Pacific Bell expects to receive regulatory approval to offer
ISDN to customers with one business line, making the service easier
and cheaper for home-office customers, telecommuters and small
businesses.

   The audio demonstration was part of a TEXPO 93 presentation
called "Is ISDN Finally for Real?"  Tuesday April 6 at 1:30 and
Wednesday April 7 at 4 in Room 220, Moscone Center.

   Pacific Bell is a subsidiary of Pacific Telesis Group, a
diversified worldwide telecommunications corporation based in San
Francisco.

   CONTACT:  Pacific Bell; Lou Saviano, 415 545-8191

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Unangst)
Subject: AT&T Partner II SMDR Pinout?
Date: 7 Apr 1993 21:45:35 -0400
Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI


We have an AT&T Partner II phone system where I work.  The powers that
be have decided that it would be a cool thing if we could hook a
computer up to the switch's SMDR port, capture the call log data, and
then analyze it using a database or something.  I've done some poking
around in the manual for the phone system, but all it says is that you
need to buy some special piece of AT&T hardware in order to send the
SMDR output to a serial device.  Calling AT&T managed to get me the
pinout, but looking at the voltage levels with a VOM, it doesn't look
anything like normal RS-232 voltages.

So, how would I go about hooking the output from the SMDR port to a
normal RS-232 device?  Is it just a simple cable adapter, with a pin
combination that I didn't manage to get right while fiddling with it
this afternoon?  Or is there actual circuitry involved?  (And if so,
what does the circuit look like?)  Or would it be, as I suspect,
easier to simply fork over the undoubtedly outrageous price AT&T will
want for the RS-232 adapter?


Marc Unangst, N8VRH    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: First Cellular Telephones Go Into Service In Cuba
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 23:21:40 -0400
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


Anthony Maillard <[e-mail]> was kind
enough to send me the following news item which originated from Radio
Havana.  It's dated February 26, but it's still interesting.  It isn't
clear what cellular technology is being used, but perhaps directional
antennas would permit communication between Cuba and the U.S.
mainland. I suppose anyone making a cellular phone call in Cuba would
have to worry about the call being monitored both by the Cuban police
and the U.S. Navy (which has a base at Guantanamo Bay) or the U.S.
National Security Agency.

You can find other postings by Anthomy Maillard (usually with
"If Yuh Int'rested" in the subject line) in soc.culture.caribbean).

Here is the message:

First Cellular Telephones Go Into Service In Cuba

Cuba's first cellular telephones are now in service after the
installation of the antennas, transmitters, receivers and computers
that make the new technology available to end users.

CELCUBA, a joint venture formed under Cuban laws and regulations,is
now operating the first cellular telephones and plans to go ahead with
the installation of more equipment in other parts of Cuba.

CELCUBA is now marketing its service among diplomatic missions,
foreign companies and trade representatives who need fast and reliable
business calls. As in any other joint venture, foreign currency
profits are split between the foreign investors and the Cuban
government shareholders.

Havana, Feb. 26 (c) Radio Havana Cuba via NY Transfer via If Yuh
Int'rested.


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 15:26:04 PDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed


Pat, here is a summary (its more than I wanted to re-type) of an
article in the business section of today's {LA Times} (4/7) that should
be of interest to readers of the TELECOM Digest:

Bylined: Carla Lazzareschi and Martha Groves

A CA PUC judge has recommended that Pac Bell be fined $65 million for
repeatedly charging its customers improper late fees.  This stems from
Pac Bell routinely assessed customer's late payment charges because of
delays in the company's own bill processing operations.

According to the judge's opinion, consumers were assessed more than
seven million dollars in improper charges between 1986 and early 1991,
requiring $32.1 million in direct customer repayments.  Furthur,
citing the seriousness of the allegations, the judge reccomended
punitive damages of $33 million.  The full PUC must confirm this.  Pac
Bell is of course screaming "unfair".

The suit stems from charges first levied in early 1991 that Pac Bell
was charging late payment fees for customers who had paid their phone
bills on time.  However, because the payments had been made in plain,
non-company envelopes, their processing had been delayed and the
customers were assessed late charges of 1.5% of outstanding balances
over $20.

Pac Bell said it corrected the problem in early 1991 immediately after
learning of it, and has already refunded $5 million of the $6 million
that it believed were erroneously collected.  However, the PUC judge
noted that the problems uncovered in 1991 represented the second time
in five years that TPC had "engaged in comparable abuses".

[ed note: The numbers in this paragraph don't seem to match those
two paragraphs earlier, that's verbatim from the article.]

The suit was originated by a San Francisco consumer group known as
TURN (Toward Utility Rate Normalization).  "Its unprecedented for a
fine of this size" said Thomas Long, a staff attorney for TURN.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....


[Moderator's Note: I strongly suspect the fine (or at least the size
of it) will be reversed or reduced on appeal, as telco is certain to
do.  Some consumer groups frankly have no idea what they are talking
ahout most of the time. PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 07 Apr 93 18:24:00 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: BC Tel Applies For Local Rate Increases


Local phone service in the Canadian province of British Columbia could
be raised CAD$4.10/month for residence customers (average) or
CAD#3.77/month for business lines if BC Tel gets its way with an
application before the CRTC, as described in {The Globe and Mail} 2
April 1993.

New long-distance competition and fears about credit ratings are
behind BC Tel's rate increase proposals. BC Tel claims that
competition from Unitel, BCRL/Lightel/Call-Net will take 5% of the
market this year, while resellers will take 8%, well above CRTC
projections. Local rate considerations such as this also focus on a
supposed subsidy that long distance gives to local service.

Bell Canada also applied for substantial local service rate increases
recently, and that case will be before the CRTC in May.

One has to wonder if the recession, more than the competition, is to
blame for reductions on the Canadian telcos returns on common equity,
a factor which is used in CRTC deliberations to determine whether or
not communications companies have sufficient revenues.


[e-mail]    [e-mail]   Fidonet: 1:250/730

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

Date: Wed, 07 Apr 93 18:45:54 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Artificial Diseased Voice Generator


 From the recent pages of {The Globe and Mail} comes word of a new
device entitled FoneSick Illness Replicator, a $139.95 product of
Millennium Technologies Inc.

The idea is that you can use this thing to change your voice to one of
four types: cold, flu, pneumonia or bronchitis. An adjustment control
can change the severity of the voice alteration (and thus the impress-
ion of disease on the other party's part).

One does not want to think of what features would be built into the
"Mark 2" edition, if one ever comes out.


[e-mail]   [e-mail]   etc etc etc

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard P Levine)
Subject: Intresting Use of Call-Yourself
Date: 7 Apr 1993 20:28:51 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In Milwaukee, Wisconsin Bell has instituted a new service that permits
me to call my own number, which results in a busy.  When I hang up
again, the phone rings with a coded ring (two rings, pause, two rings)
permitting the ringer to be tested or the phone to be used as an
intercom.

This feature was added just after a change for each local call was added.

Probably no accident.


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]

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ISDN in Residential Use
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 93 11:43:00 PDT


In response to Ketil ... my original comment stands, though I
recognize I should have qualified the statement by saying that it was
pertinent only to the U.S.  Many other countries are ahead of the U.S.
in ISDN and digital system deployment.

You note: 'I suppose they aren't all using SS7 yet, but hopefully the
switch to SS7 is a "simple" software update (at least it was for the
System 12 switches here in Norway). Initial development of the
software is an enormous investment, but you do that only once for each
class of exchanges, and there aren't that many different ones in the
world.'

To my knowledge, ITT never adapted or installed an S12 anywhere in the
U.S.  So what might be a simple upgrade for you isn't for us.  On AT&T
and NT digital switches, it's more than a simple converter to upgrade
to ISDN!  The hardware and software have been pretty cost prohibitive
(one carrier told me their payback was seven years.).  But, the costs
ARE coming down.

With the current state of our telecom infrastructure, moving to ISDN
IS a big deal.  Yet, some RBOCs (like PacBell) have been particularly
aggressive in deployment.  That's where you'll see residential ISDN.
Costs?  It costs around $245 to install an ISDN line in the Bay Area.
Monthly charges within a 16 mile radius run around $30.

I appreciate your views of ISDN outside the U.S.


Regards,

Lynne Gregg

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1993 20:49:25 GMT


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> [Moderator's Note: I know of no such law, and if no records exist,
> then nothing can be subpoenaed. This of course is the oldest gag in
> the world: keep no written records you'd not want someone else to see.
> But such a stance would, I think, only enforce the poor reputation BBS
> operators enjoy in so many quarters of the telecom industry. In the
> event extensive fraud had occurred in connection with the phone lines
> of a BBS, such a stance would only serve to cast suspicion -- right or
> wrong -- on the operator. The lack of keeping such a log would show at
> worst a conspiracy between the sysop and his callers, and at best, an
> incredible degree of naetivity by the sysop.

Why not play it safe? The truly responsible sysop will keep permanent
records of all e-mail traffic on her system. Just in case. :-)

(It's probably not an ECPA violation if the sysop doesn't actually
*look* at those permanent records until the police ask her to.)


Mike Godwin,    |"Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression
[e-mail]| of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and
[phone]  | burned women. It is the function of speech to free men
EFF, Cambridge  | from the bondage of irrational fears."  --Brandeis


[Moderator's Note: Mike Godwin has been a leader in the activities of
the Electronic Frontier Foundation since its founding a few years ago.
I don't know, Mike, if you are speaking tongue in cheek or if you are
serious, but I really don't think records or copies of personal mail
need to be kept or should be kept. I think it is asking a bit much to
expect system administrators to keep those things. The US Postal
Service does not keep copies of the mail it processes, nor the names
of the people who wrote back and forth to each other. Our circumstan-
ces are a little bit different, and there can (and should be) a modicum
of record keeping without delving into the personal affairs of every-
one who uses the system. Neither does telco keep call records forever
 ... there is a statute of limitations which they rely on as sysops
could do also. I think the intent of ECPA is satisfied when there is
no frivilous display or publication of the users' correspondence. I
think those files can be examined for technical and/or security
reasons without a specific court order.  I decided not to truncate
your signature message; it is something we all can meditate on.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #248
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14314;
          8 Apr 93 19:11 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15483
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 8 Apr 1993 16:39:21 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24857
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 8 Apr 1993 16:38:33 -0500
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 16:38:33 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #249

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 8 Apr 93 16:38:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 249

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Truly Amazing, Truly Amazing; Feds Delay Intro of GSM (C. Weisgerber)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (David Leibold)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work (Brent Capps)
    Re: Stupid Switch Tricks (Fred Schimmel)
    Re: Stupid Switch Tricks (Scott Marshall)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Doug Zolmer)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (David Reeve Sward)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Carl Moore)
    Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete? (Brent Capps)
    Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!? (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Randy Gellens)
    Information Wanted on Ericsson Network Systems (Alexy Chandy)
    AT&T Toll-Free Access Number (Alan Boritz)
    Need Apartment-Style Entry System Information (Ken Blackney)
    Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls? (Carl Moore)
    Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls? (Wil Dixon)


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

From: [e-mail] (Christian Weisgerber)
Organization: My Individual Private Site
Subject: Re: Truly Amazing, Truly Amazing ... Feds Delay Intro of GSM
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 12:30:50 +0200


In <[e-mail]>, you write:

> The GSM system is digital and sends phone calls in an encoded or
> encrypted signal. This encryption makes it virtually impossible to tap
> the radio signals sent out on GSM handsets.

I wonder, is the signal only digitally encoded or digitally encoded
and *additionally* encrypted?

I ask this question because some sales people seem to consider any
digitally encoded signal also to be "encrypted" because you can't make
sense out of it with a normal AM/FM scanner. Which doesn't mean it
can't be easily listened in.

(This is of personal concern to me since GSM-type mobile networks are
already/will be used in Europe, too.)

I'm getting a little paranoid over this, but in Germany when you buy
an approved wireless phone you are told that it is impossible to
listen in to it. Bullsh*t. In fact it's only impossible to listen in
with another (unmodified) wireless phone -- just get a scanner and
you're in.


Christian "naddy" Weisgerber, Germany     [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 08 Apr 93 12:34:13 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept


I tried the [phone] number with the Unitel long distance
service. Completion time was quite fast, especially considering that I
forgot to end the overseas digit string with a '#' to speed up the
call completion. Nice music, with the English intercept announcement
first, then the Japanses one, then repeat of the English one at which
time I disconnected. The connection did sound a bit scratchy, though
the results weren't expected to be high-fidelity stereo.

I haven't tried this through Bell Canada's service, though I note the
recent posting regarding Bell's own intercept for this.

All international calls placed in Canada (other than to the U.S.)
would be routed through Teleglobe, the monopoly international carrier.
Thus the intercept would be a Bell thing, while Unitel just lets the
other end intercept the call.


[e-mail]  [e-mail]    Fidonet: 1:250/730

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 13:10:11 GMT


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

> I recall cases where children have tried to call 911 but could not
> because they could not find the 'eleven' button on the phone ...

This was discussed on alt.folklore.urban a while ago, and the
conclusion was that this is an urban legend.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: How Fax Mailboxes Work
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 16:52:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Wil Dixon) writes:

> Ameritech is using Centigram's voice mail platform in many of their CO
> based voice mail applications.  Centigram uses Brooktrout's Fax card
> in their voice mail applications.  What you are seeing is Centigram's
> box stock, off the shelf, VoiceMemo II system.  In addition to 'store
> and forward', you can do 'fax on demand', 'fax publishing' (fax via
> distribution lists) and most anything else you can dream up.  We use
> the system, we have one in house, for fax machine overflow, ie voice
> mail for fax machines.

The Ameritech Faxtra service does not use the Centigram voice mail
platform.

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


[Moderator's Note: Would you care to say what Ameritech *is* using?
Can you discuss Faxtra even in general terms?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Schimmel)
Subject: Re: Stupid Switch Tricks
Organization: Gandalf Data Ltd.
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 16:06:03 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
writes:

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

>> The phone will function normally up until its last usage at night
>> (about 10:00 PM), and then the first time it is used the next morning,
>> it will not work.  The phone is picked up, and battery is present (and
>> the phone can generate DTMF), but no dial tone is received, and any
>> attempt to dial is ignored.  This has occurred about three times so
>> far (all this past week, but not on three consecutive days).  The
>> first two times, I called the line from another line in the house, and
>> the problem line rang as expected, and when answered it, it was a
>> perfect connection, as would be expected.  After this, the line worked
>> perfectly for incoming and outgoing calls.  The third time, I just let
>> it sit, and after somewhere between ten and sixty minutes, it
>> corrected itself.

> I suspect a wet phone line somewhere between your home and the CO.  Or
> a weak short.  Your theory about the ringing voltage burning through
> the obstruction is actually quite apt.

> Of course, you _should_ have already installed network interfaces and
> entrance bridges, so that you could readily figure out whether the
> problem is inside or outside.

I agree that it could very well be a wiring problem. Not getting dial
tone means that you are not drawing enough current from the CO. Making
DTMF tones means that you ARE drawing enough current to power the
keypad. These are not necessarily the same.

My parents had a situation where they could not get any calls or
receive dial tone. My father traced wiring in the basement til he
found a wire going to the new-fangled remote readout device for the
water meter. Condensation on the meter caused by cold water ran down
the cable to the junction block and made an ugly black liquid. The
short on the line was removed when my father cut the cable. He
promptly called the water company who installed new equipment. So the
problem may even be adjunct equipment you may not have considered.

Hum on the line (mentioned in the original post) could either be poor
line balance or a bad splice somewhere. Squirrels (or other varmints)
have been known to chew through cable sheathing. Wet cable can have
the symptoms you describe. Are you in a wet area???


Fred Schimmel  [e-mail]   Gandalf Systems Corporation
                                ^^
Cherry Hill, NJ   I'm in the USA ... My host's in Canada!!

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

Subject: Re: Stupid Switch Tricks
From: [e-mail] (Scott Marshall)
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 93 20:46:09 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX


I had that same problem in Australia at one time. I found a loose wire
in the phone jack (in the wall..). The Blue wire ... (In Australia
anyway) ...


Cheers,

[e-mail] (Scott Marshall)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, [phone]
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

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

From: Doug (D.W.J.) Zolmer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Date: Thu, Apr 8, 1993 00:00:00 GMT


Using 767-XXXX to get the time of day is unheard of in Canada (well,
at least in Ottawa).  Ottawa is the home of the National Research
Council (NRC) which owns the atomic clock that is the standard of all
time keeping in Canada.  If you want to listen to it, call
613-745-1576.  The NRC also broadcasts the time signal on various
shortwave frequencies (sorry, I don't know the frequencies), and most
people around the world can receive these broadcasts.


Doug Zolmer     Internet: [e-mail]     Disclaimer: my opinions only
        Bell-Northern Research Limited, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
     Dept. 7N61 - Service Control Point - Routing Services Design
            Voice: +1 613.763.8217   FAX: [phone]

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

From: David Reeve Sward <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Date: Thu,  7 Apr 1993 12:09:51 -0400
Organization: Sophomore, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


Excerpts from netnews.comp.dcom.telecom: 7-Apr-93 Re: The Use of
POPCORN to S.. by Rob [e-mail].e

> Does anyone know the reason for dedicating a whole exchange for
> Time/Temp, or know why Columbus ended up with 281 rather than 767
> (POP) as others have mentioned?

301 has TI4[844]-(any 4) for time and WE6[936]-(any 4) for weather.


David Sward    [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 9:03:48 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch


Re: using an entire prefix for time/temperature ... I've seen
something like that done for big cities here on the east coast, such
as: 844 for time in Washington and Baltimore 846 for time in
Philadelphia 936 for weather in Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia.

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete?
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 16:02:16 GMT


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

> From the April 5, 1993 issue of {PC Week}, article entitled 'Gates
> pledges lowball NT costs':

> " ... Gates touched on several other NT-related topics, including ...
> strategies to make central telephone switches obsolete ..."

> "Gates boldly predicted that NT servers running multimedia
> applications over ATM WANS, PBXs, cable TV and high-speed backbones
> would make central telephone switches obsolete."

Heh heh heh.  I recall ten years ago the PBX/CO manufacturers were
claiming that their own multimedia applications would soon make LANs
obsolete.  Remember CO-based LANs?

NT, AT&T, etc. lost a bundle chasing after that will o' the wisp.  As
long as Gates is about to start shoveling bags of money out the
window, I wonder if he'd mind throwing some of it my direction ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)
Subject: Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!?
Date: 8 Apr 93 14:51:27 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


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

> [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl) writes:

> The FCC wouldn't allow Connecticut (or any other state) to grant a
> company a monopoly on intra-state, inter-LATA calls.

The FCC doesn't have jurisdiction.  The Order just says that it can't
be the local phone company providing inter-LATA service.  The PUC can
regulate it (or not) or give it to AT&T.


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

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 08 APR 93 02:13
Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls


[e-mail] (John Higdon) 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).

When I have moved from one area to another, never to return, I do
exactly as you suggest: arrange for a referral of suitable length.

In this case, I hope (perhaps vainly) to eventually move back; the
only thing I didn't like about the town was that I couldn't afford to
buy there.  So, since I like my old number, I decided to continue
using it.  Since it is a residential, not business line, I only pay
the flat-rate monthly charge.  Right now, almost no one even knows my
new number.


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] (Alexy Chandy)
Subject: Information Wanted on Ericsson Network Systems
Organization: SMU - School of Engineering & Applied Science - Dallas
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 05:51:32 GMT


hi,

Could anyone give me some information on Ericsson network systems?  I
checked the local career center, they do not have much infomation on
them.  Any info will be of great help.


Thanks,

ac.

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

Date: Thu, 08 Apr 93 12:45:13 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Subject: AT&T Toll-Free Access Number


I had the occasion to use a COCOT in Dumont, New Jersey, and found
that the LD carrier (Cleartel) had blocked AT&T's 10XXX code, though
MCI's ENFIA-B service was available.  The old "1-800-CALL-ATT" gave me
an intercept to use a new number setup for calling card calls.  As of
April 5, 1993, the new number is 1-800-321-0288.


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: This has been mentioned here before, but I still
get two or three articles every week mentioning the new number being
used by AT&T.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Blackney)
Subject: Need Apartment-Style Entry System Information
Date: 8 Apr 93 13:24:52 GMT
Organization: Drexel Univ -- Telecom & Networking


My department is looking for a way to secure the hallway that leads to
our switch room without requiring the staff who work at the far end of
the hall from getting up to let visitors and the mailman in.

An apartment-style entry system has been suggested.  We want the
visitor to enter a number to get connected with a staff member who can
then "buzz" the visitor in.  The visitor's phone should have a
restricted set of outgoing numbers and should not be able to gain
entry using a Radio Shack DTMF tone generator.

Do any of you know of sources where I can find such a box?  I may even
be willing to consider a box that allows a handheld tone generator to
allow entry because all the doors on the "secure" side of the hall are
generally kept locked.


Thanks much,

Ken

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 9:13:47 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls?


[e-mail] writes, regarding New Jersey:

> a call from, say, Holmdel to Fort Lee is a ten digit intra-LATA
> call.

I'd probably have to call that 11 digits, to account for the leading
1; some people have quibbled about including that leading 1 in the
digit count.  Remember that some places, such as the DC area, instruct
you to dial area code + seven digits (yes, you may omit the leading 1)
for local calls to a different area code.

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

From: [e-mail] (Wil Dixon)
Subject: Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 14:22:44 GMT


[e-mail] (Gary Breuckman) writes:

> There are not-too-expensive toll blocking hardware devices available
> from places like INMAC, HELLO DIRECT, and likely others who would be
> less expensive, that connect in the line between the computer and your
> telco (you should HIDE it in the telephone closet or other location
> the user cannot get to).  These devices can be programmed to restrict
> toll calls, specific prefix calls, and have passwords (dialed digit

Window Phone, is a software/hardware product that installs in a PC
with Windows 3.x and gives enhanced phone capabilities.  It maintains
a log of outgoing and incoming calls (if you have Caller-ID that
information is logged), allows selective screening and notification of
calls (with Caller-ID), allows call blocking by dialing pattern (I
block 411 calls by inserting 411 in the call block table),
import/export of directories to other applications, speed call tables,
and several other features. I don't know the current cost; I was given
mine by the company.  It is a neat product, I wish I had Caller-ID.
It doesn't have to be 'inline' to block calls; the incoming call
screening hinges on the PC as the 'ringer'.  So if you don't want to
be woke up in the middle of the night unless you mother calls, you
turn the ringer off on your phone and connect your stereo to the PC.
If anyone wants more info, call or e-mail me.  Wil


[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #249
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12653;
          9 Apr 93 6:20 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12016
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 9 Apr 1993 00:16:40 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10098
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 9 Apr 1993 00:16:00 -0500
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 00:16:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #250

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 9 Apr 93 00:16:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 250

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    I'm Sorry ... (TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: Answering Machine/Voice Mailbox With a Sound Card (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Line Busy Out (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Routing Calls via Alternate Providers (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Telephone Fraud and Abuse (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA (Carl Moore)
    Re: Moving to Same Phone Number (Carl Moore)
    Re: First Cellular Telephon (Brad S. Hicks)
    Re: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy (J. Jonas)
    Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls? (J. Jonas)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Seth B. Rothenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 23:30:18 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: I'm Sorry ...


Due to financial circumstances beyond my control the Digest has to be
put 'on hold' at this time. I'm getting out a couple issues early
Friday morning to clear as much of the queue as I can. I received an
eviction notice today and the telephone company quite coincidentally
notified me that my phones will be placed on incoming only service
effective Friday until I get the bill paid. When I've resolved the
problem of the rent and the phone bill I'll try to resume publication.

To those of you who assisted financially with your subscriptions to
the Orange Card and the 800 / 1+ services, I give my thanks. Although
remittances based on the residuals have not yet come in, I believe
I'll be able to use that money to at least get the phone turned back
on later this month. If you have questions about the Orange Card or
the 800 / 1+ programs you can direct them to the customer service
offices of those companies. Those programs and my participation are
still intact. My main problem is I cannot do the Digest if I have no
telephone or place to live.

Please DO NOT send further articles to the telecom account until you
hear from me that the Digest is again operational. I send my best wishes
to all of you, and my apologies that things have turned out the way they
did.  If you need to reach me, I can still be contacted through my
Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690.


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine/Voice Mailbox With a Sound Card
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1993 07:37:49 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Jilles Groenendijk) writes:

Bunch of stuff about building PC based answering machine and call router
deleted ...

> Than all of a certain, in a German magazine c't ("Magazin fuer
> Computertechnik")there was a project called MacAnswer which did
> exactly what we wanted but for the Macintosh. It came with
> hardware-scheme's and FFT sources in Assembler & 'C'.

> My idea is to put the scheme into OrCad or UltiBOARD and convert it to
> a PC-Based print. And use Soundcard and Serial port instead of
> mac-port. But my problem is I don't have OrCad or UltiBoard. (Is there
> someone who can help me, do it or supply the software)

> Any ideas, comments are more than welcome ...

    It seems inefficient to me to use a sound card and a serial
port.  I'd probably use an existing FCC registered (for US) fax modem
card that can also do dtmf detection and voice generation.  I think
there are some based on the Yamaha chip set that can do this.  It'd
probably be a lot cheaper than combining several cards (the sound
card, the serial port card, plus a bunch of hardware to hook it all
together) and would be legal to connect to the phone line.  It then
becomes a software problem.  This combining all these existing boards
to do something rather than taking the "single chip solution" reminds
me of a student whose senior project (20 years ago) was to build a
digital clock, using only 50 chips or so.  Of course, one could be
built with just one chip, but he had all these SSI chips on hand.

    So, if anyone has software ideas on talking to these chip sets
(Yamaha calls it a VODEM chip set, for voice and modem and fax), I'd
sure like to hear about it.  Yamaha will sell you some sample source
code for a few kilobucks, as I recall.


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] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Line Busy Out
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1993 08:06:10 GMT


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

Quotes my summary of article from Compliance Engineering on legitimate
reasons to go off hook ...

> And then maybe not. I frequently have hunt groups in which I do not
> need one or more lines operating. Over the past decades, and even to
> this day the method of choice is to punch a short down on the block
> (and if the lines are ground start, ground the shorting wire). No one,
> ever, at any time, in hundreds of situations such as this has ever
> said a word at Pac*Bell.

> Oh, and what happens after the short is removed after being in place
> after a couple of years? The line instantly starts working again. I
> think much too much fuss is being made about this. My experience would
> indicate that if you want to busy out a line -- short it out. When you
> are through, take the short off. Pretty easy, eh?

> If your telco does not like it, it will tell you. Otherwise, do not
> worry about it.

> By the way you, as an end user, are not bound by, or even need to read
> Part 68.

    I admit that I had not researched this when I wrote the
original article, I just relayed on what was in the Compliance
Engineering article.  Checking my copy of part 68, I find:

68.102: Terminal equipment must be registered.

68.200(h): Makes exception to registration requirement for
"transparent" extension cords, line transfer switches and
cross-connect panels.

 68.321(k) Registered terminal equipment and protective circuitry
shall not by design leave the on-hook state by operations performed on
tip and ring leads for any other purpose than to request service or
answer an incoming call, except that terminal equipment which the user
places in the off-hook state for the purpose of manually placing
telephone numbers in internal memory for subsequent automatic or
repertory dialing shall be registerable.  make-busy indications shall
be transmitted by use of make-busy leads only as defined in 68.3 and
68.200.

    So, I agree with John that users need not worry about most of
the part 68 regulations, except for 68.102, which requires that
terminal equipment be registered (is that resistor or bridging clip
registered?  Is it a "transparent extension cord"?).  If telcos have
no problem with a line short for make-busy, then maybe we should
petition the FCC for a rule change.  Meanwhile, we probably otta
follow the rules.


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: Thu, 8 Apr 93 07:19:08 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Routing Calls via Alternate Providers


In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 246 [e-mail] (Carl
Oppedahl) wrote:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Eric
> Jacksch) writes:

>> We've finally come out of the dark ages and the past few months have
>> seen a number of non-bell companies begin to provide long distance
>> services.  In order to use these services, residential customers are
>> provided with a local seven digit access number and a ten digit or so
>> PIN.  While it is simple to get the computer to dial this, it is a bit
>> of a nusiance for voice calls.

> This post reminds me of 1980 or so, when all non-AT&T carriers were
> stuck offering their service this way.  It was called feature group D
> or B access; the former if the call cost money, the latter if the call
> was a 950-XXXX free call.

> I can't believe that now, in 1993, any carrier is still stuck with
> this.  It should be a straightforward matter for any carrier to get a
> 10XXX prefix that would route calls to it.  And it should be possible
> for any customer to simply call up the local telco and ask that all
> calls go to any particular carrier.

Citibank uses FGB for their credit card operations.  That's the only
number that can be called since their 800 number went away.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 07:38:07 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Telephone Fraud and Abuse


In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 247 [e-mail] (Sean
Malloy) writes:

> I'm an undergraduate telecom student doing a paper on toll fraud and
> am having some difficulty in finding recent sources.

> I would appreciate any information that can be passed on to me, either
> suggestions for articles, or personal experiences in this area. (For
> personal experiences, information such as how the system was
> compromised, how it was detected, and how you managed to secure the
> system would be most helpful.)

I'm surprised that PAT didn't pick up on this: Try the archives at
lcs.mit.edu.  I've used it quite often and obtained valuable
information and reading pleasure especially the historical articles
which I feel are gems.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 9:00:28 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA


I recall reading that DST stemmed from an idea of Benjamin Franklin,
who noticed daylight in the morning when it was early enough for most
people still to be asleep.

Yes, a farmer's going onto DST upsets the cows' schedule.  Obviously,
cows can't tell time and there is no way of explaining the time change
to them!

The biggest objection to using DST year-round is children going to
school in the dark in the morning.  This problem is most acute in the
western part of the time zone; further west within a time zone, clocks
don't change but the local sun time does (the sun rises and sets
later).

Regarding areas near a time-zone boundary: Some people grumble about
having to do business with people in the other time zone; in "In Cold
Blood", grumbling is noted in Holcomb, Kansas (was or is only 12 miles
east of time-zone boundary); and here on the east coast, I could hear
a powerful Fort Wayne (Indiana) radio station give the time during the
summer something like "9 PM -- 10 PM if you're in Ohio or Michigan".
(Indiana was on CDT or EST, in other words all on the same time; Ohio
and Michigan were on EDT except for some Michigan upper-peninsula
points near the Wisconsin border.)

If a state is split by a time-zone boundary, such boundary usually
runs along county lines.  I know of the AT&T message service
(800-562-6275) having to account for time differences; I also know
that some phone prefixes cross county lines, and I don't know how
these are reconciled if you're sending an AT&T message to a place near
the time-zone boundary.


[Moderator's Note: What is disouraging here in Chicago is we have five
and six year old children standing on street corners at 6:30 in the
morning when it is barely light outside so they can get picked up by
the school bus for their two hour ride to a school on the other side
of town. Now at least there is a little light outside at 6:30 (5:30
Standard Time). In January it was totally dark then.  Now at least it
is light when they come home. PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 9:26:45 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Moving to Same Phone Number


Exchange-area maps, eh?  I've done some work on the side correlating
zipcodes and phone prefixes.  Also, I wrote a while back about a case
where some people near Columbia and Ellicott City (Maryland) were
found to have been placed on the wrong exchange, and as a result some
of them were fighting to be "grandfathered" into that exchange.  (I
don't know what became of that case.)

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 8 Apr 93 14:37:48 GMT
Subject: Re: First Cellular Telephones Go Into Service In Cuba


> CELCUBA is now marketing its service among diplomatic missions,
> foreign companies and trade representatives ...

I'm SO sure!  C'mon, are people THAT dumb?  After all the news stories
all around the world about how easy and cheap it is to eavesdrop on
cellular phone calls, do they really think that ANY of those groups
are going to use cellular service inside a Communist country?  Or
anywhere, for that matter?

If I worked in ANY of those fields (or others, such as human rights
monitoring, where I had a reason to worry about who was listening to
my calls) the only way I'd CONSIDER using cellular was if I had a GOOD
built-in scrambler in my phone ... which I'll bet you dollars to
doughnuts is illegal in Cuba.

Nice try, Fidel, but we're not THAT dumb.  You weren't dumb enough to
smoke the poisoned cigars the CIA sent you, and we're not dumb enough
to broadcast sensitive data over easily-monitored radio channels.


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


[Moderator's Note: They probably use cell phones for non-confidential
conversations, and understand well the limitations involved.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 11:46:58 -0700
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA


Thanks for the note!  The history of time zones is really quite
interesting (but then I seem to find everything interesting!).  As I
recall, it was the railroads who finally standardized time.  It was
not necessary before then because transportation and communications
were so slow that no one noticed.  The current system has worked well
since the early days of railroads.  Do we now need another system?
Or, we just get used to it being a small world and rely on store and
forward technologies, such as email, fax and voicemail.  I still do a
lot of phone calls around the US, taking into account time zone
differences.  Most of my overseas communications (recently a fair
amount to Hong Kong and Taiwan) is by email.


Harold

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

From: krfiny![e-mail] (J. Jonas)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Stems From Use of Prodigy
Organization: Jeff's house of computer pieces
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 18:54:25 GMT


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

> On the Unix operating systems under which I run, I understand that
> "removing" a file merely clears the directory pointer to it; the data
> is still there until the space is initialized/overwritten for other
> use.

There's a major difference in that the UNIX file systems return free
disk blocks to a common "free list".  (I'm talking of the "classic" s5
file system although others are similar in freelist handling).  Users
CANNOT read from the free list (unless you have root privilege and are
reading the raw disk device, but that's cheating since you're
bypassing the entire file system).

There's no way I know for you to read the previous contents of the
disk block because:

1) blocks are allocated to a file only when you write(), and your data
overlays the previous contents of the block.

2) you never access the disk blocks or buffer cache directly: data is
copied to/from your process upon every read/write.

3) a process can read() only blocks that have been allocated by a
previous write().  Reading unallocated blocks gives a block of all
nulls.

4) real time systems that allow pre-allocating a file null out the
file so you can't inherit the previous contents.

What's the TELECOM relevance of this?

Ummm, well, UNIX is used on switches and billing systems and
telecommunications.


Jeffrey Jonas    [e-mail]

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

From: krfiny![e-mail] (J. Jonas)
Subject: Re: MS-DOS Comm Program That Prevents Toll Calls?
Organization: Jeff's house of computer pieces
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 19:08:28 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Breuckman) writes:

> I would not do this in software, the reason being that someone could
> easily circumvent your precautions by bringing in their own software
> or boot disk.

Ya, I agree that it's all too easy to gain/regain command mode on a
modem.  It's already been said how the user can grab the command mode
at the beginning and dial with ADTD, thus bypassing any software
restrictions.  And even if you force the session to begin with the
software autodialer and don't return control until the dial is
successful (as with a UNIX cu script where you don't have access to
the device until the dialer's sequence is complete and successful),
it's possible for the user to get back to command mode, hang up and
place another call manually (well, unless hanging up/losing carrier
drop DTR and drops the user out of terminal mode hmmm.)

This is my pet peeve about the in-band modem signalling.  I'm stating
to think that AT&T had the right idea all along with the ACU
(Automatic call units).  The dialer was separate from the modem, so a
single dialer could service a bank of modems.  It had its own serial
port, thus the strange UUCP configuration files that usually list the
tty port twice (one for control, one for data).  If you had one of
these babies, you could restrict all dialing to the dialer program
that filtered/screened/logged the numbers since no user could access
the dialer directly.

Sigh - I wish I had a job like Steve Ciarcia.  I'd bet he could build
a SCSI modem with a direct SCSI interface so all commands would be
quite separate from the data transfer.  Want Hayes compatibility - use
a software filter that translates the inband commands to the out of
band commands.  That would allow me to read statistics (such as error
rate) while the modem is active.  Telebit trailblazers would be
fantastic with such an interface -- I could monitor the transmission
quality unobtrusively in real time. Sigh -- it's all just wishful
thinking since Hayes command modes are 'the standard'.


Jeffrey Jonas    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Seth B Rothenberg)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Date: 8 Apr 93 19:42:20 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


In New York City, the number for time used to be NER-VOUS until they
changed it to 976-1212 ? until the pay 976- services came into being.

(I guess this would have been about 16 years ago).

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #250
******************************