Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1993.volume.13/vol13.iss251-300

Text File | 1993-05-03 | 1MB | 27,551 lines

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05695;
          9 Apr 93 3:57 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23286
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 9 Apr 1993 01:23:08 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31797
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 9 Apr 1993 01:22:03 -0500
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 01:22:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #251

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 9 Apr 93 01:22:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 251

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    I'm Sorry ... (TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: Routing Calls via Alternate Providers (Al Varney)
    Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal (Dub Dublin)
    Re: Telephones in the Army in the Korean War (Pete Lancashire)
    Re: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA (Ted Hadley)
    Re: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed Jonathan Sadler)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Richard Lucas)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Fred E.J. Linton)
    Calling 800 Numbers to Harrass Their Owners (Tim Crowley)
    Re: NPA-NXX by County Database (Carl Moore)
    Re: Artificial Diseased Voice Generator (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Modem Recommendations Sought (Nigel Ballard)
    Re: Toll Restriction vs Subscriber Line Access Charges (Martin Harriss)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 23:30:18 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: I'm Sorry ...


Due to 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 by 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 beleive 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 the did.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Thu,  8 Apr 93 16:52:57 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Routing Calls via Alternate Providers
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Carl
Oppedahl) writes:

> 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.

   Actually, Feature Group D defines the method of access TO the IXC.
Whether you use 10XXX+ or 950-XXXX to indicate which carrier, a FG-D
carrier can still receive the call over the same circuits.  FG-B
access TO an IXC was specified to only work for 950-XXXX calls.
Access via any other dialing pattern, such as a "local service number"
is only specified in a standard way for Feature Group A (line side)
carriers.

   The "toll-saver" boxes for businesses basically work by providing a
simple algorithm for doing call blocking (say, 1-900) and digit
prefixing.  For inter-LATA calls, it can prefix 10XXX or 950-XXXX to
the numbers, and some can handle PINs for the 950 calls.  Not much
more or less intelligent than a typical COCOT phone.  But you have to
really make a lot of calls in order for the provider to make back
their investment -- typically by getting a cut of the toll revenue as
an aggregator.  For residential use, how about getting phones with
many digit memory buttons, and put your access number on one and the
PIN on another button?  If the phone is fairly "dumb", it doesn't
prevent you from manually using several memory buttons to dial a
single 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, it's not the carrier (in most places) that's stuck -- it's
the carrier's choice to use a more primitive but cheaper interface to
the TELCo.  In many places, it's the absolute cheapest interface to
the telephone network (maybe cheaper than PBX, tie trunks, etc.).  You
pay by usage, but for some types of calls and volume, it makes sense
to some providers to stick with it.  10XXX prefixes are in short
supply, and Bellcore is frowning on non-IXC uses of these codes or the
950-XXXX numbers.  And current systems are not designed to route ALL
calls to a particular carrier, only those marked "inter-LATA".


Al Varney - just my opinion, of course

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

From: [e-mail] (Dub Dublin)
Subject: Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Chevron
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 21:03:44 GMT


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

> 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?

In my mind, this thread ties in nicely with the one about free 911
service.  I have used my calling card to place these types of calls in
situations where I _really needed_ to call someone, but I'm broken
down in the middle of nowhere, noplace is open, and I have no quarters
for the pay phone.  I should be able to do this if I want to -- the
cost will act as a deterrent to doing it routinely.

Note that in this case no one is required to supply something for me
to use this "right."  The FUNDAMENTAL difference between _rights_ and
"likes" is that a true right does not require anyone to give anything
up.  For instance, you have a right to free speech -- but I'm not
obligated to provide you with a soapbox.  This right presents no
obligation on me to give you anything, or even to listen to you.
Contrast this with the current procession of newfound "rights" we are
being accosted with as taxpayers: "rights" to free healthcare,
housing, food, higher education, jobless benefits, etc. -- all of
these require that someone else give up something.  It's time we
limited rights to the true and inalienable rights -- not just
redistribute economic or other priveleges.  (Walter Williams wrote an
excellent column on this a few weeks ago.)

In case you haven't guessed, I would be VERY opposed to having to pay
part of my phone bill to continue service to some deadbeat who won't
pay his.  Lifeline service is available at a very reasonable cost (I'm
guessing that the existing Lifeline rates are _already_ subsidized by
the rest of us...), but it is NOT a _right_ -- someone has to pay for
it!


Dub Dublin    [e-mail]
Chevron Information Technology   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Pete Lancashire)
Subject: Re: Telephones in the Army in the Korean War
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 20:27:25 GMT


[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

The crank was to generate ringing voltage. The 'phone system other
than having push to talk, an adaption of the (a) Bell local battery
exchange.  I used to have a four and a twelve line army switch board
made in the 1940. And still have the manuals for an expandable
switchboard, up to I think 100 subscribers and ten trunks.

> is: were there lines installed over the countryside?  I assume that

Usually the army 'net' at the time was separate from what ever
existed of the local phone system(s), although in Europe Signal Corp
'employees' did make use of the existing lines, mostly as trunk lines.

> 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.

I'm not from that era. But have studied the military point to point
communication systems used in WWII and what was use in Korea was in
concept not much different.

> There are some excellent telecom history files in the archives and
> hopefully more can be added.

I'd like to see more about the multiplex scheme that was developed by
Western Electic/BTL. Not may people have heard about it. It saved the
US Amry in WWII a lot of time and material. I have a Bell Labs report
on it, they were very proud of the scheme, not only a working field
multiplex systems in the 1940's but even the cable was made in
standard lenghts, with 'quick (dis)connect' connectors.


Pete Lancashire   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Hadley)
Subject: Re: Time Changing, and Civilized Areas of the USA
Organization: Cylink Corp.
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 16:18:01 GMT


Although not the USA, if I am not mistaken, the former USSR (the
Commonwealth of Russian States?) uses _permanent_ daylight savings
time. They simply leave their clocks ahead one full hour all year
long.  I, personally, favor this approach. The problem is not in
wanting to go to work earlier, but rather in convincing one's boss
that 4:30 pm (not 5:30) is the correct quitting time.


Ted A. Hadley  [e-mail]         "Credo qvia absvrdvm est" -- Tertullian
Cylink Corporation, 310 N. Mary Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086  USA    408-735-5847
All opinions expressed are my own, and probably not liked by my employer.


[Moderator's Note: Particularly if you continue to start at 9 AM
rather than 8 AM!  :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Sadler)
Subject: Re: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed
Organization: Lachman Technology, Inc., Naperville, IL
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1993 14:54:27 GMT


Actually, Illinois Bell has a similar problem.

In the past year, I've had five phone bills printed prior to the due
date for the previous month.  Since I pay all of my bills at the local
drug store on the due date, Illinois Bell ended up assessing a late
fee for each of these months.

Each of these months I had to call them up and ask for the late charge
to be reversed ...

My bill for the month of March showed up yesterday -- again, it is due
after the date my bill is printed.  Will they ever learn?


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] (Richard Lucas)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Organization: Boulder Valley School District
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 01:20:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (D.W.J.) writes:

> 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.

     Boulder, with NIST (the former Nat'l Bureau of Standards), offers
a really 'good time' (tied to the atomic clock) at 303-499-7111.


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

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

Date: 8-APR-1993 22:43:45.62
From: Fred E.J. Linton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch


Laurence Chiu <[e-mail]> mentioned that one could ...

> ... dial POPCORN in most any area codes and get the time.

The New Haven exchanges of area 203 dial SPRINGS (777 4647) for the
time of day (preceded by a short SNET "better service tip").


Fred E.J. Linton  Wesleyan U. Math. Dept.  649 Sci. Tower  Middletown, CT 06459
E-mail:  <[e-mail]>     ( or  <fejlinton@{att|mci}mail.com> )
Tel.:         + 1 203 776 2210 (home)      or     + 1 203 347 9411 x2249 (work)

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Crowley)
Subject: Calling 800 Numbers to Harass Their Owners
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 1993 19:12:18 -0500


The George Bush '92 campaign here in Seattle had to change it's phone
number at least three times because it was posted on telephone polls with
suggestions that it be flooded with hate calls.  I thought it was
great!


Seeeeee Ya

[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Since you feel telephone harrassment is a great
sport, perhaps you'll provide your number here so that it can be
posted around the net with the suggestion people flood you with
obnoxious calls, and you won't even have to pay for the calls unless
you give us an 800 number. This is wrong. It is not a question of it
being George Bush, or anyone else. A few years ago, {The Advocate}, a
newsmagazine for the gay community published a very positive story
about a neurotic, very disturbed man in Georgia who used his computer
and modem to trash Jerry Falwell's 800 line to the tune of $150,000
(yes, one hundred fifty *thousand* dollars) in one month alone. They
were very pleased by the financial damage which had been done.

The guy was arrested and charged criminally; in addition, Falwell's
organization sued him in a civil action to recoup their losses; of
course they could not collect nickle one because the guy was a total
loser to begin with. Falwell changed his 800 number; {The Advocate}
published the new one and encouraged people to load his automatic call
distributor and service representatives with silent hangup calls,
bogus calls for merchandise sent to wrong addresses, fraud credit card
orders, etc.

I wrote a letter to {The Advocate} to the person who was then the
publisher and told him if those were the kind of games he liked to
play, that his publication's own 800 number ran the risk of being
polluted beyond recovery. I asked him what he would think about a
message seen by millions of Americans saying "if you don't like the
gay lifestyle and you want to register your opinion, call 800-xxx-xxxx.
And while your at it, waste their time by putting in bogus phone
orders for magazine subscriptions, etc. "  ... "Well, um, " he said,
"I hadn't thought about that ...".  I suggested he start thinking
about it.  I did not like Bush; I don't like Falwell; but games like
you suggest are totally wrong no matter who is the victim.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 10:45:12 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NPA-NXX by County Database


I do NOT know of such (and be cautioned -- some phone prefixes cross
county lines).  What I've been doing on the side is making notes by
zipcodes and noting what phone prefixes serve each zipcode (or group
of zipcodes, for a multi-zipcode city); then, if possible, I note the
zipcode for the place name of each prefix used.

FOR EXAMPLE (old area code 301, now 410):

Havre de Grace, MD 21078 served by 939 prefix.  Parts of zipcode 21078
served by 734 and 272,273 prefixes (Churchville and Aberdeen
respectively, which are the names of post offices with zip codes 21028
and 21001 respectively).

Notice that some phone prefixes have place names which are not names
of post offices.

The zip code directory (from the postal service) lists the county where
each post office is located.

Perhaps we discuss this via direct email?

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Artificial Diseased Voice Generator
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1993 19:21:43 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> David Leibold <DLEIBOLD@VM1.
YorkU.CA> writes:

> 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).

    This reminds me of something I heard at a teaching retreat put
on by the school where I teach ... seems a student left a message on
the instructor's voicemail in a really bad sounding voice saying
he/she was too sick to make it to the exam that day.  At the end of
the message, the student realized that he/she had not given his/her
name, so in a normal voice was something like, "Oh ... this is
so-and-so".

    It is interesting how we spend all this creative energy to
produce a product to help people lie.  Perhaps we should design
something that does some good for society?


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] (Nigel Ballard)
Subject: Re: Modem Recommendations Sought
Organization: Infamy Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 14:08:36 +0000


John,

YORIKO in the UK sells a SUPERB Internal modem for 179 Pounds plus
VAT.

It's got an onboard 16550, it's V32bis as well as 14,400 fax. And cos
it's got the Rockwell chipset, will also work set to Japanese
SPEED-DIAL, most useful in the UK if you are unlucky enough to be in a
pulse dial region.

Now I know they do an external version, but it would not have the
advantagous NS16550A UART. Why not give them a bell for info, or look
out their advert in {Computer Shopper}.

Tel:[phone]


Cheers,

NIGEL BALLARD  | Int: [e-mail]
BOURNEMOUTH    | Cis: 100015.2644   RADIO-G1HOI
UNITED KINGDOM | AMAZING! and all down two wires

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin Harriss)
Subject: Re: Toll Restriction vs. Subscriber Line Access Charge
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 16:58:36 GMT
Organization: Beechwood Data Systems


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

> 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.

But surely "Mandated" is too strong a word here.  The LEC's do not
have to charge it, but they are allowed to if they so feel like it.

If I had a monopoly and I was allowed to charge my millions of clients
$3.50 a month (more, I think, for business lines) essentially for
doing nothing, I know that I sure as hell would!

I'm believe that if more of the gerenal public knew what this charge
was for (i.e to line the pockets of the LEC's) it would quite quickly
go away.


Martin Harriss    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #251
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08558;
          9 Apr 93 5:09 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22465
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 9 Apr 1993 02:09:45 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01171
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 9 Apr 1993 02:09:01 -0500
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 02:09:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #252

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 9 Apr 93 02:08:45 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 252

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    I'm Sorry ... (TELECOM Moderator)
    Canadian Phone-Sex TV Ads Softened (Marketing Magazine via Nigel Allen)
    NYNEX/NY <-> BAMS/DC Call Delivery (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Red Boxes (was Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?) (Maxime Taksar)
    SkyPagers: Looking For More Information (Timothy M. Stark)
    ATT Universal Card Problem? (Laurence Chiu)
    Line-In-Use Indicator? (Ben Cox)
    Help for Book -- I'm Sure Some of You Have Bits to Add (Richard J. Smith)
    Information Wanted on High Speed Buses (Tom Sommer)
    Latest Prodigy News: New Charge For Users ([e-mail])
    Help or Instruction Manual Needed For Displayphone (John Ross)
    I Received First Orange Card Bill (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 23:30:18 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: I'm Sorry ...


Due to 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 by 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 beleive 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.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 04:35:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Canadian Phone-Sex TV Ads Softened
Organization: R-node Public Access Unix - 1 416 249 5366


Phone-Sex Ads Softened

(from {Marketing} magazine, Toronto, April 5, 1993)
    By Jim McLegunn

    The Telecaster Committee of Canada has moved to rein in the
methods phone-sex services use to advertise themselves on television.

    The committee, which approves commercials aired on Canadian
private television, toughened its guidelines on 976 lines after a
spate of criticism from the public and the media. [Note from NDA: The
committee has no jurisdiction over advertising on radio or in
newspapers. Individual radio stations and newspapers make their own
decisions on what advertising they will accept.] Some people objected
to sexual imagery in the advertising, while others claimed the spots
could mislead viewers.

    The revised guidelines do not affect spots approved before March
8, 1993, which can air indefinitely. Major changes include:

    Advertising for 976 services cannot feature negative or degrading
sex-role portrayals, or sexual innuendo and provocativeness.

    It cannot imply that the model seen and/or heard in the commercial
is the one who will answer calls to the sex line.

    It must make clear that long-distance charges apply, and cannot
use the term "toll charges," which the committee said many people do
not understand.

    It must state the price of the call, including taxes.

    It must state that callers must be 18 years of age or older.

    It must identify the advertiser under the name listed with Bell
Canada [i.e., in the phone directory or with directory assistance]

    Pat Beatty, the committee's executive director, says many
commercials airing under the previous guidelines "were selling the
girl and not the service. They would show a model mouthing 'Call me.'
But you weren't calling them -- they were just models appearing in the
ads."

    Beatty said some callers didn't realize that long-distance charges
applied, and that many of the services are based outside Canada -- in
the U.S., Venezuela and, ironically, the Virgin Islands.

    Sex-line advertisers are complying with the new guidelines, using
third-person references ("call them"), longer explanations of the
service and more discreet camera shots in their ads.


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada    [e-mail]

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

Date: 8-APR-1993 14:51:23.69
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: NYNEX/NY <-> BAMS/DC Call Delivery


NYNEX/NY (SID 00022) and BAMS/DC (SID 00018?) have recently started
call delivery between their two systems. I just heard of this addition
yesterday, and today called a NYNEX/NY customer who was in DC to
confirm it. (I called NYNEX for the roam port for DC to reach the guy,
and the customer service representative very casually tells me that a
port is no longer needed, as if everyone knew ...!)

I think I'll have to eat my words about how the "B" side always lags
behind the "A" in terms of networking; it seems in this case that the
"B" side has at least temporarily surpassed the "A".

The "A" carrier in NY (Cell One/NY) currently delivers calls to MOST
of CT, Springfield, Mass, ComCast of New Jersey, Sussex Cellular of
New Jersey, ComCast Metrophone/Philly, and ComCast/Delaware. It also
delivers to other non-adjacent cities via the NACN, such as Albany,
San Francisco, Miami, most of Canada, etc. However, locally, CONY does
not connect with many neighboring systems (such as Orange County, NY).
Also, in markets that are connected, roam rates are usually $.99 per
minute.

NYNEX and other local "B" carriers have a $.75 per minute rate in all
call delivery markets (incoming and outgoing calls). A NYNEX/NY
customer can now get calls in: Washington/Baltimore (00018),
Philly/DE/South Jersey/North East PA (Allentown, Bethlehem, Reading;
maybe even further west), all of New Jersey (including Sussex, Ocean
County, and Atlantic City), Orange County, NY (00486?), Poughkeepsie,
NY, Albany, NY, all of Mass (Boston, Pittsfield, Franklin County), all
of Connecticut (including Litchfield County, not connected on the "A"
side to Metro Mobile), and Rhode Island, and southern New Hampshire.
Phew!

A rather sudden and major improvement on the "B" side in terms of
networking.  In my opinion, quite impressive.

(BTW, features work in SOME markets, and from what I am told calls
will STILL not go back to voicemail if unanswered in the visited
market. Anyone care to confirm or refute this?)


Doug    [e-mail]  //  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 14:25:03 -0700
From: Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS <[e-mail]>
Subject: Red Boxes (was Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Marc Blackwood) writes:

> 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.

The amount of misinformation on this topic is simply amazing!

PAT -- do you think, perhaps, that this should go in the FAQ?  I
believe I've already posted something on this topic.

In the US, the vast majority of coin phone use the ACTS (I believe
this stands for Automated Coin Telephone System or Signalling, but I
could very well be wrong on the terminology).  The same signalling
format is used both by the LECs and AT&T for coin service.

Contrary to what has been posted here recently, there *is* a degree of
Out of Band (OOB) signalling involved.  It's just that what is
transmitted OOB is a precisely one binary condition -- whether or not
there is a real coin on the tray (I'll let someone else explain how
coin phone coin mechanisms work).  For a local call, the phone will
signal this only if the full amount needed has been depositted (e.g.
20 cents here in sunny California).  For a toll call (I believe the
phone can tell the difference because the switch reverses line voltage
 -- someone please correct me if I'm wrong), any of a nickel, dime, or
quarter will set the required "bit".

Because of the way the OOB signalling behaves, "Red Boxes" only do
interesting things for toll calls.  So what do they do?  They simulate
the tones that the coin phone would send if coins were inserted.

These "tones" are actually just one sound that is timed and spaced
differently to represent the different coins.  The sound itself is
dual-tone, made by mixing a 1700Hz sine wave and a 2200Hz sine wave.
Take a look at the DTMF frequencies: it should become relatively
obvious why a DTMF encoder can be modified to make the "Red Box"
sound.

The following table represents the timing for each coin.  The numbers
represent timing in milliseconds.  Numbers with asterisks (*) around
them represent sound, plain number represent silence.

nickel    *80*
dime    *80* 40 *80*
quarter *80* 40 *40* 40 *40* 40 *40* 40 *40*

Spacing between each coin is in the hundreds of milliseconds, I would
guess, but I've never cared enough to find out.

Any comments, questions, or corrections are appreciated.


Maxime Taksar    KC6ZPS   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy M. Stark)
Subject: SkyPagers: Looking For More Information
Date: 8 Apr 1993 19:29:52 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


     I am looking for more information about skypagers (aka SkyTel
pagers) about their services. Can you give me a listing of pager
companies with service information? If so, I will appreciate that.
Thank you!

     I am looking for specific options about skypagers:

     * 800 Number
     * TDD/Modem Access for deaf people
     * Mexico/Canada/USA-wide service
     * Additional services for roaming service, etc..
     * Affordable service pricing


Timothy Stark               Digex:  [e-mail] (Preferred)
837 North Van Dorn St       Portal: [e-mail]
Alexandria, Va. 22304-2723  TDD: [phone] Pager: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: ATT Universal Card Problem?
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 02:41:52 GMT


Recently I caught the tail end of a news item about the ATT Universal
card. It seemed to be about ATT's misrepresentation of the card's
discount structure -- i.e. you get 10% off calls but they fail to
mention that the calling card surcharge is 80 cents. Trouble is it was
on a Chinese News channel and the speed of the Cantonese spoken taxed
my comprehension abilities somewhat! I never saw a similar item on a
local news station or in the newspapers. Can anybody elaborate on
this? I have a vested interest as a ATT Universal card holder.


Thanks,

Laurence Chiu    Walnut Creek, CA

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

Subject: Line-In-Use Indicator?
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 21:49:13 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)


I'm looking for a design for a simple line-in-use indicator.  All I
want is a box I can put between the wall and the phone that will light
a LED when the line is in use.

All the designs I've seen for this are part of the phone (or coupler)
and are triggered by the hookswitch, rather than by activity on the
line.

Is such a device possible?  Unfortunately, although I know what the
line looks like when nobody's on it (48V DC), I don't know much about
what to look for when it's in use (does the 48V disappear?  Are the
other signals just superimposed on it?).

Thanks in advance for any help.


Ben Cox      [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: This comes up all the time here. Perhaps one or
more readers will send you the schematics directly via email.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 11:31:01 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Help for Book -- I'm Sure Some of You Have Bits to Add


"Navigating The Internet Workshop List"

Remember me?

I bombarded you with e-mail from November to January with the workshop
"Navigating the Internet: An Interactive Workshop."  I hope you've
used the Internet enough now to consider yourself an expert.

Several notes.

I'm inputting the evaluation into a database.  I'm about a third of
the way through at 377.  I'll send you results when I'm done.

Those of you who are librarians and are going to ALA in New Orleans if
you want to get together let's meet at the Cafe Pontalba off of
Jackson Square in the French Quarter on June 27th about 7:30. That is
a bit after the library school reunions so we can have ours at that
time.

I've been asked to write a book on the Internet and I could use your
help. In particular, I'd like to hear from those of you that use the
Internet and how it has been helpful in your job, coursework, research
or in any other way.

Do you have any favorite Internet resources that would be of interest
to others to learn?  Do you have any anecdotes, stories or 'faux pas'
that you would like to share with new users of the Intenet. (I have a
few of the latter!)

I'd appreciate any stories you have that might tell people about your
favorite place to hang-out on the net, best place to get marvelous
things, best tricks to do a particular thing on the net.  Where to go
for MAC stuff, meteorology, or space stuff, sound related stuff,
graphics, etc. Stories from outside the U.S. would be especially
welcome.

We're also looking for your tips and opinions on technical issues.
Things like commercial connections (MCI, Compuserve, the WELL and
others) and software that you use to access the Internet.

If you have anything you'd like to contribute, I'd appreciate hearing
from you.  Let me know if you want your name and Internet address to
go with the story. The ten best contributions in the authors'
estimation will recieve a FREE copy of the book!!!

Your stories will not only help with the book but will add spice to
future workshops.


Thanks in advance.

Richard J. Smith   [e-mail]    University of Southwestern Louisiana
Durpre Library     Lafayette, LA 70503

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Sommer)
Subject: Information Wanted on High Speed Buses
Organization: Teleglobe
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 14:47:35 GMT


I am looking for a good survey paper which compares high speed digital
buses. This includes the likes of Futurebus +, VMEBus, Quickring,
etcetera.  I'd like a chart which contains comparisons of information
such as electrical (throughput, arbitration scheme, sync/async, etc),
physical (# slots, connector, board size, hot swappable, etc), and
cost (interface chips, connector, backplane, etc). Recent publication
is a must. I've been using DiGiacomo's book "Digital Bus Handbook" but
it does not offer comparitive information and is several years old.

  I'm also looking for information on building a switch rather than
bus based system. The ultimate application for all this is a
multimedia hub so information along those lines is also appreciated.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Latest Prodigy News: New Charge For Users
Date: 8 Apr 93 09:50:06 EST
Organization: Ball State University, Muncie, In - Univ. Computing Svc's


I would like to inform you of what is recently going on on *P*.  This
is as close to real news as USENET gets.  *P* has decided to institute
a timed rate on their bulletin board system.  As you may not know, it
is extreamly slow.  The users of the boards have all become angry.
Those with *P* access can quickly get a comprehension of how many
people feel this way by JUMPing to PRODIGY BB and selecting the topic
"Pricing Plans".  Wow!  Try the subject BB FEES PETITION and see a
note with so many replies that the computers cannot handle any more.

There is a massive boycott planned on 4/15.  Amazing that one small
change could upset so many people!  Many on that topic are searching
for another service to use.  I am trying to direct them to Internet,
the best value in the business, through the use of NIXPUB.
Unfortunatly, NIXPUB doesn't seem to be too acurate.


[Moderator's Note: I have recently put a complete copy of Nixpub in
the Telecom Archives under the file name 'public.access.sites' and
will try to finish up my work there (in the archives) and have the
file on line and available before I lose my phone service Friday. The
Telecom Archives is available using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.   PAT]

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

From: John Ross <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help or Instruction Manual Needed for Displayphone
Organization: UTCC Public Access
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 11:47:22 -0400


I have inherited an old Northern Telecom Displayphone, which
unfortunately did not come with an instruction or user's manual.  Does
anyone out there have one of these?


Thanks,

John

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 10:36:46 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: I Received First Orange Card Bill


It arrived in what the postal service calls a "flat": an envelope
large enough to handle a flat 8 1/2 by 11 inch sheet.  I received five
sheets of paper (apparently the top one, as in my local phone bill, is
to go in the return envelope along with my payment).

The bill in which the envelope was sent had 52 cents postage, H meter
342322, Merrifield, VA.  Return address is Long Distance Service,
Inc., 8180 Greensboro Drive, 4th Floor, McLean, VA 22102.  The payment
is to be mailed to same firm name but at P.O. Box 9670, McLean, VA
22102-0670.  Phone [phone], fax [phone].

On the invoice, one of the lines having zero amount is "GROSS RECEIPTS
SURCHARGE: MD (2%), DC (9.7%)".  I don't know why I get that line.
The calls I made were from Delaware to Maryland and vice versa.

I made seven calls for a total of 14.2 minutes (billing is in six
second increments, and six seconds is 1/10 minute).  At 25 cents a
minute, this would be $3.55 (it came out as $3.57 because of rounding,
given four calls each of 0.5 minute duration, charged at 13 cents
each).

In the itemized list, the column I don't quite understand is FRM
(From?).  What is it telling me?  I made two calls, partly for test
purposes right at the outset, from my Newark (Del.) residence phone to
Aberdeen, MD, and they are showing MAK in FRM column.  Other calls
were from Maryland to Delaware, and they display BAL (Baltimore,
right?) in FRM column.

Front page says customer number must be present on checks.  Would that
be the account number displayed elsewhere on that page?  (Itemized
list has that number plus an "authcode" and an "acctcode".)

The itemized list has a call at 2:10 PM to a certain number for 0.5
minutes and that same number at 2:12 PM to that same number for 10.4
minutes, both on March 30.  If I tried calling twice, I do not recall
getting through the first time.  (I did call that same number again on
April 1.)


[Moderator's Note: You must be on a different billing cycle than me. I
got the first card (about a week before anyone on this list) and I
still don't have my first bill yet.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #252
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08716;
          9 Apr 93 5:11 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11830
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 9 Apr 1993 02:45:10 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01648
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 9 Apr 1993 02:44:30 -0500
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 02:44:30 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #253

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 9 Apr 93 02:44:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 253

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    I'm Sorry ... (TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Mike McNally)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Charles Mattair)
    ISDN on Local Loop Pairs (Michael J. Hayes)
    Re: FAX-Machine/FAX-Modem (David Y. Chang)
    Re: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed (Jeff Sicherman)
    TDD Specification In Telecom Archives (Curtis E. Reid)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Mark Walsh)
    GTE Mobilenet Woes in CA (Dave Rand)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 23:30:18 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: I'm Sorry ...


Due to 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 by 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 beleive 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 the did. If you need to reach me, you can still do so through my
Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690.


Patrick Townson

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

From: vail![e-mail] (Mike McNally)
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?
Date: 8 Apr 93 13:58:37 GMT



[e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator) writes:

> ...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 anything, this situation calls *not* for BBS operators to bend over
further in efforts to "appease" the system, but rather for everyone to
raise public consciousness bring down the Big Brothers who now feel
free to wield this kind of oppressive power.

> ...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?

After the successful litigation and establishment of damage-award
precedent by Mr. Steve Jackson, I suspect that the Secret Service et
al will be somewhat less cavalier.

> ... And, you could be considered a co-conspirator.

This turns my stomach.

> 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 ...

Once again, this must stop.  *That* is where the energy of every "good
citizen" must be directed.

> "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.

"The innocent need not fear."  I guarantee you that I'd "say that".

> Police officer and AT&T man look at each other and snicker.

This is believable, and revolting.  I wonder whether I could get a
police officer to accompany me and snicker when I visit the AT&T
office to complain about an egregious billing error?

> He calls on his radioo ... in the cop's estimation, you're an asshole;
> you know your rights and he certainly knows his as an officer.

His *rights* as an officer, or his *power*, vested in him by the gun
on his belt and the festering corrupted system that put it there?

> 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.

!!!!!!!!!

> They also get to have their equipment seized and sit in jail
> if it comes to that ... they're nobody special.

Oh boy.  i.e., they have no special exemptions from the outrageous
abuses likely to be committed against the citizenry by the "authorities".

> 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.

When young people cease to have this "naive" view of the
Constitution, my love for this country will dry up and blow away.

> They know their rights ... but they have yet to be bopped over
> the head with a policeman's billy club for their impudence.

Grrrrrrrrrrrr..........

> 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 ...

Fine.  Sit in your hole and just hope they leave you alone.  It's not
for me, brother, and I rejoice in the knowledge that there are people
like John around who are similarly committed.

I am confident that if Sam Adams could read what you've written here,
he'd immediately begin signing up volunteers.  I'd be first in line.
Call me a naieve wide-eyed air-head, but this plucks a big string for
me.

Elevating blood pressure prevents me from continuing.  I don't run a
BBS, but more than anything this discussion has made me want to.


[Moderator's Note: You say 'when young people cease to have this view,
your love for America will dry up and blow away ...' Well, mine
already has dried up. How about that ... This isn't the same place I
was born and raised in, not by a long shot.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 11:22:53 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


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

> [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
> [etc...]

PAT:

   They are that bad.  Read comp.org.eff.talk, sci.crypt or most of
the privacy groups for a while.

Civil Forfeiture is a serious problem WRT to law enforcement these
days and in many ways is more corrupting than "mob" money ever was.
While not directly related to telecom and computer seizures, the
article included below will illustrate the problem.  The article was
extracted from a thread concerning the FBI wire tap proposal.  I have
more comments after the article.

  Xref: synercom sci.crypt:1391 comp.org.eff.talk:2770
  From: [e-mail] (Mel Beckman)
  Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.org.eff.talk
  Subject: Re: Prof. D. Denning's trust in the FBI
  Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 00:48:27 PST
  Organization: Beckman Software Engineering
  Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
  Reply-To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> denning@
guvax.acc.georgetown.edu writes:

> I said that the events that Marc and the other CACM commentators of
> my article referred to did not occur under the current wiretap
> statutes, which date back to the 1968 wiretap law and the 1978 Foreign
> Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

Dorothy,

  But in your article, and in online discussions, you many times
pointed to the laws against illegal wiretapping and said "those laws
will protect citizens against illegal taps." But the taps on King and
the others *were* illegal under any wiretapping laws that were in
force at the time, which seems good evidence that we can't count on
such laws for protection from offensive government taps.

   Here is what you can expect from the government: in Ventura County,
CA, where I live, the LA County Sheriff's Dept. raided a (later shown
to be innocent) rancher's house near Malibu. They broke down his front
door, and when the alarmed rancher appeared with a gun, they shot and
killed him. Their "probable cause" for obtaining a warrant was
spectrographic indications from an aircraft survey that marijuana was
growing on the rancher's property.  No plants or drugs or contraband
or evidence of any crime was ever found.  The rancher, Don Scott, had
no record.

A subsequent aircraft survey still showed the same "spectrographic"
evidence (never before used to obtain a warrant). The ranch was in
Ventura county, and the warrant was for a nonexistent LA county
address. The Ventura county sheriff started an investigation, as he
was never consulted in the raid (as required by law). The investigation,
released today, revealed the LA county sheriff had the rancher's
property assessed before the raid, and had prepared paperwork for
asset forfeiture in anticipation of success. Also today, the LA
sherrif's own investigation conclued the shooting was "justified"
because the rancher had a weapon in his hand when his door was kicked
in. Earlier reports, however, said that the elapsed time between
kicking the door in and shooting the rancher was under five seconds.
[This time has now been verified.]

   My point is that the motivations of individuals in government are
no more immune to corruption than anybody's. The system can be
manipulated (in this case, perhaps out of a desire to cash in on an
8-million dollar asset seizure) to obtain warrants, and such warrants
often are executed unsafely, with devastating results to innocent
civilians. You simply cannot trust the law as a practical restraint
against official abuse.

<end of included article>

This article was written shortly after the incident and certain of the
facts have proven to be incorrect as initially reported.  There
actually was no spectroscopic evidence, this was confusion on the
reporter's part.  The LA county DA, after some amount of prodding,
ruled that excessive force was used.  The {Ventura County Star Free
Press} reports that the Ventura County DA has stated that he now has
incontravertable evidence that the LASD deliberately obtained the
warrant using false evidence.  Unfortunately, juristictional issues
may prevent Ventura from directly filing charges.

I can also send you a series of articles from the {Pittsburg Press}
detailing abuses in civil forfeiture in you are interested.

Believe ...


Charles Mattair         (work)    [e-mail]
<standard.disclaimer>     (home)    [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 20:43 GMT
From: Michael J. Hayes <[e-mail]>
Subject: ISDN on Local Loop Pairs


I am currently working on modelling the transmission properties of copper
 "voice-grade" pairs in the local loop. Implementation of ISDN here in
Ireland requires 2B+D+housekeeping= 160 kbit/s. This "high" bit-rate
is not what the copper was designed for, but it works surprisingly
well, up to a point. It has been said that a call can be set up on a
0.50 mm copper pair of length six loop kilometers. Can anyone tell me
is this claim true or false?

     I know from my tests on an 800 metre length of this stuff that
the high-frequency components of the signal die off into background
noise after a couple of hundred meters (which is probably a good
thing, because if they reached the far end, they would be behind time
and cause inter-symbol interference.)

    Has anyone else done testing/know of tests like this?  I would
be much obliged to hear. Email or post to group, but please email me
personally if your posting isn't published / is truncated.


Thanks.

                MiX.
email main:         in%"[e-mail]"
email secondary: in%"[e-mail]"
paper:         Michael J. Hayes, Dept. of Computer Applications,
         Dublin City University,
         Glasnevin, Dublin 9, IRELAND

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

From: [e-mail] (David Y Chang)
Subject: Re: FAX-Machine/FAX-Modem
Date: 9 Apr 93 03:07:27 GMT
Organization: Unisys/Convergent, San Jose, CA


> 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.

I've been watching for this kind of product and the one I bought and
used is called "FaxScanner" which allows you to scan images from a fax
machine and stores as PCX file on your PC via a PC-FAX, but it doesn't
work the other way around (i.e. use FAX machine as a printer by
sending FAX from a PC-FAX) which it really should theoretically.

Product : FaxScanner
Company : SVA Software, Inc.
          Coral Gables, FL 33146
Phone :   [phone]


David Y Chang - Unisys Corp., San Jose, CA    INET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 23:30:10 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] quotes the
{Los Angeles Times}:

> 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.

  [ deleted ]

> 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.

> [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]

   Nor do some Moderators, who, though they have no specific knowledge
about the merits of the case under discussion, the behaviors of the
parties to it, or the history of the dispute, feel qualified to throw
some reactionary, generic remarks at it to show their superiority.


Jeff Sicherman

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

Date: 08 Apr 1993 09:44:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Curtis E. Reid <[e-mail]>
Subject: TDD Specification For Telecom Archives


TDD Specifications are now available in the Telecom Archives. The
archives can be accessed using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.


Curtis E. Reid                [e-mail]
Rochester Institute of Technology/NTID    [e-mail] (DECUS)
52 Lomb Memorial Drive             716.475.6089 TDD/TT 475.6895 Voice
Rochester, NY 14623-5604  U.S.A.    716.475.6500 Fax (Business Use Only)


[Moderator's Note: Curtis gave me this file a few weeks ago, but I've
been mentally occupied with other things and did not get a chance to
work on the archives for a couple weeks until Thursday (partially),
and I will try to finish straightening out the newly arrived files on
Friday morning if I can do so before my phone is shut off.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Walsh)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Date: 8 Apr 93 21:09:22 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA


Here in 707 land, POP-xxxx works as it did in 415 (now 510) land where
I grew up.  I had thought that this POP-xxxx thing was universal.  A
few years back, I was on business in 617 and called it at about
midnight from my hotel, only to wake somebody who refused to believe
that such a thing as POP-xxxx exists.

As we all know by now, this time comes off of a WWV/WWVH clock.  A few
years ago, people calling POP-xxxx found that it was off by an hour.
To make a long story short, someone had bumped a switch that read
"Normal/Daylight Savings."

> [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]

When I was a kid, NWS was 936-1212.


Mark Walsh (walsh@optilink) -- UUCP: uunet!optilink!walsh
Amateur Radio: KM6XU@WX3K -- AOL: [e-mail] -- USCF: L10861

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Rand)
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1993 22:30:56 PDT
Subject: GTE Mobilenet Woes in CA


Recently, thanks in part to our Esteemed Moderator's long distance
programs, I had occasion to look at the long distance portion of my
GTE Mobilenet Cellular telephone bill.  I saw several calls that I had
made that seemed to be higher in cost than I would otherwise expect.
Thinking that perhaps rates were different on cell phones, I called
GTE Customer service.

After the mandatory wait for a representative, I was told that:

1) GTE uses AT&T as their primary outgoing long distance service;
2) Sprint is used as a backup;
3) AT&T Direct Dial rates are charged for any calls outside of
   your service area, plus airtime;
4) A selected long distance carrier is not available from GTE;
5) AT&T would have to rate any calls, as GTE did not have any
   rating information, and they "selected the cheapest service
   for you automatically";

I checked the calls in question with AT&T, and found that the AT&T
rates were about 1/3rd of the GTE billed rates. A 0.30/min call on GTE
would cost 0.10/min on AT&T. A call to GTE again confirmed that they
charge only the AT&T rates -- no surcharge.  I asked to speak to a
supervisor. The supervisor confirmed the story. I asked *HIM* to call
AT&T and check their rates.  A very nervous supervisor called me back
a few minutes later, and promised to check in to it further --
apparently there *WAS* a surcharge, or something ... that was 04/02/93.
He promised a call back 04/05/93.

On 04/06/93, I called again, and was given the same "we charge AT&T
rates" story. I again asked for a supervisor, explained the situation,
and asked for a timely resolution. On 04/07/93, I also asked for the
telephone numbers of the CPUC.  They gave me disconnected numbers
(both 800 and 415).  They did, however, promise me an answer by 10 AM.
At 4 PM, a *VERY* worried and upset supervisor called me to explain
that they still didn't have a good answer, and would I please give
them another day or two to solve the problem.

Today, I spoke with the head of the Customer Service department --
Gail Carpenter (number available on request).  GTE Mobilnet apparently
did not notice that AT&T had changed its rates, and has been billing
customers with an old billing tape for the past few *YEARS*. They
promised that I would receive a credit for my calls billed in error. I
asked them if they were going to notify any other customers ...

According to Ms. Carpenter, GTE Mobilnet has no plans at this time to
notify existing or past customers of their error. She indicated that
the decision to do so (or not) would be done at "a higher level".
There is no expected date of such a decision. She further indicated
that it would be "very hard" to re-rate all of the calls made by
customers over the years.

If you are a GTE Mobilnet Customer, or if you would like more
information, please feel free to contact me.


Dave Rand     10288 0-700-FOR-RAND
{pyramid|mips|bct|vsi1}!daver!dlr   Internet: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #253
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18796;
          9 Apr 93 19:15 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13414
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 9 Apr 1993 16:45:14 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14041
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 9 Apr 1993 16:44:24 -0500
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 16:44:24 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #254

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 9 Apr 93 16:44:15 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 254

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    One Last Time ... (TELECOM Moderator)
    Workshop - ATM in the Government Sector (Michael R. Brown)
    Re: Stupid Switch Tricks (Warren Burstein)
    Re: Answering Machine Feature (Mark Steiger)
    Re: How to Busy Out a Line? (Warren Burstein)
    Re: Jacking In at the Demarc (John Gilbert)
    Where to Find Official Docs on ... (Michael Cox)
    Re: 911 Service for Deadbeats (Rebecca Snyder)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Rob Boudrie)
    Re: NPA-NXX by County Database (Rob Boudrie)
    Looking For Panel Mounted 1-A Keyset (Warren Tucker)
    Atmel, Intel and Flash Memories (Tyler R. Holcomb)
    Max RS-232 Cable Lengths at 9600 Baud (George A. Perkins)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Michael Jennings)
    Re: Line Busy Out (Floyd Davidson)
    Re: I Received First Orange Card Bill (Matt Simpson)
    Re: Truly Amazing, Truly Amazing (Michael Lyman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 14:30:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: One Last Time ...


Through the courtesy of someone whose office I visit a lot, I was able
to check in for my personal mail this afternoon and decided to make a
real quick issue of the Digest with things which came in during the
wee hours of the morning on Friday. I hate to see anyone left out with
an article if it is at all possible to include them. Things are sort
of grim for me right now; but we'll stay in touch, I'm sure.


Pat T.

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

From: Michael R. Brown <[e-mail]>
Subject: Workshop - ATM in the Government Sector
Organization: Advanced Telecommunications Group
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 12:40:59 GMT


ATM Networking for the Late 1990's

The MITRE Corporation and the ATM Forum are pleased to announce a 1
day workshop on ATM networking in the government sector, to be held on
27 April 1993.  The focus of this workshop is on the government's need
for broadband network technology and services, and industry's plans
for to meet these needs over the next 5-10 years.  Senior
representatives from the Government and Industry will discuss a wide
range of issues including requirements, technology developments, early
(ATM) trial results, and product and service plans.  Workshop sessions
include:

    Keynote Speakers

    Dr. Bob Lucky        Vice President, Bellcore
    Mr. John Grimes        Deputy ASD, Defense-wide C3
    Mr. Don Scott        Associate Director FTS2000, GSA

    ATM Networking Standards

    Richard Vickers        Senior Manager, Northern Telecom
    Mike Goguen        Senior Product Manager, Synoptics
    Glen Estes        Director of ATM Technology, Bellcore

    ATM Networking - Early Trials

    Hank Dardy        Supervisory Research Physicist, NRL
    Dan McAuliffe        Director, Telecom Division, Rome Labs
    Scott Anderson        Fujitsu America

    Federal Government Requirements

    Dr. Dave Signori    Associate Director, DISA
    Col. John Barnes    Project Manager, Pentagon IM&T
    Dan Scott        Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA
    Cindy Peak        Manager, Comm Systems Engineering, FAA

    Vendor and Carrier Plans

    Eric Cooper        President, Fore Systems
    Bob Halligan        VP & GM, Government Systems Division
    Gil Falk        Director, Strategic Systems, BBN
    Robert Doyle        Director of Marketing, Gov Systems, Sprint
    John Strickland        Director, Broadband Services, USWest

In addition to these sessions, vendor demonstrations will be conducted
throughout the workshop.  Given the recent interest in related
initiatives such as NREN, NII, and Global Grid, this workshop offers a
unique opportunity for government and industry officials to discuss
potential applications of this enabling technology.

The workshop will be held at :

        The MITRE Corporation
        Hayes Auditorium
        7525 Colshire Drive
        McLean, VA  22102

For registration information contact:

        Linda Ericson
        [e-mail]
        703.883.5948
        703.883.5914 (FAX)

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

Michael R. Brown            [e-mail]
Advanced Telecommunications Group    617.271.7390
The MITRE Corporation            617.271.7231
MS B280 Burlington Road   Bedford, MA  01730

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

From: [e-mail] (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: Stupid Switch Tricks
Date: 9 Apr 93 14:04:04 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: WorldWide Software


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
writes:

> 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.

Do you suppose there's a dog tied up in the yard?


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: This of course is part of an old, old story we've
published here many times before. It goes to show that truth can often
times be stranger than fiction. If the story's true, that is.  :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (MARK STEIGER)
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1993 15:07:09 -0600
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Feature
Organization: The Dark Knight's Table BBS:  Minnetonka, MN (Free!)


>> To bring this back to answering machines, I am continually amazed t
>> they continue to use such antiquated technology as analog magnetic
>> tape.  How difficult/expensive would it be to put a small hard driv
>> (10MB or 20MB, say) inside an answering machine, and record digitiz
>> voice on it?  At 64Kbps/sec using u-law encoding (we're shooting fo
>> "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
>> little for housekeeping and data structures.  This would allow for
>> easy time/date stamping, random access to messages (including delet
>> 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-bi
>> 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 $1
> 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 b
> 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?

Personally, what I do is run "The Complete Answering Machine" on my
computer.  It runs totally in the background.  I am running a BBS
under desqview along with other applications and it doesn't miss a
beat.  It can deliver outbound messages, notify me when a message
comes in, and it can handle 999 mailboxes.  If you're looking for a
great sounding machine that uses a hard drive, this is the one to
get ...

I don't work for the CAM company.  Just a happy customer ...


Mark Steiger, Sysop, The Igloo BBS [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]  Fido: 1:282/4018  Simnet: 16:612/24

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

From: [e-mail] (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: How to Busy Out a Line?
Date: 9 Apr 93 13:49:15 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: WorldWide Software


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Roy Smith)
writes:

> 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.

Well since 600 ohms looks like an off-hook phone, would it be safe to
rely on the telco to not deliver ring to it for longer than it takes
for them to figure out that the phone is off-hook?  If so, I would
guess that a smaller wattage resistor would be able to take the ring
voltage for this brief interval, which I would guess off the top of my
head lasts a few milliseconds.

I've taken apart el-cheapo brand telephones on the way to the trash;
they don't have anything in them that I would think is designed to
dissipate 2W.

I wonder why no one has come out with a black-and-white "generic"
telephone yet.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Jacking In at the Demarc
Organization: Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 15:17:44 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Russell Nelson <nelson@
crynwr.com> writes:

> 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.

Most of the numbers that the linemen call at the telco seem to be
programmed for "free terminating service."  This way you don't pay
message units when they borrow your line and they don't have to carry
quarters for coin phones.


John Gilbert   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Cox)
Subject: Where to Find Official Docs on ...
Date: 9 Apr 1993 08:00:50 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


I am trying to find the name of official (government or otherwise)
documents that discuss the OSI model and where I can get them.

My situation is that I am designing a system that involves dial-up
modems.  One requirement is that they follow the OSI standards.  Now,
even if a vendor says his modem supports v.32 which, I think, is part
of the OSI model, what document can I refer to that says v.32 is in
the OSI model?

Also, any other documents that talk about LAN media (10BaseT/2/5) and
the protocols (Ethernet TCP/IP) as being part of the OSI model would
help.

And, finally, is anyone familiar with the AT&T FTS 2000 system?  What
is it?  Can I use regular modems (USRobotics, Hayes, etc) on this
system or do they need to be a special type?

Oh, one more thing.  Where can I learn more about how a MUX operates?

I can FTP so FTP sites would be appreciated!  Thanks in advance for
any help that you can provide.


Michael Cox     Work:   [e-mail]
Play:   [e-mail]    Fido:   1:109/456.0

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

From: [e-mail] (Rebecca Snyder)
Subject: Re: 911 Service for Deadbeats
Organization: New Mexico Tech
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 20:08:42 GMT


One problem with DEBTline -- since the deadbeat is only recieving
calls from bill collectors, there really isn't much in it for them to
keep their phone plugged in.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Boudrie)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 18:13:26 GMT


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

> In New York City, the number for time used to be NER-VOUS until they

It still is NER-VOUS (actually, NER-xxxx) in the Boston (617) area code.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Boudrie)
Subject: Re: NPA-NXX by County Database
Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 18:11:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(michael r. kenny) writes:

> Does anyone know of a database commercial or other that has the
> NPA-NXX's that are within a county?

If you want to find a PLUS system ATM which is near you, call
1-800-THE-PLUS.  You will be asked to touch tone in the area code and
first three digits of the phone number you are calling from.  If any
machines are near you, the recording will tell you about them.

Very convenient for locating ATM's based on NPAs.

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

Date: Fri, 9 Apr 93 12:56:40 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Warren Tucker)
Subject: Looking For Panel-Mounted 1A Keyset


Maybe some of the historian/archeologists in here can help me.

I am a quadriplegic computer programmer who spends a good bit of time
on the phone while typing at the computer.  (OK, I am a "low quad" who
has use of arms and wrists, but no hands.) I'm having a workstation
built to take advantage of what capability I have.

We've solved most of the problems, but the telephone is a problem.
I've seen multi-line "subscriber sets" (1A-ish, like a reshaped 565 or
630 set) integrated into equipment.  The phone is just a dial and a
few buttons on a panel, with a headset jack "under the table"
somewhere.  While a number of these things have been obviously custom,
I'm sure there must be some off-the-shelf stuff around.  (I don't
think I'm up to the 200-line ringdown arrays I've seen in some old
film about SAC installations, heh heh).

My workaday telecom experience ends in 1982, so I'm still in love with
the simple 1A2 I already understand.  It is all "hard copper" and
keeps the flexibility that digital or "home PBX" stuff excludes.
Besides, I'm poor and I have a bunch of it already :-).

I'm open to any (low-cost I hope) suggestions that will give me a
flat-faced multi-line phone based on the old 1A arrangement (or at
least has one T/R/A/A1 circuit).  Could some kind soul please give me
a clue?

As an aside, does anyone know of a junk dealer with 400 cards and
other 1A archeological artifacts?  I got a price on a 400 card the
other day of $45 from someone who treated me like I was some
time-displaced H. G. Wells :-).

Please E-MAIL as well as posting.  THANKS!!!!!!!!!


Warren Tucker  [phone]    n4hgf!wht or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tyler R. Holcomb)
Subject: Atmel, Intel, and Flash Memories
Date: 9 Apr 1993 17:35:41 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


I am seeking informatin on a company call Atmel that makes flash
memories.  In particular, I want to know:

1.  Is this a "good" company?  In particular, do they seem "well run"
and do they have satisfied customers?

2.  If (and when) does Intel plan to re-enter this market?

3.  I understand that the Atmel products have "proprietary" features
that differentiate them from "commodity" flash memories.  How
important are these features?  What types of users find these features
most useful?  Do these features "lock-in" users and and build "brand
loyalty?"

THank you for your input.


Tyler Holcomb   tylerh@juliet       caltech.edu

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

From: [e-mail] (George A. Perkins)
Subject: Max RS-232 Cable Lengths at 9600 Baud
Date: 9 Apr 1993 16:00:02 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Folks,

Can someone tell me what the EIA says are the max cable lengths for
RS-232 at differing baud rates?

Specifically I am interested in 9600, but if you have 1200, 2400 and
19,200 I would be interested in that as well ...

Please reply to me at "[e-mail]".


Thanks,

George A. Perkins   Systems Engineer
Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation
6200 Courtney Campbell Causeway  Suite 840
Tampa, FL  33607  Phone:  [phone]
Fax:    [phone]   EMail:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Jennings)
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Organization: University of Cambridge, DAMTP
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 14:53:28 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David
Leibold) writes:

> 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.

    I tried it from a payphone belonging to Cambridge cable (the
local cable television company (which also provides telephone
services)), which I think gets its long distance connections via
Mercury (British Telecom's one major competitor for long distance
calls). The first couple of times I simply received an engaged signal,
but eventually I did get the same message and music, English first,
followed by Japanese. (Fast connection, very clear line). Has anybody
tried this from a non-English speaking country, or does it just give
an English message for anything that is not Japanese?


Michael

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

From: [e-mail] (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: Line Busy Out
Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 14:12:57 GMT


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

> 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.

Certainly one should follow the rules ... and if you intend on the
manufacture or sale of Customer Premise Equipment, please do read and
understand part 68.

It does NOT apply to me, I just use or work on the stuff.

Others have claimed that a short on the cable causes too much current
which leads to a trouble call ... but I don't know of any switch that
does that.  All line switchers that I know of do get excited about an
off hook that does not result in a call attempt within a preset amount
of time.  None can tell the difference between a dead short and an
off-hook phone (technically there isn't any difference).

What happens as a result depends ... but usually it is exactly as John
described: Nothing.  And two years later it will work fine if you
remove the short.  There are exceptions, but the telco will cheerfully
call you up and inform you of how they view your short if they don't
like it.  There won't be a charge either.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Simpson)
Subject: Re: I Received First Orange Card Bill
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 08:29:20 GMT


I got my first Orange Card bill yesterday, too. Much the same as the
previous description. Flat envelope, I didn't notice the postage. Five
sheets of paper, including all kinds of irrelevant information.

I had one 0.5 minute call ... total cost, including tax, $0.14.
Including the 0.29 it's going to cost me to mail them a 0.14 check,
total cost comes to 0.43. I still saved money over the 0.95 MCI would
have charged me to make that call with their card. But it hardly seems
profitable for the company.

Pat - Do you know if they have any plans to offer either billing to
Visa/MC or billing via LEC bill, to reduce their overhead in handling
small individual bills such as this?


[Moderator's Note: Yes, they are now set up to bill to VISA/MC. Call
the customer service number on the bill, although I think there is a
minimum they are willing to bill that way. I'd say for a 14 cent bill
you could easily hold it over a month before paying. No one is going
to get rich or go broke from the 14 cents. :)    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Lyman)
Subject: Re: Truly Amazing, Truly Amazing ... Feds
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Motorola Inc. - Satellite Communications
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1993 15:28:02 GMT


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

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

> I wonder, is the signal only digitally encoded or digitally encoded
> and *additionally* encrypted?

Yes on both counts. On the air interface between the base station (
BSS ) and mobile station ( MS ) the signals are digitally encoded.
Traffic channel rate is 13 Kb/s. In addition to this, ciphering is
done to protect the signalling channel such that user data privacy is
provided then, encryption is provided for all voice traffic. As an
aside, the GSM system also assigns "alias" subscriber numbers which
are changed automatically with ( usually ) every call -- the
subscribers real phone number is never ( well, almost never ) used
over the air.

> 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.

For GSM, the level of privacy for both signalling and voice is
considerable.  Just to give you an idea, encryption keys change for
each call made by the subscriber and the encryption algorithms use the
changing physical properties of the radio channel.

As a matter of fact, GSM is SO secure that several European
governments including Britain are insisting that the scrambling
algorithm ( called A5 in GSM ) be modified to allow at least
government operatives ( read "undercover eavesdroppers" ) to listen in
on suspected criminal activities. Agencies such as GCHQ, the British
government's listening post near Cheltenham and the FBI in America are
concerned that the A5 scrambling algorithm provided with the GSM
Mobile Stations is equivalent to many military systems and in fact
when exported may be adapted for military applications.

Vendors of GSM equipment are starting to run into export problems due
to the nature of the encryption / ciphering.

Although there are some industrious "scanners" out there, I dare say
that listening in on a GSM conversation will be a bit of a job.


Michael Lyman    Motorola - Iridium     Phoenix, Arizona


[Moderator's Note: I don't know when I will be able to get the next
issue of the Digest out, so I loaded this one with everything on hand
as of this writing. Thanks for your notes to me thus far, I hope to be
able to resume the Digest at an early date ... nothing definite yet
however.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #254
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05693;
          12 Apr 93 19:05 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05147
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 11 Apr 1993 14:22:17 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31518
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 11 Apr 1993 14:21:46 -0500
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 14:21:46 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #255

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 11 Apr 93 14:21:45 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 255

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    A Quick Visit to a Friend's Office (TELECOM Moderator)
    How Real is SCI at This Point? (Tom Sommer)
    Cellular Reprogramming Handbooks (Anton Mitchell)
    Re: Leukemia From LF Magnetic Fields? (Jamie Hanrahan)
    Re: Leukemia From LF Magnetic Fields? (Mark Fraser)
    Re: First Cellular Telephones Go Into Service In Cuba (John R. Levine)
    Re: Secret DTMF Voice/Data/Fax Switch? (James J. Alles)
    Re: Does Anyone Remember Who Makes the Distintive Ring Box? (Jack Winslade)
    Cellular Systems Simulation Project (Rick Dennis)
    NAPLPS/JPEG Group For ONLINE Apps (Ed Pimintel)
    Re: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed (Bill Campbell)
    Re: Win/NT to Make CO Sw (Craig Ford)
    Re: Truly Amazing, Truly (Laurence Chiu)
    Good Source For Telecom Supplies? (Gabe M. Wiener)
    Tip/Ring, Red/Green, etc. (Steve Summit)
    Re: Can I Get a Modem Jack For My NORSTAR? (Larry D. Tumbleson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Subject: A Quick Visit to a Friend's Office
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 13:45:00 CDT


I got a friend to let me use his office this afternoon (Sunday) since
they don't need their terminals, etc today. Checking in for mail, I
find despite several notes saying 'do not send mail please' the
telecom mail queue is as full as always. So, here is some of what has
come in since I last created an issue. I'm otherwise working on this
end to get things corrected, but nothing is definite yet.


PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Sommer)
Subject: How Real is SCI at This Point?
Organization: Teleglobe
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 20:59:54 GMT


   I am looking for comments on how real the IEEE's Scalable Coherent
Interface (SCI) is at this point. SCI allows for a 1 gigabyte/sec
interconnection scheme for up to 64K processors. SCI is IEEE P1596.
Questions that come to mind include has anyone built a system that
uses it, does anyone make chipsets which are available to handle the
interface, if someone has used it -- what was their experience, what
applications currently need 1 gigabyte/sec, etc.

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

Organization: City University of New York
Date: Sunday, 11 Apr 1993 08:55:34 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular Reprogramming Handbooks


Does anyone have reviews of the several books advertised about
cellular phones. I have seen two books listed in Radio Electronics,
such as Cellular Telephone Hackers Guidebook by Dynaspek and another
one by Spy Supply called Cellular Telephone Modification Handbook. I
was wondering if they are worth the 69 and 79 dollar price tags. Any
reviews or views on these books would be great. Thanks.


Anton Mitchell

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

From: Jamie Hanrahan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Leukemia From LF Magnetic Fields?
Date: 11 Apr 93 05:54:39 PDT
Organization: Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego, CA


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

>      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.

Oh, please.  Not again.

>      Finally, although there seems to be a cause and effect
> relationship, no one knows how the low frequency electromagnetic
> fields actually affect the body.

Um, in the absence of a known mechanism, it's impossible to establish
a "cause and effect relationship".  You can establish a statistical
correlation, but that isn't "cause and effect".

If you HAD a suspected mechanism you could design experiments to see
whether it really works or not.

In the absence of a suspected mechanism, you can't pick out one aspect
of the subjects' environment and assume that that's the *cause*.
Simply plotting one set of numbers against another doesn't establish
anything except that two *might* be related.  Remember the _post hoc_
fallacy?  That's what you've got here.  You might as well conclude
that children's cancer causes magnetic fields ...

More realistically, there is suspicion that living near power
distribution transformers and capacitors (which used to contain PCBs,
known carcinogens), wooden utility poles (formerly preserved with
materials we now know contain carcinogens), and utility easements
(often defoliated with ... but you get the idea) is the real problem.
In other words the cancer rates would have been the same had the power
lines been somehow shielded so as to not emit magnetic fields.


Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego CA
Internet:  [e-mail]  Uucp: uunet!cmkrnl!jeh  CIS: 74140,2055

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Fraser)
Subject: Re: Leukemia From LF Magnetic Fields?
Organization: Wimsey Information Services
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 03:11:20 GMT


The studies that showw an increase in superstition during recessions
or other hard times are also fascinating.  PErsonally, I think the
rumors about leukemia etc. are originated by demented and
superstitious seniors named Ursula who keep goats under power lines
and think that space ships are poisoning her cats too.

I also don't deny that there could be some link.  Creosote from power
pole treatment?  Pesticides in the carrot patch?

I need better evidence than a statistical correlation that could be
right 5 % of the time but which could be corrupted by the phase of the
moon.


Mark

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

Subject: Re: First Cellular Telephones Go Into Service In Cuba
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 11 Apr 93 10:10:12 EDT (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> 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, ...

What makes you think that they don't eavesdrop on wired phone calls?
Who do you think owns the wires?


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (James J Alles)
Subject: Re: Secret DTMF Voice/Data/Fax Switch?
Date: 11 Apr 93 03:13:49 GMT


Joel M. Hoffman ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 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.

> Any ideas?

Yes, a product, now sold by Damark.  I bought one, yet to be installed
on my second line.  An input port, a answering machine port, and four
extension ports.  It gives you intercom capability, also.  Made by
Areanex.  It is neat -- it produces a ring signal out to the extension
ports.


Peace,

JA

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

Date: Sun, 11 Apr 93 11:29:28 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Re: Does Anyone Remember Who Makes the Distintive Ring Box?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


In a message dated 27-MAR-93, Gregory Youngblood writes:

> 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.

I think you're thinking of the Ring Director made by Lynx Automation.
I have the four-line version and it's been working fine for over two
years.

Hello Direct sells some different models of the Lynx line.


Good day.  JSW     Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1
Department of Redundancy Department  (1:285/666.0)

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 11 Apr 93 16:03:19 GMT
Subject: Cellular Systems Simulation Project


I am currently taking a class in parallel architecture.  I have
selected a project that involves the simulation of a cellular phone
network.  Does anyone out there have any good references for the
factors involved in modelling a cellular system?  The project must be
reasonable enough to be completed in nine weeks, so it can't be too
complex.

Please reply directly to attmail!rickdennis or [e-mail].


Thanks in advance!

Rick Dennis       AT&T Information Management Services
Systems Development Organization-Conversant Systems Suite 600
email: attmail!rickdennis        5555 Oakbrook Parkway
Phone: [phone]            Norcross, GA 30093

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

Subject: NAPLPS/JPEG Group For ONLINE Apps
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 93 13:47:33 EDT
Organization: Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- [phone]


I have proposed that all of us in the promotion of NAPLPS/JPEG form a
consortion/task force to openly discuss ways, method, procedures,
algorythms, applications, implementation of NAPLPS/JPEG standards.
These standards should facilitate the creation of REAL_TIME Online
applications that make use of Voice, Video, HiRes graphcis, Fax plus
more ...

This would be a NOT-FOR PROFIT group with bylaws and charter.  It
would have public domain software repository just as GNU & OSF.  This
would give us more clout in getting access to other upcomming
technology.  Already many corporation have decided to support this
endeavor, so do not delay joining if you are a developer.

For a name I am proposing ONG "Open Naplps Group" or something along
these lines. In addition I will attempt to form a Usenet newsgroup
and allocate a directory on SIMTEL for such software.

This group would have a quarterly NAPLPS/JPEG newsletter as well as
a hardcopy version.

I hope that all of you that would like to see CMCs based the
NAPLPS/JPEG G R O W decide to join and mutually benefit from this
NOT-FOR_PROFIT endeavor.

If you would like to get involve write to me at:

IMG (Inter-Multimedia Group)
P.O. Box 95901     Atlanta Ga. 30347-0901
Data: 404-985-1198 zyxel 14.4k   Voice: 404-985-1763
internet: [e-mail]  Cis: 70611,3703


[e-mail] (Ed pimentel)
gatech!kd4nc!vdbsan!willard!edimg  emory!uumind!willard!edimg
Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Campbell)
Subject: Re: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 16:47:17 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] quotes the
> {Los Angeles Times}:

>> 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.

:> [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]

Nor do some Moderators, who, though they have no specific knowledge
:about the merits of the case under discussion, the behaviors of the
:parties to it, or the history of the dispute, feel qualified to throw
:some reactionary, generic remarks at it to show their superiority.

I would agree with this from personal experience.  I'm involved with a
dispute with Tandy Radio Shack Credit where they consistently took
10-15 days to process my payments assessing a $15.00 "Late Charge" to
an account.  I have very strong feelings on this subject because I
refused to pay these "Late Charges", Tandy filed an adverse credit
report, and I cannot refinance my house as a result.


INTERNET:  [e-mail]   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!bill   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!bill   Mercer Island, WA 98040; [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig Ford)
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 08:51:20 -0600
Subject: Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switch


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Brent Capps) writes in part:

>> "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 ...

If you take a look at his hiring practicies over the past 18-36
months, I'm not so sure he can't pull it off. There are some awfully
talented teleco-wizards working in Redmond these days (Eg. besides
dead president's portraits in green ink on white paper, why would Toby
Nixon go to work for Billy-Boy????).


Craig Ford                                     |
Futures Past Systems, Ltd.                     | (713)-425-3498 FAX
INTERNET: [e-mail] | (713)-458-0237 BBS
     CIS: 74276,[e-mail]            |
 Origin: Dayze of Futures Past Systems [H14-V32B 713-458-0237] (1:106/2001)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Truly Amazing, Truly
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 04:13:54 GMT


In a message to comp.dcom.telecom <04-08-93 12:30>, [e-mail].
sub.org writes:

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

>> 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 have heard talk of a new system called Digital AMPS. Does such a
system exist? If so how would it compare with GSM. Is encryption
involved.  Apparently phones which can use this new system scan for a
digital signal, if none found then they look for an analogue one.


Laurence Chiu    Walnut Creek, CA

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

From: [e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Good Source For Telecom Supplies?
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 04:17:11 GMT


Can anyone recommend some good mail-order sources for telecom
supplies?  I usually order tools from Jensen, but I'm looking for
things like 66-blocks and other such items that prove useful for doing
your own telecom installations and networking.


Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.   [e-mail]   72355,1226 on CI$

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

Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 12:10:19 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Steve Summit)
Subject: Tip/Ring, Red/Green, etc.


I'm sure this sort of thing gets discussed here from time to time, but
it probably can't hurt to see it again.

I'm doing some wiring, and I'd like to know *definitively* what the
correct polarity is, in a number of situations.  (I know that many
DTMF generators have bridge rectifiers such that they don't care about
polarity, and that a simple empirical test suffices for those that do
care, but as I say, I'm trying to be definitive this time.)

I'd like to know, for each of the following, which is ring and which
is tip:

     1.    The red wire, and the green wire.

     2.    The negative wire, and the positive wire, when on-hook
    (if you wish to show off, you may also discuss polarity
    reversals when ringing/answering).

     3.    In 25-pair cable, the blue/white wire (blue with a white
    stripe), and the white/blue wire.

     4.    On a modular plug, with the pins numbered as in:

          123456
         _________
        /\ \\\\\\ \
        \ \        \
         \ \        \
          \ \________\
           \/___\ \__/
             \ \
                  \ \
                 (cable)

    (where the other end of the cable is connected to an
    instrument), pin 3, and pin 4.

     5.    On a modular plug (as above) wired for two lines, pin 2,
    and pin 5.

     6.    On a modular plug wired for three lines, pin 1, and pin 6.

     7.    For a second line, the black wire, and the yellow wire.

     8.    For a third line, in 6-wire modular cable, the white wire,
    and the blue wire.

     9.    In a 1A2-style ribbon connector, pin 1, and pin 26.

    10.    In a 66-style punch-down block mounted vertically, the top
    line, and the bottom line, of a pair of terminals (there
    may not be a definitive answer for this one).

    11.    For a simple piece of red/white bell wire, the red wire,
    and the white wire.

I think I have answers for some of these, but I don't want to bias
anyone's replies by revealing them prematurely :-) .

Finally, and I hope I'm not sounding too particular, but since parity
problems are so easy to get wrong, and since it's so easy to "resolve"
them empirically, I'd really appreciate it if you could back your
answer(s) up with a reference.  (That's actually part of my question;
I'd love to know what the official reference is for this sort of
thing. I had no luck trying to answer these questions in what I
thought was a good engineering library.)

Please respond by mail, and I will post a summary once I have some
answers.


Steve Summit   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 17:10:09 +0000 (GMT)
From: [e-mail] (Larry D Tumbleson)
Subject: Re: Can I Get a Modem Jack For My NORSTAR?
Organization: University of Cincinnati


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

> 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?

The Norstar key switch only has digital station ports. To hook up an
analog device, such as a modem or fax machine, you need to get an
analog terminal adaptor. You would hook the adaptor into your station
port and your analog device into the adaptor. If you have the money
another option would be to get a DCI, a digital computer interface.
This will work as a 9600 baud modem for internal station to station
calls and a 2400 baud for calls outside your Norstar. The nice thing
about the second option is that you can plug your phone into the DCI
and use both simultaneously on one station port. The digital station
set using the B2 channel and the DCI the B1. The DCI is kind of
expensive though. You will have to guage your needs and balance them
against the cost/benefit.


Rick Goodrich   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #255
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10077;
          13 Apr 93 6:31 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06064
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 13 Apr 1993 03:48:06 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06070
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 13 Apr 1993 03:47:06 -0500
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1993 03:47:06 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #256

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 13 Apr 93 03:47:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 256

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Just Me and the Cleaning Lady (TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Jack Winslade)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed (Jim Graham)
    Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded? (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Does Anyone Remember Who Makes the Distintive Ring Box? (Bill Campbell)
    Re: Truly Amazing, Truly (Dan J. Declerck)
    Re: ISDN Goes Hollywood! (Liron Lightwood)
    Re: AT&T Blacklisting? (Robert L. McMillin)
    Help Us Install ISDN (was Connecting Work to Home via ISDN) (Peter Gordon)
    Help with Call Management ([e-mail])
    When to Not Replace Old Technology With New (Rajan Srikanth)
    Update: ATM Networking in the Government Sector (Michael R. Brown)
    Mitel PBX Mailing List (Dave Johnston)
    Need Computer Interface to a Pager (Will Estes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Just Me and the Cleaning Lady
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1993  00:18:00 CDT


These folks have been nice to let me come in and out late at night the
past couple of days ... but it cannot be abused; I cannot stay all
night or come around during the day. I am accumulating the money I
need to make peace with Mother; maybe another week or so before it all
gets paid off.   Here is a few more messages from the queue.


Patrick

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

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 11:14:38 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


In a message dated 05-APR-93, TELECOM Moderator notes:

> 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 ...

Back in the early 1970's, dialing 637/NE7-{anything} would get you the
time.  I don't remember it being sponsored by anyone.  I always
assumed it was NYT.  The 'official' number was 637-1212, but somehow
the name NERVOUS was popular.


Good day!       JSW     Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1
Department of Redundancy Department  (1:285/666.0)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 16:03 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch


In Lost Angels and vicinity, we mark time with recordings like, "at
the sound of the riot, the time will be..." :-(.  We've always had it
as UL3-1212 as far back as I can remember.


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


[Moderator's Note: Yeah? Well then get ready to synchronize your time
pieces when the Jury in El Lay comes back with their verdict. Is it
true what a knowledgeable snitch in the Justice Department has said:
that the Assistant US Attorney in Los Angeles was instructed by higher
authority to try and tamper with two recalcitrant jurors -- using cash
if necessary, and threats of exposure about something the feds have on
one of the two -- to get a 'proper decision' in the matter?  Nah, the
United States government wouldn't operate that way ... even when they
are really scared of the likely possibility the defendants will be
found not guilty, they would not try anything like that ... would
they?  Of course not; the US Injustice Department is not corrupt even
though half the software in the place is stolen or pirated -- only
Usenet moderators who peddle telephone calling cards on the side are
to be considered corrupt for 'commercializing the Internet'.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Graham)
Subject: Re: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 16:07:30 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Jonathan Sadler) writes:

[regarding paying on time and still getting charged late fees]

I've run into this problem quite a few times -- not just with phone
service (though when I was using Sprint, this was the cause of all
three strikes against them that caused them to lose a customer), and
in each case, I was able to make one quick phone call to my bank and
determine that my check had cleared before the date payment was due
(sometimes well before), and yet there was a late charge (usually
saying I hadn't paid at all).

> Each of these months I had to call them up and ask for the late charge
> to be reversed ...

I have a very simple solution to all of this ... it looks something like
this on the bill (usually in bright red ink and lots of big, ugly caps):

      [late charge and past due amount crossed out, net amount
      due adjusted accordingly]

      YOUR RECORDS ARE IN ERROR.  CHECK NUMBER xxxx FOR $ xx
      CLEARED [bank name] ON [date].  I TRUST YOU WILL CORRECT
      YOUR RECORDS IMMEDIATELY.   [IMMEDIATELY underlined several times]

And if, such as was the case with Sprint, this has happened before,
and I have another option for the service (not applicable otherwise),
they also see something along the lines of:

      MUST I GO TO [company xyz] TO GET ACCURATE BILLING?

With Sprint, on strike two, someone who, if memory serves, was fairly
high up sent me a long, detailed apology.  On strike three, they lost
a customer (and I made sure they understood *EXACTLY* why).  Oh yeah,
with Sprint, there was *NO* due date on the bill at all (I understand
they have fixed that particular part of the problem now).

The way I see it, if I'm going to pay my bills on time (and I make a
point of doing just that), I expect them to credit me for paying on
time.

Anyway, enough rambling. Got lots of stuff to do today, including some
really important stuff (grabbing my cast net and going fishing again
to get the ones that escaped from the net this morning).


jim
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
INTERNET: [e-mail] | [e-mail]
AMATEUR RADIO: n5ial@w4zbb (Ft. Walton Beach, FL)

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

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 15:46 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded?


Talking about Sears' going out of business sale ...

> 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.

Boy, does this ever favor people in big cities like Los Angeles (818,
714, 310, 213, 619, 818 are all within the L.A. county borders).


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Campbell)
Subject: Re: Does Anyone Remember Who Makes the Distintive Ring Box?
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 15:18:51 GMT


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

> In a message dated 27-MAR-93, Gregory Youngblood writes:

>> 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.

> I think you're thinking of the Ring Director made by Lynx Automation.
> I have the four-line version and it's been working fine for over two
> years.

We too have been using the Lynx units for several years now with no
major problems.  Their customer support has been excellent (and
they're only about 20 miles from here :-).

    Lynx Automation, Inc.
    2100 196th Street SW #144
    Lynnwood WA 98036
    [phone]

There is a possiblity of noise problems due to ground loops when using
these automatic switch boxes.  Lynx pointed out to me the possibility
of ground loops when I complained about noise on the line with their
box.  The solution is to disconnect the outer two wires on each
modular connector.


Bill

INTERNET:  [e-mail]   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!bill   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!bill   Mercer Island, WA 98040; [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan J. Declerck)
Subject: Re: Truly Amazing, Truly
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 20:11:59 GMT


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

> In a message to comp.dcom.telecom <04-08-93 12:30>, [e-mail].
> sub.org writes:

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

>>> 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?

The system is digitally encoded, and optionally at the option of the
base-site operator/manufacturer digitally *encrypted* also.

> I have heard talk of a new system called Digital AMPS. Does such a
> system exist? If so how would it compare with GSM. Is encryption
> involved.  Apparently phones which can use this new system scan for a
> digital signal, if none found then they look for an analogue one.

Digital AMPS, basically applies TDMA to analog AMPS channels by
slicing up the spectrum into 3 timeslots (the mobiles per channel). It
uses analog signalling, then if a digital Base is available, can
initiate the Voice coding and timeslot control of TDMA. Thus mobiles
must be dual mode ... both analog and digital.

I'm not sure if any digital AMPS systems are in commercial service as
of yet.


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

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

Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1993 00:19:08 +1000
From: Liron Lightwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ISDN Goes Hollywood!


Regarding the use of ISDN to deliver CD quality audio to the home.

I was under the impression that this currently requires 256 Kb/s at
present, thus requiring four or so B channels (1 B channel = 56 or 64
Kb, not sure which in the US).

Does anyone know how many B channels are being used in the demo to
deliver the CD quality audio?  Would such a service require more than
one ISDN line to deliver the audio?

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

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 19:23 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: AT&T Blacklisting?


Yes, I know the thread is dead (officially), but Pat, I find your
willingness to knuckle under to petty authority (a choice phrase
gleaned from Matt Groening) uncharacteristic, and damn near pathetic.
You would cede our civil rights because it's convenient to let the
government take them rather than fight.

That's cowardice.

The men who founded this country were willing to stick their necks out
to give birth to new and unheard of freedoms in a new and unheard of
country.  You mock their bravery by proposing to let the datacops snag
whatever they want in the name of "cooperation."

If we meekly cooperate in the destruction of our civil liberties, we
have only ourselves to blame when the constitution turns out to be a
hollow shell.


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


[Moderator's Note: Don't confuse civil liberties with civil rights;
they are two different things. And don't misunderstand. I *know* what
is going on and I don't like a lot of what is going on. Eventually, I
suppose I will get riled up and do something. I do not make mock of
the Founder Fathers.  It is difficult to know 'what the founders
intended'; or indeed, to decide if what they intended should have any
bearing on what we wish to do today.

President Rodham-Clinton will demonstrate how hollow the constitution
is during the next four years: Watch for an historic event during the
term of the resident president now in power when a portion of the Bill
of Rights is *repealed* -- the Second Amendment will be history before
this term is finished. The Reagan/Bush bashers said it would be that
hot team that trumped up a national emergency to get martial law
installed and the Bill of Rights repealed or suspended. I say the
current president will do it at least with the Second. I've already
written Jim and Sarah Brady and our man in Washington and suggested
while they're at it, why not repeal the First Amendment also; like the
Second, it has become quite a nuisance in recent years. If it is true
that a 'well-regulated militia' refers to the Army, thus freeing the
people of the 'need to bear arms' and obliviating the need for the
Second, I suggest that since the Government Printing Office and my
competitor the {New York Times} publish lots of speech every day,
there is no 'need' for the rest of us to speak out about anything; why
not kill the First also.

So just give them what they want; if you don't, they'll take it at gun
point anyway. The difference between us, Roger, is that you'll
continue playing the role of Bad-Ass until they point a gun in your
face as they inevitably will and tell you to shut up. I already know
the guns are there; the paperwork up to that point is a mere formality
intended to humor the people. I'll go along with the joke; I got worn
out from protesting back in the seventies sometime.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Gordon)
Subject: Help Us Set up ISDN (was Connecting Work to Home via ISDN)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 14:55:54 -0700 (PDT)


Greetings!

Here on the wet, wind-swept coast of British Columbia, we folks of the
Victoria Free-Net Association have talked our local telco into
providing us a major grant of their services -- including ISDN access
to a couple of locations here in town.

The catch is, no one on our committee has any experience with ISDN
technology.  According to the note below, you may have an electronic
journal with some recent information which could help us.  Could you
please forward this to me, along with any other information or advice
which you feel could benefit us?  I am most concerned about the
hardware requirements at the residence end of the ISDN connection.
Thanks a million!


[Moderator's Note: His letter went on to refer to an article published
here recently of Wil Dixon's. I forwarded this to Wil and put it here
in the hopes our resident ISDN-experts will correspond with the
Victoria Free-Net and help them get things going.  Thanks!   PAT]

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

Date: 11 Apr 93 16:33:00 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Help With Call Management


When our office moves, we'll be getting a new AT&T Merlin Legend PBX
system.  Unfortunately, we don't have funds for call management
software.  I am looking for inexpensive software for telephone call
traffic management.  I am hoping to find freeware or shareware.

Although it would be a plus to have call management/accounting
software, I am primarily interested in software that would run on an
IBM compatible PC and provide call traffic analysis.  I want to be
able to ensure we have enough of the right trunks and that the
PBX/trunks are performing as they should.  The PBX will have an SMDR
port to provide data to the PC.

If you are aware of any free/shareware or inexpensive commercial
software, please drop me a note.  I'll summarize responses for the
Digest.


Thank you.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rajan Srikanth)
Subject: When to Not Replace Old Technology With New
Date: 12 Apr 1993 01:54:25 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


At the Haas School of Business, University of California at Berkeley,
we are doing a study of what factors influence the decision to replace
or not replace old information technology/products with new
information technology/products.

*** If you were involved with such a technology replacement situation, we
*** would like to include you in our study. We are especially interested in
*** responses from people who evaluated a replacement but DECIDED AGAINST.

Your participation will contribute to the progress of information
technology!  In exchange for your participation, we would be happy to
give you information about our findings- to help you in future
decision making.

We are interested in all technology areas and are especially
interested in the areas of DATABASES, IMAGING, and CLIENT-SERVER
technology. For example, we are looking for companies who considered
replacement of a non-relational database with a relational database.
Or, replaced older applications with new generation (e.g.
client-server) applications.

If you can help, please provide us a regular (not just email) postal
address.  To contact us, send email to:

(Asst. Professor) Rajan Srikanth at [e-mail] or
call him at 510-643-9994 or call (MBA Student) Rehan Syed at
415-312-8420. If we are not in when you call, please leave a message
indicating when you can be called back.

Thanks very much for your interest!

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

From: Michael R. Brown <[e-mail]>
Subject: Update - ATM Networking in the Government Sector
Organization: Advanced Telecommunications Group
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 13:14:03 GMT


*** Update on "Workshop - ATM in the Government Sector"****

Due to the overwhelming response to the "ATM in the Government Sector"
workshop posting, MITRE has decided to limit enrollment to Governent
(Federal, State, and Local) at this time.  However, consideration will
be given to a follow-up session if there is sufficient interest.
Please refer any further questions, comments, or suggestions to the
undersigned below.

  Michael R. Brown            [e-mail]
  Advanced Telecommunications Group    617.271.7390
  The MITRE Corporation            617.271.7231 (fax)
  MS B280 Burlington Rd        Bedford, MA  01730

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

From: Dave Johnston <[e-mail]>
Organization: Santa Rosa Junior College
Date:  12 Apr 93 12:49:17 PST
Subject: Mitel PBX Mailing List
Reply-To: [e-mail]


As a result of my previous TELECOM Digest posting and the volumes
(well 11 actually) of interest I've received, a Mitel PBX Mailing List
was created.

The list is intended to provide a forum for users, installers,
technicians, engineers and other interested parties to discuss Mitel
PBX equipment.  The entire Mitel product line is fair game, including
the Entrepreneur, SX-5, SX-10, SX-20, SX-50, SX-100/200, SX-200D,
SX-200 Light, SX-2000 and SX-2000 Light and their assorted variations.

The address for joining the list is: [e-mail]

The list address is:  [e-mail]


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] (Will Estes)
Subject: Need Computer Interface to a Pager
Organization: Mail Group
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 23:01:27 GMT


Does anyone know of a way to interface a computer to a pager?  I need
some way that the pager data can be sent to a computer instead of to
human via a pager.  Maybe there is a board that slips into a computer?

The actual application for this is that a windmeter is going to send
wind data every hour to a pager number, which will then get read by an
Internet-attached host and fed by email to interested parties.

I think this would be a good question for a mailing list or newsgroup
on computer operation centers, so if you know of such a group maybe
you could point me there.


Will Estes    Internet: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #256
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24884;
          15 Apr 93 3:51 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14523
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 15 Apr 1993 01:31:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29244
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 15 Apr 1993 01:30:32 -0500
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 01:30:32 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #257

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 15 Apr 93 01:30:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 257

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Roll Your Own PBX / Internal Phone System (Robert J. Granvin)
    New York Telephone Using Sun Platform (Sun Press Release via Mike Bender)
    Deregulation of Telcos in Texas (Mike Coyne)
    Residential ISDN (Russ Wilton)
    Southern Bell Anonymous Call Rejection (Atlanta Constitution via L Reeves)
    Where Can I Find Phrack? (Jinmo Ahn)
    We Want Your Work (Bowyer Jeff)
    Bell Canada Phases Out Rotary (Pulse) Dialing (Andrew M. Dunn)
    Information Needed on Bahamaian Phone System (Tom Perrine)
    Telco Uses My Lines (James Gleick)
    Re: Test Equipment (Keith Willox)
    Re: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed ([e-mail])
    Re: Information Needed About Plex (John Edmond Auckett)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Andrew M. Dunn)
    Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete? (Tony DeSimone)
    AI/Exp Sys in Telecom Information Needed ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Robert J. Granvin)
Subject: Roll Your Own PBX/Internal Phone System?
Organization: School of Statistics, University of Minnesota
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1993 21:43:40 GMT


I got a fun one.  :-) And I admit I know NOTHING other than proper
wiring schemes and that I haven't even bothered to talk to our local
phone companies (the latter because I already know there's NO way we
can afford it ... :-)

Anyways, I volunteer for a group that is, like most non-profits,
incredibly broke.  We have two phone lines to handle our voice and
data needs.  That is all we can essentially afford to do.

We continue to run wire all over the place so that each desk can have
a phone at it if desired.  This has become a real mess and I plan to
scrap the existing wiring and replace it all with something logical.

At the same time, I will be RE-installing a PC with voicemail
capability.  It will sit as a "front end" on the voice line and
answer.  It has the ability to issue the sequences necessary to
forward the call to another physical telephone number, which is how
we'll manage voice communications.  Data will suffer, to a degree.

In any case, the ultimate solution (Especially after a bunch of new
offices are built in the long-distant future :-) is that we find some
ability to develop our own internal telephone network -- to be able to
call up a specific phone or at least be able to forward incoming calls
to a specific phone (as opposed to the current procedure -- expecting
SOMEONE to answer that ringing nightmare and YELL for the person who
the call is for).

I realize I'm talking about a small office PBX.  But I also realize
that it is something that is way beyond our budget or abilities to
acquire.  I also realize that we do NOT need any other special
features -- we don't need long distance control. reporting, area code
tables, etc. etc. etc.  Just the ability to deal with a single phone
internally.

Is there any way to do this cost effectively, cheaply or better yet,
on your own?  Has anything of this nature ever been done with hardware
enhanced common-market (i.e., PC) computers?

As usual, I greatly appreciate any insights that people may have, and
also appreciate EMAIL as time prevents me from keeping up with many
newsgroups.


Robert J. Granvin                          User Services Specialist
School of Statistics - University of Minnesota     [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 14 Apr 93 10:58:20 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Duke of Canterbury)
Subject: New York Telephone Using Sun Platform


Here's something that was sent via our internal e-mail that I thought
that telecom readers might find interesting:

   SUN SPARC PLATFORM TO BE USED FOR ADVANCED TELEPHONE SERVICES

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. --April 14, 1993-- For the first time in U.S.
history, telephone customers can get flexible, low-cost private line
services so they can tailor their communications network to fit their
business needs.  New York Telephone's NYNEX Enterprise Services is
using more than 100 SPARCserver(TM) systems from Sun Microsystems
Computer Corporation (SMCC) to deliver advanced communication
capabilities, including multimedia services for the transmission of
voice, data and video, to customers.  NYNEX Enterprise Services was
introduced today by New York Telephone. The services are available
immediately in specified areas within the New York City area.

A private line is a direct channel, leased from a carrier, between
specified points. In the past, private line services offered by
carriers like New York Telephone were inflexible, expensive and
difficult to maintain.  By using technology based on open systems,
like the Sun(TM) SPARC(R)/Solaris(R) platform, New York Telephone was
able to build Enterprise Services on a system that is scalable,
flexible and interoperable.  Private line services will now be less
expensive and the services available can be changed or modified
without interrupting private line access.

New York Telephone can now deliver to its ever-growing customer base
in the financial services, retail, insurance, publishing and
healthcare markets advanced features like bandwidth-on-demand,
flexible provisioning and proactive trouble reporting. As a result,
customers can use their private lines efficiently and avoid losing
time making changes to their services or recovering from a system
shut-down.

Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation, a subsidiary of Sun
Microsystems, Inc., is the world's leading supplier of open
client-server computing solutions. The company has its headquarters in
Mountain View, Calif.

                # # #

Sun Microsystems, Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation, Sun, the Sun
logo, and the Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation logo are
trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. All
SPARC trademarks, including the SCD Compliant logo, are trademarks or
registered trademarks of SPARC International, Inc.  SPARCserver is
licensed exclusively to Sun Microsystems, Inc.  Products bearing SPARC
trademarks are based on an architecture developed by Sun Microsystems,
Inc.  All other products are referred to herein by the trademarks as
designated by the companies who market those products.

For reader inquiries, telephone [phone].

This announcement was made today, April 14, 1993.  For more
information, please contact: Lauren Swingle, SMCC PR at (415)
336-7273.

                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

mike bender  DOD# 007             415-863-8913 (home)
1991
[e-mail]  415-336-6353 (work)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Deregulation of Telcos in Texas
Date: 14 Apr 1993 14:19:27 GMT
Organization: At UT?  You must be kidding


Yesterday thousands of telephone company representatives and employees
rallied at the state capitol in support of a bill to deregulate
telephone rates in Texas.

According to the story in our student newspaper, they want to switch
to a regulatory system based on rates of return to a price-based
calculation.

They claim it will enable them to install fiber optic networks and
give them flexibility to compete with 800/900 based competition.  It
is opposed by newspapers who claim it forces them to compete with the
phone company.

The article and TV reports, frankly, did not make much sense.  But
then there are two thinga a man ought not to see.  One is how sausage
is made, and the other is how laws are made.  This is especially true
in Texas.

Somebody has been advertising on TV to get us to call 800-669-6903 to
learn about how we can get Texas into the technology future with
fiber optic communication etc.  Other than that, there has been very
little hint of what is going on.  There has certainly been no reportage
of any issues in Texas papers.  Can any of your readers shed light on
this matter?

If you liked unregulated cable -- you'll love unregulated telcos.


Mike Coyne   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1993 09:14:14 MDT
From: Russ Wilton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Residential ISDN


Hi:

  I manage a Northern Telecom Meridian exchange which supports digital
(ISDN) telephones.  Each telephone requires it's own pair of wires
running back to the exchange, so multiple phones on the same number
are done by programming the exchange, not by just wiring them in
parallel off a single pair.  This is not a problem on a university
campus, but I'm sure it would not be acceptable for residential
service.

  So how do they connect multiple extensions in a house to an ISDN
circuit?  Does it allow the same functionality as with analog phones?
That is, can two people on different extensions talk simultaneously to
a third remote party?  If so, how do they mix the signals?

  This is beginning to sound like I need a short course on ISDN. :-)
Any pointers to a good ISDN reference book would be appreciated.
Thanks.


Russell D Wilton                   E Mail: [e-mail]
Telecommunications Manager         Voice:      [phone]
Computing Services                 FAX:        [phone]
University of Lethbridge
4401 University Drive   Lethbridge, Alberta, CANADA   T1K 3M4

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 14 Apr 93 01:04:25 GMT
Subject: Southern Bell Anonymous Call Rejection


Southern Bell will begin offering Anonymous Call Rejection May 6 to to
it's Georgia customers. The service will route callers who have
selected to have their number identify as "private" to a recording
informing the caller that the number they are calling is rejecting
calls from private numbers.  Numbers may be set to identify as
"private" in Georgia permanently for no charge.  Per-call selection of
"private" is not available in Georgia.

   "Anonymous Call Rejection" can be activated and deactived by
pressing a code.

   Cost of the service, which becomes available May 6, is $2.75 a month
 for residential customers.

Southern Bell thinks the new service will boost demand for the
controversial caller identification service, which has about 40,000
Georgia subscribers."   ------ Atlanta Constitution 4/08/93 --------

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

From: Jinmo Ahn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Where Can I find Phrack?
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1993 04:38:15 -0400
Organization: Senior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


I'm looking for a ftp site which has back issues of {Phrack}.  Could
someone tell me where I can find it?


Thanks,

Jim

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

From: Bowyer Jeff <[e-mail]>
Subject: We Want Your Work
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1993 09:55:42 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Technical University of Brno, Czech Republic


We want you to announce your work on our mailing list!

 Do you use a program that has a non-English interface?

 Have you converted any software to support more than one language for
 its interface?

 Will you sponsor a conference that might concern software with a
 non-English interface?

Please tell us!


INSOFT-L on [e-mail]   Internationalization of Software
                                    Discussion List

   Internationalization of software relates to two subjects:

   1. Software that is written so a user can easily change the
      language of the interface;

   2. Versions of software, such as Czech WordPerfect, whose
      interface language differs from the original product.

   Topics discussed on this list will include:

     -- Techniques for developing new software

     -- Techniques for converting existing software

     -- Internationalization tools

     -- Announcements of internationalized public domain software

     -- Announcements of foreign-language versions of commercial
        software

     -- Calls for papers

     -- Conference announcements

     -- References to documentation related to the
        internationalization of software

   This list is moderated.

   To subscribe to this list, send an electronic mail message to
   [e-mail] with the body containing the command:

      SUB INSOFT-L Yourfirstname Yourlastname

   Owner:

      Center for Computing and Information Services
      Technical University of Brno
      Udolni 19, 602 00 BRNO
      Czech Republic

      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew M. Dunn)
Subject: Bell Canada Phases Out Rotary (Pulse) Dialing
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 93 05:29:58 GMT


Well, it had to happen!  After years of people complaining about being
charged more for TouchTone (which actually costs less to provide),
Bell Canada has solved the problem.  They've phased out rotary
service.

But, of course, you still pay the surcharge for TouchTone.  Now
_everybody_ pays it.  Sheesh.

To quote from a Bell information circular:

"Starting March 8, 1993, Touch-Tone(tm) became the standard service
 offered to individual-line residence and business customers who move
 or request a new telephone line.  This change was recently approved
 by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
 (CRTC).

 Rotary-dial service will continue to be available to customers who
 do not now have Touch-Tone, until such time as they move or request
 a new individual telephone line.  Rotary-dial service will also
 continue to be offered to customers ordering a two-party line or
 a four-party line ...

 Touch-Tone service provides customers with speed and ease of dialing,
 as well as access to interactive voice-response systems (IVR). These
 systems are automated services such as ...  Prior to standardization,
 close to 92 per cent of customers ordering new individual-line
 service requested Touch-Tone.

 Touch-Tone will continue to be offered at the existing monthly rates ..."


Yeah, right.


Andy Dunn   <[e-mail]> or <uunet!mongrel!amdunn>

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Perrine)
Subject: Information Needed on Bahamaian Phone System
Date: 14 Apr 1993 17:51:43 GMT
Organization: San Diego Supercomputer Center @ UCSD
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I am looking into the state of phone service in the Bahamas.  The
specific things I need information about are the availibility of the
following services:

Data links to the U.S. (probably X.25 or maybe satellite);

cellular (which standard, and the availability);

The specific area is a small island that is due North of Great Exuma
(about 15 minutes by boat), which already has a microwave link to
Great Exuma.

Anyone have any contact at the Bahama PTT?


Thanks,

Tom E. Perrine (tep)            | [e-mail]
San Diego Supercomputer Center  | Voice: [phone]
P. O. Box 85608                 |   FAX: [phone]
San Diego CA 92186-9784

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

From: [e-mail] (James Gleick)
Subject: Telco Uses My Lines
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1993 21:07:08 GMT


It drives me nuts to find NYTel repairmen using my phone lines,
presumably from the terminal on the street, to make calls to the
office or even (I believe) personal calls.  I assume personal calls
are against the rules, but the phone company contends (though somewhat
fuzzily) that there's nothing wrong with the repairmen picking up a
handy line to call in to call in to the office.

Am I not paying for these lines?

When pressed, the phone company promises to have the box, or the file,
or something, marked so that the repairmen will use someone else's
line.  However, experience shows that this is a sham -- if anything is
getting marked, the repairmen either don't see it or ignore it.

Any thoughts?  Is this really allowed?


Jim

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Test Equipment Available
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 93 9:10:30 BST


To: Norman Gillaspie

Hi Norman,

I'm responding to your message requesting information on DS0 Test
Equipment.  Your request for information was passed on to me by one of
our engineers who is on Unix -- unfortunately I'm not. Can you fax or
telephone me with information on your fax number, or address so that I
can send you information on our products.

  My telephone number is  -  (UK) 031-331-7388
     fax number           -  (UK) 031-331-7443

Sorry about the delay in contacting you but I've been trying to get an
address or node I could use.


Best regards,

Keith Willox    Hewlett Packard
South Queensferry   Scotland.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Pac Bell Caught Red Handed
Organization: ProLine [pro-cynosure]
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 21:14:47 EDT


OUCH!!  That really *stinks*!!

I hate big corporations ... grumble, grouch, groan...!


j.a.c.
ProLine:  jeanc@pro-cynosure
Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP:     crash!pro-cynosure!jeanc

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

From: [e-mail] (John Edmond Auckett)
Subject: Re: Information Needed About Plex
Date: 14 Apr 1993 14:43:13 GMT
Organization: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology


[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 is a language for programming signalling protocols (any-one
correct me if I am wrong). As far as I know it is used exclusively by
Erricson for inhouse software developement on AXE exchange equipments.
I have never seen any Plex source code so I wouldn't know if it was
procedural like Pascal.

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew M. Dunn)
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 93 16:17:50 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark Brader) writes:

>> 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."

It works from Kitchener, Ontario (area code 519).  I got the KDD
recording with the music.

Neat!

Andy Dunn    <[e-mail]> or <uunet!mongrel!amdunn>

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 93 00:58:32 GMT
Subject: Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Tony DeSimone)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


On Wed, 7 Apr 1993 14:38:12 GMT, [e-mail]
(david.g.lewis) said:

> 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 < four minutes
> per year downtime, I'll start believing it.

Well, I certainly hope my distinguished colleague from Illinois is
right ... still, I'm nagged by a similar sentiment that might have
come from some three-letter company about a decade ago:

   "When someone shows me a desktop computer that can handle a
    multi-gigabyte disk farm and a dozen tape drives and will support
    hundreds of 3270 terminal sessions, I'll start believing it."

I guess if users had been as insistent as providers about doing things
the same old way, IBM wouldn't be where it is today.

Not that I'm really worried about the Windows NT gassing.  Still, some
of the stuff some of the workstation and router vendors are doing is
enough to make me nervous.  Of course there's always billing to screw
them up ...

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: AI/Exp Sys in Telecom Information Needed
Date: 15 Apr 93 00:32:44 CST
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services


I am interested in recent publications (last two or three years),
mainly books or general articles, on AI/Expert Systems in
Telecommunications, Intelligent Networks, or Network Management.

If you know of such publications, please send me an e-mail, with some
description, if available.


Thanks in advance.

Merzad

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #257
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21721;
          16 Apr 93 4:55 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21060
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 16 Apr 1993 01:27:40 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00823
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 16 Apr 1993 01:26:53 -0500
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 01:26:53 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #258

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 16 Apr 93 01:26:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 258

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telco Uses My Lines (Fred Goldstein)
    Re: Telco Uses My Lines (John Nagle)
    Re: First Cellular Telephones Go Into Service In Cuba (Robert Wiegand)
    Re: Need Computer Interface to a Pager (Bob Frankston)
    Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle? (Thomas Grant Edwards)
    Re: Truly Amazing, Truly (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Where Can I Find Phrack and Chaos Digest? ([e-mail])
    Re: Where Can I Find Phrack? (Frederick Dean)
    Re: NYNEX/NY <-> BAMS/DC Call Delivery (Scott Eckelman)
    Re: Bell Canada Phases Out Rotary (Pulse) Dialing (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Residential ISDN (Fred Goldstein)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before sumbitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Telco Uses My Lines
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk])
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 17:37:16 GMT


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

> It drives me nuts to find NYTel repairmen using my phone lines,
> presumably from the terminal on the street, to make calls to the
> office or even (I believe) personal calls.  ...
> Any thoughts?  Is this really allowed?

This is one of my pet peeves about NYNEX too!  A couple of weeks ago I
reported a problem with a line to my house.  They dispatched somebody.
It was daytime and I wasn't home.  The protector was outside so he had
no real need to come in, or at least that's the understanding I had
with the repair supervisor.  But he left without fixing anything.
Why?  Because he couldn't call the CO up to run the tests.  He would
have had to come into the house and use my other, working phone line.

No cellular phones.  No land mobile radios.  Nothing in the trucks at
all.  When they need to communicate, they need a live phone line, and
think it's their right to beg, borrow or steal one.  And this is part
of the same conglomerate that owns the local cellular (B) carrier.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Telco Uses My Lines
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 18:59:17 GMT


[e-mail] (James Gleick) writes:

> It drives me nuts to find NYTel repairmen using my phone lines,
> presumably from the terminal on the street, to make calls to the
> office or even (I believe) personal calls.  I assume personal calls
> are against the rules, but the phone company contends (though somewhat
> fuzzily) that there's nothing wrong with the repairmen picking up a
> handy line to call in to call in to the office.

       You might build a device which connects to your phone line and
detects off-hook voltage without off-hook current.  This indicates a
phone off-hook upstream of the device, so if placed just past your
demark, it indicates someone is using your line.  Use this to turn on
a tape recorder.  This should give you ammunition to deal with the
problem.


John Nagle

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Wiegand)
Subject: Re: First Cellular Telephones Go Into Service In Cuba
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 18:34:25 GMT


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

>> 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?

Do you really believe the regular phone lines in Cuba are any more
private? The government can just as easily tap the regular phones as
well.


Bob Wiegand

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Need Computer Interface to a Pager
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 16:31 -0400


Simple answer.  If your pager is 555-1234 and you want to send the
message "98-25-26", then send

ATDT5551234@98*25*26

Where the first part is the standard dial string, the @ waits for
silence and the *, in some systems, is a dash.

No board necessary, just a com port.

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: Free Calls With a Captain Crunch Whistle?
Date: 15 Apr 1993 21:24:28 GMT
Organization: Project GLUE, University of Maryland, College Park


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

> Let me begin by saying that it is a shame that I feel that I have to
> forge this note.

It is much better to use anonymous remailers.  If you do not trust an
anonymous remailing service, then use multiple cypherpunk sites.  By
multiply encrypting your message with PGP, and sending it through
multiple cypherpunk sites, there is no way to link you to your message
or recipient, even by the individual remailing sites.


Thomas


[Moderator's Note: Anonymous articles are generally not accepted here
at telecom. There are some exceptions, but very few.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Truly Amazing, Truly
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access System: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 01:47:41 GMT


In a article to Comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] had the
following to say about Re: Truly Amazing, Truly

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

>> In a message to comp.dcom.telecom <04-08-93 12:30>, [e-mail]
>> sub.org writes:

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

[ . some stuff about GSM deleted ... ]

>> I have heard talk of a new system called Digital AMPS. Does such a
>> system exist? If so how would it compare with GSM. Is encryption
>> involved.  Apparently phones which can use this new system scan for a
>> digital signal, if none found then they look for an analogue one.

> Digital AMPS, basically applies TDMA to analog AMPS channels by
> slicing up the spectrum into 3 timeslots (the mobiles per channel). It
> uses analog signalling, then if a digital Base is available, can
> initiate the Voice coding and timeslot control of TDMA. Thus mobiles
> must be dual mode ... both analog and digital.

> I'm not sure if any digital AMPS systems are in commercial service as
> of yet.

The reason I asked was because I have been told by a friend in the
Telecom industry in New Zealand that Telecom New Zealand, who are
currently the only cellular provider, are planning (or have already
done so) to install Digital AMPS. The equipment may already be in
place. This presumably is to counter the upcoming competition from
Bell South who have been granted a licence to operate the second
cellular service in the country. They will be using GSM.


Laurence Chiu    Walnut Creek, CA

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 15 Apr 93 23:59:59 GMT
Subject: Re: Where Can I Find Phrack and Chaos Digest?


In article <[e-mail]>, Jinmo Ahn <ja2f+@andrew.
cmu.edu> writes:

> I'm looking for a ftp site wich has back issues of {Phrack}.  Could
> someone tell me where I can find it?

You can found _Phrack_ on a lot of ftp sites, e.g.

        * kragar.eff.org [192.88.144.4] in /pub/cud/phrack
        * uglymouse.css.itd.umich.edu [141.211.182.91] in /pub/CuD/phrack
        * halcyon.com [192.135.191.2] in /pub/mirror/cud/phrack
        * ftp.ee.mu.oz.au [128.250.77.2] in /pub/text/CuD/phrack
        * nic.funet.fi [128.214.6.100] in /pub/doc/cud/phrack
        * orchid.csv.warwick.ac.uk [137.205.192.5] in /pub/cud/phrack

Some others very interesting underground e-journals or newsletters are
available on the same ftp sites, like _Chaos Digest_.  Only change
"phrack" by "chaos" in the precedent ftp list and ask for chaos-1.xx,
with xx as the issue number.  If you don't have an ftp access, don't
hesitate to send and e-mail message to [e-mail] with the
following message in the body of the text:

                        connect ftp.eff.org
                        chdir /pub/cud/chaos
                        get chaos-1.15
                        quit
                        .

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me!


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)

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

From: [e-mail] (Frederick Dean)
Subject: Re: Where Can I Find Phrack?
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 15:27:12 GMT


Here is a listing of anonymous ftp sites from an archie search of
"phrack"...

peacock% archie phrack

Host cs.dal.ca

    Location: /pub/comp.archives
      DIRECTORY drwxrwxrwx        512  Jan 28 14:12  phrack

Host cs.ubc.ca

    Location: /pub/archive/mirror/EFF/cud
      DIRECTORY drwxr-xr-x       1024  Aug 26 1992  phrack

Host bric-a-brac.apple.com

    Location: /pub/stud_reps
      DIRECTORY drwxr-xr-x        512  Jul  1 1992  phrack

Host titania.mathematik.uni-ulm.de

    Location: /pub/info
      DIRECTORY drwxrwxr-x        512  May 25 1992  phrack

Host uxc.cso.uiuc.edu

    Location: /pub
      DIRECTORY drwxr-xr-x       1536  Aug 13 1992  phrack

Host f.ms.uky.edu

    Location: /pub3/mailing.lists
      DIRECTORY drwxr-xr-x       1024  Jan 19 02:29  phrack

Host nic.funet.fi

    Location: /pub/doc/cud
      DIRECTORY drwxr-xr-x       1024  Jan 13 05:53  phrack
    Location: /pub/doc
      DIRECTORY drwxrwxr-x       3584  Aug 24 1991  phrack
    Location: /pub/doc/phrack
      DIRECTORY drwxrwxr-x       1024  Feb 14 1992  phrack

Host nic.cic.net

    Location: /pub/nircomm/gopher/e-serials/alphabetic/p
      DIRECTORY drwxr-xr-x       1024  Apr  2 09:19  phrack

Host kragar.eff.org

    Location: /pub/cud
      DIRECTORY drwxr-xr-x       1024  Mar 31 12:54  phrack

Host src.doc.ic.ac.uk

    Location: /usenet/comp.archives/hackers/journals
      DIRECTORY drwxr-xr-x        512  May  3 1991  phrack

Host clover.csv.warwick.ac.uk

    Location: /pub/cud
      DIRECTORY drwxr-xr-x       1024  Jan  7 05:02  phrack



Rick Dean     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Eckelman)
Subject: Re: NYNEX/NY <-> BAMS/DC Call Delivery
Date: 14 Apr 93 18:42:19 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.


Douglas Scott Reuben ([e-mail]) wrote:

> (BTW, features work in SOME markets, and from what I am told calls
> will STILL not go back to voicemail if unanswered in the visited
> market. Anyone care to confirm or refute this?)

Inter-switch call delivery is offered in two ways:
    1.  Manufacturer proprietary
    2.  IS41 Rev A.

I don't know too much about the first case (it's proprietary, after
all), but 'regular' IS41A call delivery works like this:

    1. mobile roams in another market.  Visited switch detects roamer by one
       of three methods:
           a.  Roamer makes a call.
           b.  Roamer receives a call.
           c.  Switch has autonomous registration turned on, and the phone
               sends registration messages to the switch at regular intervals.

    2. Visited switch passes 'Registration Notification' message to home
       switch.  Home switch answers with the customer's service profile
       if the customer is good, or a denied reason if the customer is
       invalid. (delinquent account, stolen phone, wrong serial number).

    3. Home switch receives an incoming call for the mobile.  Since the
       mobile is not in the home market, home switch sends a 'Routing
       Request' message to the visited switch.

    4. If the mobile is busy, visited switch sends back a 'busy' message
       to the home switch.  If the mobile has CFBusy activated, the home
       switch will forward the call to the appropriate number, e.g., voice
       mail. If not, the home switch will provide busy tone to the caller.

       If the mobile is idle, the visited switch sends back a temporary
       number (tldn) to the home switch.

    5. Home switch routes the call to the temporary number through the
       customer's preferred interexchange carrier (PIC) if the home switch
       is an RBOC, or to whatever IXC the home carrier chooses if it's not
       an RBOC.

    6. Roaming switch receives the call to the temporary number, looks up
       which mobile it assigned the tldn to, and pages the mobile.

    7. If the mobile is busy, or does not answer, and the service profile
       received (step 2) indicates that the customer has CFbusy or CFN/A
       active,  it sends a 'Redirection Request' message back to the
       home switch indicating that the mobile is either busy or not answering.

    8. Home switch tears down the tldn/IXC connection, and forwards the
       incoming call to the appropriate number.

    With the MFJ and recent rulings from Judge Green, RBOCS are restricted
    to the following:

    4. The RBOC must always receive a tldn, and never a 'busy' message,
       even if the mobile is busy.  The call _must_ be given to the
       customer's PIC.  This means that the visited switch software
       must be modified for non-standard IS41 to always send back a tldn,
       or an intermediary clearinghouse must provide the tldn to the home
       switch.

    5. Home switch routes the call to the temporary number through the
       customer's preferred interexchange carrier.

    6. Roaming switch receives the call to the temporary number.
       If the tldn was assigned by the roaming switch, it pages the mobile.
       If not, it requests the mobile associated with the tldn from
       the intermediary clearinghouse, then pages the mobile.

    7. If the mobile is busy, or does not answer, and the service profile
       received (step 2) indicates that the customer has CFbusy or CFN/A
       active,  it sends a 'Redirection Request' message back to the
       home switch indicating that the mobile is either busy or not answering.

       This is where it gets a little tricky -- depending on how you read
       the most recent ruling, the RBOC home switch may have to ignore
       this 'Redirection Request' message and not forward the call.

       One interpretation is that an RBOC may not tear down the IXC call.
       Other interpretations suggest that this is ok, since the IXC has at
       least had a shot at delivering the call, and the call may then
       be forwarded to voice mail or elsewhere as appropriate.
       Depending on the RBOC lawyers, the home switch will either ignore
       or handle the Redirection message.

       If it ignores the message, the visited switch will provide either
       a busy tone or an announcement that the mobile is not answering and
       the caller will not get routed to the customer's voice mail.

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Phases Out Rotary (Pulse) Dialing
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 17:49:07 GMT


    So, are switches going to stop accepting pulse dialing?


Harold

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Residential ISDN
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 17:30:16 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Russ Wilton <wilton@hg.
uleth.ca> writes:

> So how do they connect multiple extensions in a house to an ISDN
> circuit?  Does it allow the same functionality as with analog phones?
> That is, can two people on different extensions talk simultaneously to
> a third remote party?  If so, how do they mix the signals?

You don't really want ISDN phones in a house: It doesn't provide the
bridging capability that we take for granted.  Some Centrex features
can simulate it by automatically making a three-party conference, but
it's a kludge.  Better to have an analog terminal adapter for the
phones, with the ISDN left digital for data devices.  Gandalf,
Motorola-UDS and Xancomm, among others, provide analog TA
capabilities.

> This is beginning to sound like I need a short course on ISDN. :-)
> Any pointers to a good ISDN reference book would be appreciated.
> Thanks.

Far be it from me to plug my own works... :-)

But I did write a book, "ISDN In Perspective", which might make nice
bathroom reading.  It's from Addison-Wesley with ISBN 0-201-50016-7.
Be forewarned, it's not unopinionated.


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


[Moderator's Note: Fred, your reviews are always welcome here, opinion-
ated or not. Keep sending 'em in!    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #258
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27450;
          16 Apr 93 23:49 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09858
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 16 Apr 1993 21:01:51 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13101
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 16 Apr 1993 21:01:19 -0500
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 21:01:19 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #259

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 16 Apr 93 21:00:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 259

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Crossed Lines Day (Randy Gellens)
    Scheduling/Control Systems For Video Teleconferences (Chuck Ludinsky)
    Magazine Review: Disaster Recovery (Bob Ackley)
    Why Wasn't Bell Labs Part of the Original Arpanet? (Ronda Hauben)
    In Search of SNMPPP 56K CSU/DSU (Steve Baum)
    Wanted: "Snergy: Technical Integration in the Bell System" (Ronda Hauben)
    AT&T / NT Integration/Networking etc ... (Frank Blau)
    Correction to NYNEX <-> DC Delivery (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    How Are 900 Numbers Terminated? (Yoav Weiss)
    Cellular Protocol Analyzer Information (Roupen Nahabedian)
    Testing Phone Lines For a Modem ([e-mail])
    Undersea Fiber Optics (Tracy Richardson)
    Mysterious Charges on Phone Bill (Joe Roden)
    Minor But Puzzling Problem (Ed Casey)
    Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete? (Lynne Gregg)
    Information On Signalling System 7 and PABX's (John Edmond Auckett)
    Anonymous Messages (Jason Garner)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 15 APR 93 18:03
Subject: Crossed Lines Day


Yesterday, there was an odd message on my voice mail.  I could hear,
quite plainly, a receptionist for a different company answer the
phone, and converse with a caller, who asked to speak with someone
(not me), was told he wasn't in, and left a message (with the
receptionist, not voice mail).  In the background, I could hear
another conversation moderately well.  Further in the background were
many other conversations, but very faint.

Today, I had a doctor's appointment.  As I was talking to the secretary,
she asked if I got her "strange message" on my voice mail yesterday.  She
had tried to call me, and had gotten someone else's voice mail.  She hung
up and called back, and got my voice mail, but it didn't respond to her
pressing any keys.  In her call, she could hear, very loudly, half of a
conversation with a rude woman who was going on and on about losing her
cigarettes on a walk.

While the secretary was telling me this, another patient overheard,
and told us that when she tried to make a call yesterday (at about the
same time) she heard other conversations, including one with a woman
talking about a pregnancy.

Both my office and the doctor's office are on (714) 380, which last
time I checked was a 1AESS due to be converted to a 5ESS at some point
this year.


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] (Ludinsky)
Subject: Scheduling/Control Systems For Video Teleconferences
Organization: The MITRE Corp., Bedford, Ma.
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 12:56:05 GMT


Does anyone know of any scheduling and control systems for video
teleconferences on private T1-based networks?

Such a network would consist of a relatively large number of "smart"
multiplexers or digital acess and cross-connect systems (DACS) that
are interconnected in a mesh network using T1 lines.  User connections
to the network would also be via one or more T1 lines from the user's
site to a network node (multiplexer).  A multiplexer at the site would
combine inputs from two or more video codecs for transmission over the
T1 access line.

The scheduling/control system would support a dialog with site users,
allow the users to identify and reserve available time periods and
system resources for scheduled conferences, then, at the appropriate
times, issue commands to the multiplexers/DACS, codecs, and ancillary
equipment (e.g., multipoint control units) to establish the
connections and appropriately configure the equipment.

Any leads/ideas would be greatly appreciated.  Please reply via
e-mail.


Regards,

Chuck Ludinsky   [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 93 01:10:43 CST
From: [e-mail] (Bob Ackley)
Subject: Magazine Review: Disaster Recovery
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In a message of <31 Mar 93 19:12:44>, Seth B Rothenberg (11:30102/2) writes:

> 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.)

        There is a magazine called 'Disaster Recovery' aimed primarily
at those in charge of such things for large computer installations.
Most material and articles should also be applicable for communications
recovery.  There is also an organization specifically for such people
and 'Disaster Recovery' is their professional journal, I suppose it's
somewhat similar to the NFPA in Boston.  Check the index of periodicals/
publications at your library.


Bob's Soapbox   Plattsmouth  (1:285/1.7)

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

From: [e-mail] (Ronda Hauben)
Subject: Why Wasn't Bell Labs Part of the Original Arpanet?
Date: 15 Apr 1993 22:45:55 GMT
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ronda Hauben)


I'm doing some research for a paper about the development of the net
for a communications conference.

 From my research about the early days of the Arpanet, it seems that
Bell Labs was not part of the original Arpanet. Given the important
role that Bell Labs has played in the development of new technology in
the U.S. (and world), this seemed a bit of a surprise to me.

I wondered if anyone knew if that was true and if so why.


Thanks,

Ronda Hauben             write for a copy of the Fall '92
Amateur Computerist            Special Supplement on
P.O. Box 4344          "The Wonderful World of Usenet News"
Dearborn, MI 48126    [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (STEVE BAUM)
Subject: In Search of SNMPPP 56K CSU/DSU
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 22:52:16 GMT


I am looking for a SNMP manageable 56K CSU/DSU or one that has a net
management systemthat is SNMP compatible.

I am also looking a Netview LPDA maneable 56K CSU/DSU other than IBM
and AT&T.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ronda Hauben)
Subject: Wanted: "Snergy: Technical Integration ... in the Bell System"
Date: 15 Apr 1993 23:06:11 GMT
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ronda Hauben)


I wondered if anyone could suggest how I might find a copy of the book
about Bell Labs called "Synergy: Technical Integration and Technical
Innovation in the Bell System" by H.W. Bode which was privately
printed by Bell Labs in 1971.

I have looked in the University of Michigan library which is my local
library and it wasn't listed.

I am working on a paper on the development of the global computer
network. I have found the role of Bell Labs in the development and
propagation of unix as an important contribution to the development of
the current global network. I hoped to draw some perspective from the
history of the Royal Society in England and the role that experimen-
tation and science played there in contributing to new forms and
principles of production.  I have found Bell Labs an interesting
parallel and felt that the book "Snergy" would be helpful in the
research I am doing but it seems hard to locate.


Thanks,

Ronda Hauben            write for a copy of the Fall '92
Amateur Computerist           Special Supplement on
P.O. Box 4344           "The Wonderful World of Usenet News"
Dearborn, MI 48126    [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Frank Blau)
Subject: AT&T / NT Integration/Networking etc ...
Organization: The Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 18:06:24 GMT


I am looking for information on integration of a heterogeneous phone
network, consisting of AT&T G1, System 75, NT Option 21, and NT
Option11.  The only piece of software that I've seen that does this is
the TFMS package from TDS in Plano TX.

Does anyone know of any others. I want to be able to do remote
administration, ACD/CMS reporting, cable inventory, etc ... All
hopfully running under UNIX on a Sequent ...


Thanks,

Frank Blau   Preferred Health Care

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Correction to NYNEX <-> DC Delivery
Date: 16 Apr 93 06:22:45 EDT
Organization: Wesleyan University


I posted recently about NYNEX getting Call-Delivery to DC, Albany,
Boston, etc.

I stated, *ERRONEOUSLY*, that both incoming and outgoing calls had no
daily surcharge. This is not the case.

ALL calls placed/rec'd in BAMS/DC WILL be will a roam charge. So how
do you know if you are in the BAMS/Philly system (no charge?) and the
BAMS/DC system? Well, you don't. And unless you want to put the SID
for DC into your phone (assuming you can), if you are on the border
between two systems, you are taking chances with a roam charge when
you answer a call. (Sort of like the Springfield/Franklin County Mass
split for Cell One/Boston and Cell One/NY customers.)

Calls rec'd in Albany have no daily charge; calls placed in Albany do.

Calls rec'd in Boston have no daily charge, and no one seems to know
about placed calls.

As to Newburgh, Poughkeepsie, Mid-Hudson, Eastern PA, Philly, Atlantic
City, etc ... I dunno ... they give different answers each time I ask
(how nice! :( ), so I figure 'get a name, and if I'm billed say "so
and so told me otherwise"'.

Anyhow, PLEASE check to see how roam charges are levied in each one of
NYNEX's auto-call delivery markets. IMHO, its ridiculous to have such
an inconsistent policy -- and leave it to NYNEX to diminish from the
otherwise superior utility of their delivery system with these inane
charges/roaming agreements.


Doug    [e-mail]  // [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Yoav Weiss)
Subject: How Are 900 Numbers Terminated?
Organization: Tel-Aviv University Computation Center
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 11:38:58 GMT


Hi all,

Here in Israel, we have a (relatively) new service called 056, which
is identical to the 1-900 of the USA.  I heard that for every 1-900
number which exists, there is a regular-toll line, that connects to
the same line.  Is that true?  What if I run a company, using 900?
Can people find my regular number, and call it directly for no fee?
Is there a way for them to find it?


Thanks in advance.

Yoav Weiss, ISRAEL   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I can only address the USA system for 900 numbers.
Some do and some do not have 'regular' lines. It depends on how it was
set up when installed. The carrier servicing your 900 numbers can set
it up so there is a 'private' or 'leased' line direct from his switch
to you. Unless you have a very high volume of 900 traffic (in which
case microwave -- or some form of local telco bypass -- between the
carrier and yourself might be cost effective), the most common way to
get the private or leased circuits between the carrier and yourself is
via the telco. But, this can be expensive; the cost of the wire pairs
between the 900 carrier and yourself (via telco) will drive the cost
of the 'carriage' -- or what you have to pay the carrier for the call
before adding on your own fees -- up quite a bit unless you can keep
the leased lines packed or loaded with calls most of the time in order
to amortize or spread the cost a little thinner among all calls.

So, the real low traffic (like what? maybe a dozen calls per day?) 900
information providers sometimes opt for having the 900 carrier just
drop their calls on a POTS line with call-forwarding attached; a 900
call comes in, it gets redialed or call-forwarded out to the person
or company receiving the call on a 'regular' line, possibly a line
with distinctive ringing on it so they can identify the call (as
coming from 900) before they answer. This can be a real inexpensive,
simple way to receive 900 calls, on your phone at home for example.
The other side of the coin is if someone finds out the number to which
the 900 carrier is forwarding calls, *they* can dial that number also.
The information provider assumes the call is coming in via 900, but it
is not. They get no fees for that call as a result, and the caller
only gets charged for a call to the regular number also.

Here in Chicago there were a number of information providers of all
stripes (sex, astrology, tarot, etc) downtown in the Opera Building a
few years ago -- or at least that is where the 900 carrier dropped off
their calls. The calls all went outbound from there on 312-609-xxxx.
Fortunatly (for the IPs), not too many people knew that. So, it is an
applications thing: you don't have the volume of traffic to justify
T-1 or telco bypass on your 900 numbers; you want to keep the carriage
costs down to a minimum; then you use the 900 ==> POTS ==> call for-
warding routine ... but keep those numbers *very confidential* and
preferably in some exchange unrelated to the rest of your lines, and
with a real obscure numbering sequence, etc to make it harder for the
phreaks and crackers to find them.  Your choice: definitly pay more to
start with or risk earning less later on.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Roupen Nahabedian)
Subject: Cellular Protocol Analyzer Information Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Roupen Nahabedian)
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 16:49:23 GMT


I'm looking for infomration on celluar CAI (Common Air Interface)
PROTOCOL ANALYZERS such as amps, CT2, etc. Make, model, views and
reviews would be appreciated.


Thanks in advance,

Roupen Nahabedian   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Testing Phone Lines For a Modem
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 93 23:20:01 PDT


I'm having problems using my modem at 9600 baud. The line sounds fine
for voice although the levels seem abnormally low. Is there any
testing I can do with simple test equipment that might isolate the
problem to either the line or the modem?


PLS

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 14:23:46 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Undersea Fiber Optics

I am doing a paper on Undersea Fiber Optics and was wondering if you
could give me some in-depth information on these questions.

*  How is it put together?
*  When was the whole project started?
*  What you can do with it?
*  Advantages and Disadvantages?
*  How long have they used it?

If you can think of anything else I could use for my paper I would
really appreciate it.


Thanks a lot :)

Tracy Richardson  ( [e-mail] )

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Roden)
Subject: Mysterious Charges On Phone Bill
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 18:00:11 GMT


Can anyone explain to me how I could receive a charge on my phone bill
when someone called me from a hotel while using her own AT&T calling
card?

We got a $9 charge for a 12 minute call from Zero Plus Dialing, Inc.,
for a call that they claim was made on our calling card.  We've called
the company, and they are "researching" it.  They claim that the call
was made on our calling card, but they can't tell which of our cards
was used.  We have Pac Bell and MCI calling cards.  The caller
received no charges on her own bill.


Thanks,

Joe Roden


[Moderator's Note: The party calling you from a hotel used one of the
AT&T calling cards with a scrambled number -- a number which has no
direct, obvious relationship to the telephone number to which it is
assigned. They were probably tricked into thinking their call was
being placed over AT&T when in fact 'Zero Plus Dialing' intercepted
the call. Once 'Zero Plus Dialing' got the call and realized they had
no way to bill the calling party (the rip off carriers are no longer
getting a free ride via the AT&T data base, etc) they simply decided
to reverse the charges, putting them through to *your* line instead.
I've received many complaints about this outfit; almost as many as
Integretel. Perhaps I should do a corporate records search for 'Zero
Plus Dialing, Inc' and publish the names and addresses of their corp-
orate officers and their attorney. Let *them* start handling customer
service inquiries. Not to toot my own horn too much, but there are
calling cards available (since January) which eliminate all this
hassle once and for all at 25 cents per minute calling with no sur-
charge. Request the Orange Card file from '[e-mail]'.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (ejc)
Subject: Minor But Puzzling Problem
Organization: mitre.org
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 19:05:22 GMT


Greeting,  Help ...

With a teenage daughter in the house I was finding it difficult to
maintain the peace and talk to the world at the same time so I had a
second phone number added.  It is the same four-wire line; she's on
red-green and I've got black-yellow.

The final result is alot of "cross-talk".  We can heare each other
whilst talking on our respective lines.  Additionally, I seem to have
developed a slight buzz on the line(s).  The worst part is that my
modem doesn't really like it.  Especially at 9600 or higher (I tend to
get disconnected).

The problem got so disturbing that I rewired the house putting each
phone plug on its own line from a terminal and my modem on a direct
line to the grey junction box.  The buzz remains as does the cross-talk
although not as bad.

All wires are terminated (no loose hanging wires anywhere) and no two
bare wires are touching (from where I can legally enter the grey box
to the phone jacks).  No phone wires (location wise) have changed
their general location.  Some do run near, with, or across electrical
and cable wiring.  I am beginning to feel that the problem has always
been here but the second line with cross talk has caused the problem
to manifest itself into a real headache.

Is there a filter or something I can add to quiet the lines?  Or do I
need to get the phone company to run a seperate line (yeah, right)
from the pole/box, whatever)?

Anyone else ever have this problem and how was it solved?


Thanks,

ed casey   [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Responses from anyone?  There are a lot of things
this fellow should check out; he may need telco assistance also.  PAT]

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Subject: Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete?
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 93 07:46:00 PDT


> When someone shows me a desktop computer that can handle a
> multi-gigabyte disk farm and a dozen tape drives and will support
> hundreds of 3270 terminal sessions, I'll start believing it.

Stranger things have happened ...

It's the NETWORK that supports the devices ... try lashing together
some RS/6000's (the serial optical will connect to high speed devices,
channels, or networks).

Believe it!  A small net of RS/6000's can outperform a Cray (a take up
a lot LESS SPACE).


Lynne

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

From: [e-mail] (John Edmond Auckett)
Subject: Information on Signalling System 7 and PABX's Wanted
Date: 16 Apr 1993 14:47:18 GMT
Organization: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology


Any help/info greatly appreciated.


JA   ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Well, that is an awfully big topic. Can you narrow
it down a little, or did you have specific questions?   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 93 02:55:27 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Jason Garner)
Subject: Anonymous Messages


Why don't you accept anonymous messages?  There have been many times I
wanted to comment on something posted here but won't because signing
my name to it would incur the wrath of the government or worse, telco
(this may seem like a toungue-in-cheek joke but if you'd ever seen the
surveillance equipment telco has you wouldn't think it was so funny).
Without sounding paranoid, I know that there are many things that THEY
don't want you to know but, in fact, should be known to the general
public.  Are you a fascist Pat? (or just an attorney).


Moderator's Note: I'm a facist.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #259
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29405;
          17 Apr 93 0:56 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32441
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 16 Apr 1993 21:44:33 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22557
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 16 Apr 1993 21:44:02 -0500
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 21:44:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #260

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 16 Apr 93 21:44:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 260

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    White House Encryption Proposal (Steve Forrette)
    Information Needed on Bellcore V&H (Jeffrey P. Bakke)
    Problems With the GSM Subscriber Units (Samir Soliman)
    Another Way of Expanding Calling Area? (Carl Moore)
    Re: Roll Your Own PBX/Internal Phone System (David S. Roland)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Lukas Zahas)
    Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch (Cliff Barney)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Charles Hoequist, Jr.)
    Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete? (Al Varney)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 93 16:34:52 -0700
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: White House Encryption Proposal


[Moderator's Note: Steve caught this item and sent it in. Thanks!  PAT]

                         THE WHITE HOUSE
                  Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release                           April 16, 1993

                STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY

The President today announced a new initiative that will bring the
Federal Government together with industry in a voluntary program to
improve the security and privacy of telephone communications while
meeting the legitimate needs of law enforcement.

The initiative will involve the creation of new products to accelerate
the development and use of advanced and secure telecommunications
networks and wireless communications links.

For too long there has been little or no dialogue between our private
sector and the law enforcement community to resolve the tension
between economic vitality and the real challenges of protecting
Americans.  Rather than use technology to accommodate the sometimes
competing interests of economic growth, privacy and law enforcement,
previous policies have pitted government against industry and the
rights of privacy against law enforcement.

Sophisticated encryption technology has been used for years to protect
electronic funds transfer.  It is now being used to protect electronic
mail and computer files.  While encryption technology can help
Americans protect business secrets and the unauthorized release of
personal information, it also can be used by terrorists, drug dealers,
and other criminals.

A state-of-the-art microcircuit called the "Clipper Chip" has been
developed by government engineers.  The chip represents a new approach
to encryption technology.  It can be used in new, relatively
inexpensive encryption devices that can be attached to an ordinary
telephone.  It scrambles telephone communications using an encryption
algorithm that is more powerful than many in commercial use today.

This new technology will help companies protect proprietary
information, protect the privacy of personal phone conversations and
prevent unauthorized release of data transmitted electronically.  At
the same time this technology preserves the ability of federal, state
and local law enforcement agencies to intercept lawfully the phone
conversations of criminals.

A "key-escrow" system will be established to ensure that the "Clipper
Chip" is used to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans.  Each
device containing the chip will have two unique "keys," numbers that
will be needed by authorized government agencies to decode messages
encoded by the device.  When the device is manufactured, the two keys
will be deposited separately in two "key-escrow" data bases that will
be established by the Attorney General.  Access to these keys will be
limited to government officials with legal authorization to conduct a
wiretap.

The "Clipper Chip" technology provides law enforcement with no new
authorities to access the content of the private conversations of
Americans.

To demonstrate the effectiveness of this new technology, the Attorney
General will soon purchase several thousand of the new devices.  In
addition, respected experts from outside the government will be
offered access to the confidential details of the algorithm to assess
its capabilities and publicly report their findings.

The chip is an important step in addressing the problem of
encryption's dual-edge sword: encryption helps to protect the privacy
of individuals and industry, but it also can shield criminals and
terrorists.  We need the "Clipper Chip" and other approaches that can
both provide law-abiding citizens with access to the encryption they
need and prevent criminals from using it to hide their illegal
activities.  In order to assess technology trends and explore new
approaches (like the key-escrow system), the President has directed
government agencies to develop a comprehensive policy on encryption
that accommodates:

     --   the privacy of our citizens, including the need to
          employ voice or data encryption for business purposes;

     --   the ability of authorized officials to access telephone
          calls and data, under proper court or other legal
          order, when necessary to protect our citizens;

     --   the effective and timely use of the most modern
          technology to build the National Information
          Infrastructure needed to promote economic growth and
          the competitiveness of American industry in the global
          marketplace; and

     --   the need of U.S. companies to manufacture and export
          high technology products.

The President has directed early and frequent consultations with
affected industries, the Congress and groups that advocate the privacy
rights of individuals as policy options are developed.

The Administration is committed to working with the private sector to
spur the development of a National Information Infrastructure which
will use new telecommunications and computer technologies to give
Americans unprecedented access to information.  This infrastructure of
high-speed networks ("information superhighways") will transmit video,
images, HDTV programming, and huge data files as easily as today's
telephone system transmits voice.

Since encryption technology will play an increasingly important role
in that infrastructure, the Federal Government must act quickly to
develop consistent, comprehensive policies regarding its use.  The
Administration is committed to policies that protect all Americans'
right to privacy while also protecting them from those who break the
law.

Further information is provided in an accompanying fact sheet.  The
provisions of the President's directive to acquire the new encryption
technology are also available.

For additional details, call Mat Heyman, National Institute of
Standards and Technology, [phone].

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

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S
TELECOMMUNICATIONS INITIATIVE

Q:   Does this approach expand the authority of government
     agencies to listen in on phone conversations?

A:   No.  "Clipper Chip" technology provides law enforcement with
     no new authorities to access the content of the private
     conversations of Americans.

Q:   Suppose a law enforcement agency is conducting a wiretap on
     a drug smuggling ring and intercepts a conversation
     encrypted using the device.  What would they have to do to
     decipher the message?

A:   They would have to obtain legal authorization, normally a
     court order, to do the wiretap in the first place.  They
     would then present documentation of this authorization to
     the two entities responsible for safeguarding the keys and
     obtain the keys for the device being used by the drug
     smugglers.  The key is split into two parts, which are
     stored separately in order to ensure the security of the key
     escrow system.

Q:   Who will run the key-escrow data banks?

A:   The two key-escrow data banks will be run by two independent
     entities.  At this point, the Department of Justice and the
     Administration have yet to determine which agencies will
     oversee the key-escrow data banks.

Q:   How strong is the security in the device?  How can I be sure
     how strong the security is?

A:   This system is more secure than many other voice encryption
     systems readily available today.  While the algorithm will
     remain classified to protect the security of the key escrow
     system, we are willing to invite an independent panel of
     cryptography experts to evaluate the algorithm to assure all
     potential users that there are no unrecognized
     vulnerabilities.

Q:   Whose decision was it to propose this product?

A:   The National Security Council, the Justice Department, the
     Commerce Department, and other key agencies were involved in
     this decision.  This approach has been endorsed by the
     President, the Vice President, and appropriate Cabinet
     officials.

Q:   Who was consulted?  The Congress?  Industry?

A:   We have on-going discussions with Congress and industry on
     encryption issues, and expect those discussions to intensify
     as we carry out our review of encryption policy.  We have
     briefed members of Congress and industry leaders on the
     decisions related to this initiative.

Q:   Will the government provide the hardware to manufacturers?

A:   The government designed and developed the key access
     encryption microcircuits, but it is not providing the
     microcircuits to product manufacturers.  Product
     manufacturers can acquire the microcircuits from the chip
     manufacturer that produces them.

Q:   Who provides the "Clipper Chip"?

A:   Mykotronx programs it at their facility in Torrance,
     California, and will sell the chip to encryption device
     manufacturers.  The programming function could be licensed
     to other vendors in the future.

Q:   How do I buy one of these encryption devices?

A:   We expect several manufacturers to consider incorporating
     the "Clipper Chip" into their devices.

Q:   If the Administration were unable to find a technological
     solution like the one proposed, would the Administration be
     willing to use legal remedies to restrict access to more
     powerful encryption devices?

A:   This is a fundamental policy question which will be
     considered during the broad policy review.  The key escrow
     mechanism will provide Americans with an encryption product
     that is more secure, more convenient, and less expensive
     than others readily available today, but it is just one
     piece of what must be the comprehensive approach to
     encryption technology, which the Administration is
     developing.

     The Administration is not saying, "since encryption
     threatens the public safety and effective law enforcement,
     we will prohibit it outright" (as some countries have
     effectively done); nor is the U.S. saying that "every
     American, as a matter of right, is entitled to an
     unbreakable commercial encryption product."  There is a
     false "tension" created in the assessment that this issue is
     an "either-or" proposition.  Rather, both concerns can be,
     and in fact are, harmoniously balanced through a reasoned,
     balanced approach such as is proposed with the "Clipper
     Chip" and similar encryption techniques.

Q:   What does this decision indicate about how the Clinton
     Administration's policy toward encryption will differ from
     that of the Bush Administration?

A:   It indicates that we understand the importance of encryption
     technology in telecommunications and computing and are
     committed to working with industry and public-interest
     groups to find innovative ways to protect Americans'
     privacy, help businesses to compete, and ensure that law
     enforcement agencies have the tools they need to fight crime
     and terrorism.

Q:   Will the devices be exportable?  Will other devices that use
     the government hardware?

A:   Voice encryption devices are subject to export control
     requirements.  Case-by-case review for each export is
     required to ensure appropriate use of these devices.  The
     same is true for other encryption devices.  One of the
     attractions of this technology is the protection it can give
     to U.S. companies operating at home and abroad.  With this
     in mind, we expect export licenses will be granted on a
     case-by-case basis for U.S. companies seeking to use these
     devices to secure their own communications abroad.  We plan
     to review the possibility of permitting wider exportability
     of these products.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey P. Bakke)
Subject: Information Needed on Bellcore V&H
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 16:53:16 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network


This seems to be the place to ask this question.  My employer has an
old copy of the Bellcore V&H tape (two years old?) that he assigned to
me to see if there i a way to get the Long/Lat coordinates of a
areacode+prefix from the tape.  I think that information is contained
in the data but I can't make heads or tails of the format.  This is
what I'm looking at:

ROCHESTER,MN  507-286-XXXX
Location:  Approx  43deg 52' N  and 92deg 30' West

The corresponding record in the Bellcore tape lists:
0591604326  00620010310000507286000126 009631310060ROCHESTER MN09158600

I can spot the Location name and the AREA+PRE but I can't figure where
coordinates may be.  Area the coordinates stored LONG/LA or is it some
other funky format.

Any and all information would be appreciated.  And yes, I did call
Bellcore.  They said, "Gee sorry, its an old tape.  Buy our new one
for $350 and we'll talk to you" -- Thanks ever so much.


Jeffrey P. Bakke       [e-mail]
UUCP : ...!uunet!plains!bakke    BITNET : [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: We have a regular reader here who presents an
analysis of the 'State of The Network' once each quarter as the new
tapes come out. Perhaps he will respond and explain things.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 09:57:48 -0700
From: Samir Soliman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Problems With the GSM Subscriber Units


Recently I learned that using GSM portables inside vehicles cause some
problems. Either the GSM waveform or the way they turn the power up or
down can accidentally activate the airbag system also can interfer
with the automobile automatic break system (ABS). Also it has been
noticed that the GSM mobile interferes with people with hearing aids!
The problem has to do with the GSM waveform more than the frequency
band. Does anyone have more information on these issues? There there
any recent articles that address these problems.


Samir Soliman   Qualcomm Incorporated

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 93 14:30:39 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Another Way of Expanding Calling Area?


In previous notes to the Digest, I have discussed that, given an
exchange area near Baltimore and Washington, you may find that the
prefixes serving it have differing local calling areas.  Normally, the
prefix with the smallest calling area is expected to be the one found
on the pay phones there, but now I notice an exception:

Glenwood and vicinity, Maryland (Howard County, west of Baltimore
along I-70):

410-489 has no local service to Baltimore city;
410-442 (Woodstock service) is local to Baltimore metro area;
and I recently found 442 in use on C&P pay phones, although I also stopped
in a shopping center where at least one store was using 489.

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

From: [e-mail] (David S. Roland)
Subject: Re: Roll Your Own PBX/Internal Phone System
Organization: Roland Projects, Inc
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 20:16:05 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> of comp.dcom.telecom,
[e-mail] (Robert J.  Granvin) writes:

> ... I volunteer for a group that is, like most non-profits,
> incredibly broke.  We have two phone lines to handle our voice and
> data needs.  That is all we can essentially afford to do.

> At the same time, I will be RE-installing a PC with voicemail
> capability.  It will sit as a "front end" on the voice line and

> In any case, the ultimate solution (Especially after a bunch of new
> offices are built in the long-distant future :-) is that we find some
> ability to develop our own internal telephone network -- to be able to
> call up a specific phone or at least be able to forward incoming calls
> to a specific phone (as opposed to the current procedure -- expecting
> SOMEONE to answer that ringing nightmare and YELL for the person who
> the call is for).

> I realize I'm talking about a small office PBX.  But I also realize....

I recommend a PC ISDN BRI interface card.

All of the issues that you speak of are perfect for ISDN. Put your
office on CENTREX, and use BRI only on your main "gateway" number. If
you choose a board with a voice interface (I know of only two), you
can provide an integrated solution. Display information that is sent
to the ISDN device contains called number (and where available,
calling number).

The ISDN interface allows you to "answer", speak your message, collect
routing information (such as extension), and forward the call to what
ever desk you want. (I understand you want to do this under PBX
control).  But in addition, with the display information that you
receive with the incoming call, you can request access codes to be
entered before you transfer them into a modem or other secure device.
If you get Caller ID, you can verify the caller based on the incoming
number. Further, with ISDN you will get the data connection capability
without modems (of course you can still use the analog ones too).

The ISDN interface opens up an opportunity to provide ACD type
services without being an ACD. It allows you to provide additional
information and voice services that are not available any other way.

The KEY is which hardware, and software to purchase and that depends
on how you configure your system. Roland Projects provides software in
this arena especially within a UNIX environment.

Hope I helped.


Dave

<<----Ask me about the Residential (ISDN based) Information Appliance ---->>
ROLAND PROJECTS, Inc. - P.O. Box 491/Fairport, New York 14450/[phone]
Interactive Voice Response Application and System Telecommunication Software

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

From: [e-mail] (Lukas Zahas)
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch
Date: 16 Apr 93 06:18:33 GMT
Organization: Boston University, Boston, MA, USA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark
Walsh) writes:

> Here in 707 land, POP-xxxx works as it did in 415 (now 510) land where
> I grew up.  I had thought that this POP-xxxx thing was universal.  A
> few years back, I was on business in 617 and called it at about
> midnight from my hotel, only to wake somebody who refused to believe
> that such a thing as POP-xxxx exists.

I tried the same thing when I came to Boston for school.  After two
years, someone finally told me that the number is 637-xxxx.  It seems
to be less common knowledge than POPCORN is in the Bay Area.

The weather report number is the same as in the Bay Area -- WEather
6-xxxx.  (I first found out that one from a question on Jeopardy).

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 93 12:25:16 PDT
From: Cliff Barney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Use of POPCORN to Set Your Watch


San Franciscans have used POPCORN for years.  However actually all one
needs is the 767 prefix; after that, any four digits will do.

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 09:30:00 +0000
From: Charles (C.A.) Hoequist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept


In Digest issue 243, [e-mail] (Mark Brader) writes:

>  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.

I suspect the poor quality of some of these are due to freelancing by
local telcos, rather than a new voice being used. There are any number
of IVR application generators out there which allow you to roll your
own. I know, for example, that New Brunswick Tel does exactly that,
and I doubt they're alone.

The current 'voice of Bell Canada' (if you will) is a fluent bilingual
named Claudia Theriault. She started doing Bell work around 1988-1989,
but I suspect the intercept you heard is older (intercepts are pretty
stable -- most of them have been around a long time).  The numeric code
is definitely not her voice. I've both recorded and 'coached' Claudia,
and she *never* says 'twenny'.


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

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 93 13:47:54 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Win/NT to Make CO Switched Obsolete?
Organization: AT&T


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

> On Wed, 7 Apr 1993 14:38:12 GMT, [e-mail]
> (david.g.lewis) said:

>> 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 < four minutes
>> per year downtime, I'll start believing it.

> Well, I certainly hope my distinguished colleague from Illinois is
                                                         ^^^^^^^^
   Actually, David is at Holmdel ...

> right ... still, I'm nagged by a similar sentiment that might have
> come from some three-letter company about a decade ago:

>   "When someone shows me a desktop computer that can handle a
>    multi-gigabyte disk farm and a dozen tape drives and will support
>    hundreds of 3270 terminal sessions, I'll start believing it."

> I guess if users had been as insistent as providers about doing things
> the same old way, IBM wouldn't be where it is today.

> Not that I'm really worried about the Windows NT gassing.  Still, some
> of the stuff some of the workstation and router vendors are doing is
> enough to make me nervous.  Of course there's always billing to screw
> them up ...

   One can always imagine faster CPUs/memories to compensate for
inefficient OS application support.  But speed alone can't compensate
for an architecture that isn't reliable (both hardware and software).
Initial versions of ESS(tm) central offices had about 75% of their
software concerned with diagnostics, fault detection, fault recovery
and routine internal testing of redundant hardware.  I'm sure the
number is somewhat less today, but the point is that an un-reliable or
un-testable hardware base can't be saved by using a fancy OS.

   If Windows NT can support high-speed switching, why couldn't it
support real-time FAA radar displays, on-board aircraft controls and
defense radar threat analysis?  Want to have Windows controlling BART?


Al Varney - just my opinion

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #260
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04129;
          17 Apr 93 3:16 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08645
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 17 Apr 1993 00:55:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25476
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 17 Apr 1993 00:54:20 -0500
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 00:54:20 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Telecom Archives Index of Files - Spring, 1993


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 17 Apr 93 00:50:00 CDT    Special: Telecom Archives

Inside This Issue:                            Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Archives Index of Files - Spring, 1993 (TELECOM Moderator)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 93 23:00:00 CDT
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecom Archives Index of Files - Spring, 1993


A couple times each year I specifically update the indexes to the
Telecom Archives files and present them here as a reference tool for
users searching for specific files. The indexes will be presented
below, but first, a few words about what you will be seeing. I have
captured the directory 'telecom-archives' and several of the sub-
directories.

The directories labeled 1993, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1989, etc are the
files of back issues of this Digest. We have almost 12 year's worth,
going back to the start of the Digest in August, 1981. The further
back we go, the more likely an issue here and there is missing, but
most of the several thousand back issues are available.

The file 'telecom-recent' is the most recent (at any given time) bunch
of back issues. This file contains issues x01 through x50 *or* issues
x51 through x00. In other words, it gets flushed after the fiftieth
and hundredth issues. Currently, the file opens with issue 251 as an
example. It will be closed and moved to the 1993.volume.13 file when
we reach issue 300, and a new 'telecom-recent' file will begin with
issue 301.

The file 'index-vol.9-10-11.subj.Z' is a HUGE file which contains all
the subjects during the years 1989-91 in alphabetical order. You take
it back to your site (be sure to use 'I', or binary mode to haul it!),
then you uncompress it. Use 'grep' to search for subjects and authors.

The file 'index-vol.12.subj.Z' is the same thing for 1992.

The other files which begin with the word 'index' are mirrors, or
copies of the directories.

One of the most popular files in the archives is 'areacode.guide', a
complete and detailed list of USA area codes in numerical order. The
sub-directory dealing with security issues has also been very popular
among archives visitors. The 'country.codes' sub-directory has had a
lot of additions done to it recently as well, and is seeing a lot of
traffic.

How to obtain the files:  As is briefly noted in the Digest masthead,
anyone with anonymous ftp access can get any of the files for free;
just go pull them. Just ftp lcs.mit.edu then login 'anonymous'.
You should give your [e-mail] as your password. Then, you
would 'cd telecom-archives'. You can also use 'gopher' to go to the
archives, and I think 'web' will work at some sites. If you wish, you
can use an ftp <=> email service. You can get the past two year's or
so of back issues from the Net Exchange BBS operated by PC Pursuit,
and the last year's worth more or less from Compuserve in the TELECOM
Forum Library #1. Then too, there is a dialup you can use to a BBS
where quite a few Archives files are kept (sorry, I cannot remember
the number off hand, please write and mention it in a <Re:>ply.

Caveat Emptor to UUCP users, people at Fido sites, and those similarly
situated where telephone connections or limited-traffic gateways are
concerned (or if you are at a site where your email is metered and you
have to pay for it): --

Many Archives files are quite large. The back issues files are the
biggest, as you will see from the indexes below. *Before* you send
away via ftp <=> email server or whatever, please consult your
postmaster and or site administrator. Notify that person you are
expecting very large files. Accept their counsel on the how/when/where
aspects of it.  Sites handling each other's UUCP traffic tend to get
hostile at their neighbors when a user begins hauling great gobs of
stuff back and forth, keeping toll-charged phone lines up for hours at
a time. Even on the Internet, ftp is best done late at night or on
weekends as resources are not infinite. Newsgroups and mailing lists
are not to get first priority. Just a couple weeks ago, our site here
(eecs.nwu.edu) slowed down to almost a halt; the admin looked at the
mailq and saw me in there gobbling all those cpu's -- I got a no non-
sense note: DO NOT RUN SENDMAIL IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY ON A BIG LIST
LIKE YOURS! I ask the same of you where the Telecom Archives is con-
cerned. Be considerate.

Now let's look at the directories:

First, the main directory:

total 5688
drwxrwxr-x 15 telecom  telecom      6144 Apr 10 04:55 ./
drwxrwxr-x 24 root     wheel        1024 Apr 10 01:05 ../
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Mar  2  1991 1981-86.volumes.1-5/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Mar  2  1991 1987.volumes.6-7/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Mar  2  1991 1988.volume.8/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Oct 27  1991 1989.volume.9/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Oct 27  1991 1990.volume.10/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Jan  1  1992 1991.volume.11/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Jan  2 01:05 1992.volume.12/
drwxr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Apr 10 03:38 1993.volume.13/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17903 Oct 25 22:03 19th-century-telegraphers
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     40940 Mar  4 13:50 800.collect.callbacks
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       663 Jan 27  1991 READ.ME.FIRST
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     25799 Sep 12  1990 abernathy.internet.story
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17389 Oct  1  1992 ada.phone.requirements
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14124 Mar 24  1992 air.fone.frequencies
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13983 Apr 19  1992 alascom.story
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      3551 Jan 27 06:12 ans.mach.exclusion.scheme
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     68508 Mar 14  1991 aos-new.fcc.proposals
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     68224 Nov 20  1990 aos-rules.procedures
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     60505 Feb 24  1991 apple.data.pcs.petition
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     18580 Jan  1 01:07 area.210-512.split.tx
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     18238 Nov  9  1990 area.214-903.split.tx
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     34805 Jul 30  1991 area.301-410.split.md
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     41444 May 19  1992 area.404-706.split.ga
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     34771 Jan 31 08:25 areacode.guide
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      9444 Apr 10 01:06 areacode.history
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     10662 Jan 31 08:05 areacode.program.in.c
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     20987 Jan 31 08:32 areacode.script
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8734 Dec 13  1991 att-reach.out-calculator
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       474 Feb 11  1990 att.service.outage.1-90
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     18937 Aug  1  1989 auto.coin.collection
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16833 Nov  3 23:06 autovon-dod.phone.co
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     18962 Jun 20  1992 autovon.instructions
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      5795 Jan 27 02:40 bellcore.public.documents
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8526 Dec 29 20:44 boing.zip
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      4788 Jun 10  1990 books.about.phones
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     21206 Nov 18  1991 breaux.bill.call.blocking
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     23355 Feb 14 22:28 cable.role.in.telephony
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     61504 Jul 30  1990 caller-id-legal-decision
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      4569 Feb  2  1992 caller-id-specs.bellcore
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      6807 Feb  2  1992 caller.id.specs
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     35488 Aug 22  1992 cellular.and.900.in.uk
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     39449 Dec 14  1990 cellular.carrier.codes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16188 Mar 14  1991 cellular.fraud.abernathy
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2755 Mar 14  1991 cellular.fraud.prevention
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17016 Aug  5  1990 cellular.phones-iridium
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     24455 Feb  6  1991 cellular.program-motorola
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     15141 Aug  1  1989 cellular.sieve
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       298 May 31  1990 cellular.west.germany
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16292 Mar 18  1990 class.ss7.features
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     40784 Feb 25 12:37 clinton.hi-tech.speech
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15023 Sep 30  1990 cocot-in-violation-label
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     38981 Oct 12  1990 cocot.complaint.sticker
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     52871 Apr 10 00:57 coming.of.the.fibersphere
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     70477 Sep  5  1990 computer.bbs.and.the.law
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     37177 Aug 22  1992 computer.in.hotel
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     23944 Aug  1  1989 computer.state
drwxr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Apr 10 01:37 country.codes/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     11267 Feb 25  1990 cpid-ani.developments
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       436 Mar 16  1991 deaf.communicate.on.tdd
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     86136 May 19  1992 deregulated.telecom.mkt
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15877 Sep  1  1990 dial.tone.monopoly
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     28296 Sep 29  1990 dialup.access.in.uk
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      9087 Jan 27 02:56 dialups.to.internet
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     29980 Oct 29  1991 docket.87-215
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13622 Aug 18  1991 e-mail.system.survey
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16367 Sep  1  1990 e-series.recommendations
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      3422 Jan 20  1990 early.digital.ESS
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     62602 Aug  1  1989 ecpa.1986
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     97987 Aug  4  1990 ecpa.1986.federal.laws
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     39956 Jul 14  1990 elec.frontier.foundation
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      5922 Feb 22  1991 email.middle-east.troops
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     20660 Sep  5  1990 email.privacy
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8504 Jan 27  1990 enterprise-funny-numbers
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8234 Sep 26  1991 exploring.950-1288
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     19836 Nov 20  1990 fax.products.for.pc
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     24706 Oct 29  1991 fcc.modem.tax.action
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     33239 Aug  1  1989 fcc.policy
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     19378 Aug  1  1989 fcc.threat
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       484 Jan 14  1990 fcc.vrs.aos-ruling
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      9052 Aug  1  1989 find.pair
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     47203 Aug  1  1989 fire.in.chgo.5-88
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      1998 Jan 27  1990 fire.in.st-louis.1-90
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       377 Jan 27  1990 fires.elsewhere.in.past
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      1247 Feb 10  1990 first.issue.cover
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     62927 Feb 22 11:02 frequently.asked.question
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14105 Nov 24  1990 genie.star-service
-rw-r--r--  1 map      telecom    118496 Jul 31  1992 glossary.acronyms
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     43101 Jan 27  1991 glossary.isdn.terms-kluge
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    115757 Jul 31  1992 glossary.naval.telecom
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     42188 Jan 14  1990 glossary.phrack.acronyms
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     67113 Jan 14  1990 glossary.txt
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     68804 Feb  2  1990 hi.perf.computing.net
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      9444 Apr  9 00:03 history.of.area.splits
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2337 Jan 27  1990 history.of.digest
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17129 Jan  5  1992 history.of.stock.ticker
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     27984 Nov 23  1991 history.of.teletype
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     30996 Feb 26  1992 history.of.western.union
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     53628 Dec  6  1991 house.of.reps.bill.3515
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     32625 Mar 29  1990 how.numbers.are.assigned
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     31520 Aug 11  1991 how.phones.work
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15302 Jan 20  1991 how.to.post.msgs.here
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     54041 Dec 13  1991 hr.3515.federal.law
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      1616 Nov 20  1990 index-canada.npa.files
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom         0 Apr 16 19:36 index-country.codes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       411 Nov 20  1990 index-minitel.files
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom         0 Apr 10 05:53 index-telecom.archives
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      1936 Feb  1 10:23 index-telecom.security
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       343 Jan 20  1991 index-tymnet.info
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    568541 Jan  1  1992 index-vol.9-10-11.subj.Z
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    220055 Jan  2 15:06 index-volume.12.subj.Z
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      9087 Jan 27 02:42 internet.dialup.access
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     43671 Nov 16 01:09 internet.txt
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       936 Mar  3  1991 intro.to.archives
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     19745 Mar 12 13:50 isdn.paper
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12896 Nov 20  1990 isdn.pc.adapter-hayes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     73366 Feb 15 12:40 ixo.program.scripts
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     42150 Feb 14 22:33 ixo.tap.protocol
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     10590 Aug 11  1991 lata.names-numbers.table
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      4816 Aug  1  1989 lauren.song
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom       801 Aug  1  1989 ldisc.txt
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      2271 Aug  1  1989 ldnotes.txt
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     13675 Aug  1  1989 ldrates.txt
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12961 Aug 18  1991 lightning.surge.protect
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12260 Jan 20  1990 london.ac.script
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12069 Mar  5  1990 london.codes.script
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15604 Aug  1  1989 mass.lines
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     19158 Nov 16 01:03 mcimail.interconnect
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom       463 Aug  1  1989 measured-service
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Nov 20  1990 minitel.info/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     36641 Aug  1  1989 mnp.protocol
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    106028 Aug 22  1992 modem.for.digital.data
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    103336 Jan 28  1992 modem.tutorial
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2450 Jan 20  1990 modems.and.call-waiting
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     30981 Feb  9  1992 modems.and.hotel.phones
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     29973 Aug 11  1991 monitor.soviet.xmissions
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     23449 Jan 18  1992 motorola.programming
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      7597 Feb 10  1990 named.exchanges
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16590 Oct 21  1990 net.mail.guide
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      3014 Jan 27  1990 newuser.letter
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     32815 Mar 25  1990 nine.hundred.service
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    190125 Jan 31 08:05 norway.goes.8.digits
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2795 Aug  3  1991 npa.510.sed.script
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     45105 Mar  2  1991 npa.800-carriers.assigned
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17618 Feb  2  1992 npa.800.carrier.list
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13779 Sep 19  1990 npa.800.prefixes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     45109 Mar  2  1991 npa.800.revised
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     35934 Dec 13  1991 npa.809.prefixes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15488 Nov 20  1990 npa.900-carriers.assigned
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15099 Mar  8  1991 npa.900.how.assigned
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Jan  5  1992 npa.exchange.list-canada/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16534 Feb 11  1990 nsa.original.charter-1952
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      9886 Jan 23  1990 occ.10xxx.access.codes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      6847 Mar  2  1991 occ.10xxx.list.updated
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      7714 Jul 23  1991 occ.10xxx.new.revision
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8593 May  5  1990 occ.10xxx.notes.updates
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14354 Aug 12  1990 octothorpe.gets.its.name
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     85802 Apr 19  1992 ohio.decree.on.caller-id
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8504 Jan 27  1990 old.fashioned.coinphones
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      2756 Jan 27  1990 old.hello.msg
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      3417 Feb 22 01:27 orange.calling.card
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     60707 Aug 18  1991 pager.bin.uqx
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13079 Aug 22  1991 pager.ixo.example
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     70153 Aug  1  1989 pc.pursuit
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      5492 Aug  1  1989 pearl.harbor.phones
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     41112 Jun 20  1992 phone.hardware.you.build
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     11489 Sep 29  1991 phone.home-usa
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     28922 Aug 11  1991 phone.patches
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     38772 Aug  1  1989 pizza.auto.nmbr.id
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14189 May  6  1991 radio-phone.interfere.1
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     11696 May  6  1991 radio-phone.interfere.2
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8452 May  6  1991 radio-phone.interfere.3
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17950 Jan 14  1990 rotenberg.privacy.speech
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      4184 Jul 27  1991 sprint.long-dist.rates
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     20526 Jun 11  1991 st.louis.phone.outage
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      9764 Jan 20  1990 starline.features
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     46738 Jan 18  1990 starlink.vrs.pcp
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    103069 Apr 26  1990 sysops.libel.liability
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      3864 Aug 22  1992 tat-8.fiber.optic
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      5921 Apr  8 13:50 tdd.specificaitons
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     27533 Feb  9  1990 telco.name.list.formatted
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     31487 Jan 28  1990 telco.name.listing
-rw-rw-r--  1 ptownson telecom     85906 Apr 10 02:04 telecom-recent
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       610 Sep  5  1991 telecom-recent.read.first
drwxr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Apr 10 04:55 telecom.security.issues/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     32160 Feb 26  1992 telex.from.internet
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     21831 Jan 20  1991 telsat-canada-report
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     11752 Aug  1  1989 telstar.txt
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14429 Jan 18  1992 test.numbers
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     18138 Sep 29  1991 toll-free.tolled.list
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Dec 10  1990 tymnet.information/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     26614 May 29  1990 unitel-canada.ld.service
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     75793 Apr  8 13:43 unix.public.access.sites
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       427 Sep 20  1991 usa.direct.service
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       116 Oct 22  1990 white.pages
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     37947 Aug  1  1989 wire-it-yourself
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      4101 Aug  1  1989 wiring.diagram
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     24541 Aug  1  1989 zum.debate

Next, a look at just one of the sub-directories with back issues. There
are too many to do them all, but this example, '1992.volume.12' will
give you an idea of how the files there are organized when you go
looking for them. This convention works back through the start of
Volume 8. Before that, check it out!

total 17195
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Jan  2 01:05 ./
drwxrwxr-x 15 telecom  telecom      6144 Apr 17 01:14 ../
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    900594 Jan 20  1992 vol12.iss001-050
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    921470 Feb  1  1992 vol12.iss051-100
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    905907 Feb 20  1992 vol12.iss101-150
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    920896 Mar  7  1992 vol12.iss151-200
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    886584 Mar 22  1992 vol12.iss201-250
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    948652 Apr  7  1992 vol12.iss251-300
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    936106 Apr 29  1992 vol12.iss301-350
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    895354 May 20  1992 vol12.iss351-400
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    884860 Jun  6  1992 vol12.iss401-450
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    936120 Jun 21  1992 vol12.iss451-500
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    898774 Jul 15  1992 vol12.iss501-550
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    986567 Aug  2  1992 vol12.iss551-600
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    941731 Aug 22  1992 vol12.iss601-650
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    951483 Sep 11  1992 vol12.iss651-700
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    952503 Oct  2  1992 vol12.iss701-750
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    986788 Oct 25 04:13 vol12.iss751-800
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    990138 Nov 16 02:07 vol12.iss801-850
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom   1053771 Dec 12 15:09 vol12.iss851-900
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    593668 Jan  2 01:03 vol12.iss901-928

As you can see, these are large files. All the sub-directories for the
years 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 are this size and use this same
naming convention for the files. Just change the 'vol' number in the
file name.

Next is the sub-directory 'telecom.security.issues':

total 1054
drwxr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Apr 10 04:55 ./
drwxrwxr-x 15 telecom  telecom      6144 Apr 10 05:55 ../
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     24515 Sep  3  1991 atm-bank.fraud
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      6144 Mar 14  1991 cellular.fraud.abernathy
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2755 Mar 14  1991 cellular.fraud.prevention
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13343 Feb 25  1990 computer.fraud.abuse.act
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     27395 Jun 23  1990 craig.neidorf.indictment
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      9354 Jul 30  1990 craig.not.guilty
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     67190 Jun 23  1990 crime.and.puzzlement
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     62602 Aug 12  1990 ecpa.1986
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     97987 Aug 12  1990 ecpa.1986.federal.laws
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      6303 Apr 10 04:54 herb.zinn.story
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     21918 Dec  2  1990 illinois.computer.laws
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     28935 May 19  1990 jolnet-2600.magazine.art
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     30751 Mar  7  1990 jolnet-attctc.crackers
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     43365 Jan 28  1990 kevin.polsen
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     35612 Apr  1  1990 legion.of.doom
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     20703 Aug 12  1990 len.rose-legion.of.doom
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2516 Jun 14  1991 len.rose.in.prison
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    184494 Jun 22  1991 len.rose.indictment-1
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    192078 Jun 22  1991 len.rose.indictment-2
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15355 Feb  1 10:16 sentencing.guidelines
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     67099 Nov  4  1990 telecom.usa.call.block-1
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     31995 Nov 20  1990 telecom.usa.call.block-2
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     10833 Nov 20  1990 telecom.usa.call.block-3
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      6344 May 24  1992 virgin.islands.phreak
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14821 Sep 12  1990 war.on.computer.crime

Next, the 'country.codes' index:

total 733
drwxr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Apr 16 23:50 ./
drwxrwxr-x 15 telecom  telecom      6144 Apr 10 05:55 ../
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     11370 Feb  9  1990 country.code.list-covert
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      9150 Jan 31  1990 country.code.list-djl
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      6089 Dec 27  1991 introduction-read.first
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    190125 Jan 31 09:29 norway.goes.8.digits
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       645 Dec 27  1991 zone.1
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       267 Apr 10 01:37 zone.1.canada.area.codes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     35934 Apr 10 01:34 zone.1.npa.809.countries
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     35128 Jan 27 02:50 zone.2
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     31857 Dec 27  1991 zone.3
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     37294 Dec 27  1991 zone.4
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    141455 Apr  8 13:47 zone.4.uk.44.detailed
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     56224 Jun 20  1992 zone.5.codes.50-54
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     60921 Jun 20  1992 zone.5.codes.55-59
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     27587 Dec 15  1991 zone.6
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8787 Nov 16 01:11 zone.7
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17716 Nov 16 01:11 zone.8
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     43018 Sep 27  1992 zone.9

The Canadian area code/place name file:

total 228
drwxr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Nov 20 11:39 ./
drwxrwxr-x  6 telecom  telecom      4608 Nov 20 11:28 ../
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom         0 Nov 20 11:39 index.to.canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      1351 Feb  4  1990 introduction-canada.lists
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15019 Apr 22  1990 npa.204.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14708 Apr 22  1990 npa.306.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17978 Apr 14  1990 npa.403.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15907 Jul 20 22:31 npa.416.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15592 Feb  3  1990 npa.418.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     10441 May 26 08:17 npa.506.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     11647 Feb  2  1990 npa.514.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13538 Sep 12 18:55 npa.519.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16701 Jul 20 22:32 npa.604.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12444 Mar 29  1990 npa.613.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12016 Feb  2  1990 npa.705.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12899 May  3  1990 npa.709.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      5566 Feb  7  1990 npa.800.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     10479 May  5  1990 npa.807.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15645 Feb  3  1990 npa.819.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12839 Mar 29  1990 npa.902.exchanges-canada
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      1762 Apr 11  1990 updates.to.above.files

The Tymnet and Mintel sub-directories are listings of dialup numbers
and other items for use with those services.

So, that's about it. There are additions to the Archives on an almost
weekly basis, so please remember that what you see here is only a
picture of what it looks like today. Have a nice weekend, and enjoy
your visit(s) to the Telecom Archives!

Patrick T.

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

End of TELECOM Digest Special Issue: Telecom Archives
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07449;
          17 Apr 93 5:00 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17447
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 17 Apr 1993 02:43:31 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18108
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 17 Apr 1993 02:42:56 -0500
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 02:42:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #261

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 17 Apr 93 02:40:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 261

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Using the Accelerated Index to Subjects and Authors (TELECOM Moderator)
    Bell Canada Phasing Out Rotary Dialing (David Leibold)
    Eastern Europe Telecommunications Mailing List (David Leibold)
    Deregulation of Telcos in Texas (James Hartman)
    Need PD IXO Pager Software For PC (Dub Dublin)
    Re: Roll Your Own PBX/Internal Phone System? (David H. Close)
    Re: Telco Uses My Lines (Gary Breuckman)
    Re: Minor But Puzzling Problem (Brian T. Vita)
    Re: Residential ISDN (Bob Frankston)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 01:56:55 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Using the Accelerated Index to Subjects and Authors


I have been asked to elaborate further on the Subject/Author
Accelerated Index to the Digest. A project I started two years ago was
a compilation of the subjects and authors in the Digest. I began with
volume 9, which is when the present style of header information
started. (You will notice we are indented by five spaces, with subject
followed by author name in parenthesis). Prior to volume 9 the style
was different, and getting those subject titles would tax a good
programmer, which I am not.

So we have volumes 9,10, and 11, covering the years 1989, 1990 and 1991
in one file, and volume 12 which covers 1992 in another file. The 1993
titles will be merged into the latter file at the end of this year.

These files are compressed in the archives. What you do is ftp them to
your site, *then* uncompress them. Don't uncompress them in the
archives, heh heh! Then you 'grep' them as desired or if you actually
want to print out a file many thousands of lines long, you can send it
to your printer if desired. The list is in alphabetical order, with
any reference to 'Re:' ignored in the sort.

Where subjects have the same name (with one being the 'original' and
the remainder being 'Re:' followups), then the sort continues further
by author's FIRST name then last name. For example, two articles with
the same name, the first by Adam Smith and the second by John Bunyan
would appear in that order, because A comes before J.

Due to oddities in the file, it is suggested you use the most liberal
arguments to 'grep': 'grep -iw' seems to work best and avoids missing
a possible hit because of upper/lower case differences, the way words
are presented in the line, etc. It is also a good idea to include the
argument in single quotes so grep will avoid misunderstandings about
what you want when symbols like {, [ , ^, etc could appear in a
subject name.

Experiment with search keys. Too broad a search key will produce reams
of titles and authors ... too narrow a search may miss the hit you are
looking for.

The output to your screen will look something like this: Let's say you
were grepping for an article by Mr. Bunyon:

12/101-150 My Mind to Me a Kingdom Is (John Bunyan)

This is interpreted as follows: Volume 12, the file of issues
101-150. So you would then go to the archives using anonymous ftp.

      cd telecom-archives
      cd 1992.volume.12
      get vol12.iss101-150

The lowest numbers you will see on the right side are 09/xxx-xxx
meaning Volume 9. The largest number at the present time will be 12.

When you get the proper file back to your site, then you would grep
further to find where the article was in the file.

For more help within the accelerated index itself, grep 'intro'. Each
of the index files has several lines at the top keyed that way with
helpful text.

Let me know if you really have a hard time finding something.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 93 23:43:01 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bell Canada Phasing Out Rotary Dialing


Below is material from the CRTC regarding Bell Canada's new mandatory
touch tone network access for new and changed installations.

Bell Tariff Item 70 sets out the local monthly rates for primary
exchange (local) service. There is now a rider which requires the
Touch-Tone service according to rates specified in Item 2150.5, namely
$3.80 extra/month for business service, and $2.55/month for
residential service, or a special $1.90/month rate for those with
certified disabilities.

(All rates in CAD$, incidentally.)

This proceeding was buried in the general stream of tariff approvals.
There was no formal public proceeding or public notice issued
regarding this change which effectively raises local phone rates for
those who previously wanted rotary dial service without the touch tone
rate. While this was technically available to the public, it takes a
bit of an inside jon to find out such plans before it's too late.

Bell Canada's application letter was as follows:

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

1992 12 23

Mr. G.G. Henter,
Executive Director, Telecommunications,
Canadian Radio-television and
    Telecommunications Commission
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N2

Dear Mr. Henter:

Associated with Tariff Notice No. 4653

Attached for the Commission's approval are proposed revisions to the
Company's General Tariff Items 70, 2150 and 2300 to provide for the
grandfathering of rotary dial access service and the standardization of
Touch-Tone (TT) access service for individual line customers.

Under the Company's proposal, which is similar to those recently approved by
the Commission for MT&T and NBTel, TT access will be the standard service
offering for individual line customers. Customers who request installation
of an individual line service or a move of their existing individual line
service to a different premises will be provided TT access at existing
tariffed rates. Individual line customers who have rotary dial access
service will be able to retain their rotary service until such time as they
move to other premises. Rotary dial access service will also continue to be
available for all two and four-party line service customers.

In conjunction with the grandfathering of rotary dial access for individual
line services, the Company also proposes to no longer provide the 500-type
telephones, in item 2300.1, for new installations, except for two and four-
party line customers.

The implementation of TT access as the standard service offering for
individual line customers on new installations and moves is consistent with
both the Company's plans to increase revenues through increased penetration
and customer expectations of the service. The Company has made TT access
technically feasible throughout its territory and has actively promoted the
service, with the result that the TT access penetration rate was 75.4%
overall as of October 1992. Touch-Tone's ease of dialing and its ability to
facilitate customer access and use of a growing number of services,
including the Company's various calling services, have also helped increase
Touch-Tone's penetration as well as the penetration for calling services,
with the resultant increase in overall revenues from local services.

Because of the current level of penetration and because more than 90% of
customer requests for new installations or moves already involve Touch-Tone,
the Company's view is that the gradual process of standardizing TT access by
grandfathering rotary dial access will minimize disruption for customers and
to the Company's operations.

The Company proposes to implement the standardization of TT access on 1993
03 08 and will advise customers of the change via bill inserts.

At current monthly rates, the Company expects that the implementation of TT
access will generate additional revenue of approximately $2.3 million in
1993 and $8.2 million in 1994. At the monthly rates proposed in Tariff
Notice No. 4552 the impacts are expected to be $2.6 million and $9.0 million
respectively.

The Company respectfully requests approval of the proposed tariffs by 1993
01 22. In the event that the Commission is unable to approve the proposed
tariffs by 1993 01 22 the Company requests that the Commission allow 45 days
between the approval date and the effective date to facilitate
implementation of the proposed changes.

Yours very truly,


Director General - Regulatory Matters

Attachment

[Approved by Telecom Order CRTC 93-23, issued 14 January 1993]

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

Date: Fri, 16 Apr 93 23:59:16 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Eastern Europe Telecommunications Mailing List


There is a mailing list for discussions of Eastern Europe
telecommunications.  This is on a listserv at UBVM.BITNET, list
EUEARN-L.

Recent posts include progress of e-mail networks in eastern Europe,
among other things.

To subscribe, send mail to [e-mail] with the first text line
set up as:

SUBSCRIBE EUEARN-L Firstname Lastname

(with the Firstname Lastname part being your name that you will register
under)

The listserv should return a message with details on how to use the
mailing list, but once that happens, you will receive the EUEARN-L
postings.


[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Deregulation of Telcos in Texas
From: [e-mail] (James Hartman, Sysop)
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 00:32:32 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX


[e-mail]  writes:

> Somebody has been advertising on TV to get us to call 800-669-6903 to
> learn about how we can get Texas into the technology future with
> fiber optic communication etc.  [...]

That "somebody" includes -- guess who! -- Southwestern Bell!

Reading that fine print as it sped by made me immediately want to talk
to my representatives in Austin and tell them NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.
Anything that SWB wants so badly that they need to advertise it on TV
can only mean that we're gonna get reamed again.


James Hartman ([e-mail])
Listen to "Weightless" Friday mornings on KPFT 90.1 Houston at 3:00 a.m.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dub Dublin)
Subject: Need PD IXO Pager Software for PC
Organization: Chevron
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 05:32:10 GMT


I've tried the more common ways to get this kind of info, and I
haven't had any luck.  I need a PD/free program for a PC to send a
message to an Alphanumeric pager using the IXO (same as TAP, I think)
protocol.

I'm currently using tpage 2.0 (with a lot of my own hacks to make it
work - that's another story) on UNIX to do this, but I need something
that will work on the PC.  (Before anyone suggests it, it would be
easier to start over than to port the tpage programs to the PC...)

Also, there is apparently some way to send an alpha message to an
alpha pager using only DTMF signalling (assuming, of course, that my
paging company's terminal can handle this...)  If someone can provide
me with info on this protocol as well, I would really appreciate it.

If there is enough interest in this subject, I'll summarize and post
the results.


Dub Dublin         Chevron Information Technology Company
[e-mail]  [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Just the very information you are seeking is in the
Telecom Archives. Check out the ixo files. There are two or three you
should pull and review for programming examples, etc.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: Re: Roll Your Own PBX/Internal Phone System?
Date: 17 Apr 1993 02:29:08 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


[e-mail] (Robert J. Granvin) writes:

> I realize I'm talking about a small office PBX.  But I also realize
> that it is something that is way beyond our budget or abilities to
> acquire.

Have you considered used equipment?  There are quite a few vendors who
specialize in used key systems suitable for your needs.  Depending on
your organization, you might even be able to arrange a donation ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Breuckman)
Subject: Re: Telco Uses My Lines
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc. [phone]
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 03:06:52 GMT


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

> It drives me nuts to find NYTel repairmen using my phone lines,
> presumably from the terminal on the street, to make calls to the
   ...
> Am I not paying for these lines? Any thoughts? Is this really allowed?

A group I am with has a line set up as a "info-line" with an answering
machine that members can call for late-breaking events, etc.  Now that
the local telco is charging for outgoing calls, the person in charge
of the line and billing noticed two outgoing calls charged for one
month.  All previous months had no calls outgoing and of course there
is no telephone set on the line.  It was only 12-cents, but he pushed
the issue and the telco sent an itemized list of the calls
(number,time and duration).  Despite his assurances that previous
months had no calls and there was no instrument on the line, they
insisted that he review the list first to see if he recognized the
numbers before they would issue a credit -- what a waste of time all
around.  I don't think they (the telco) were concerned about the fraud
issue or tried to explain it.


[Moderator's Note: After 'looking it over', I'd have identified both
numbers (as being internal numbers at telco) then called back telco
and yelled for awhile ... using phrases like 'theft of service'.  PAT]

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

Date: 17 Apr 93 01:14:03 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Minor But Puzzling Problem


> It is the same four-wire line; she's on red-green and I've got black-yellow.

I think that your problem is right here ... most of the red/green/black/
yellow telephone wire that I've seen is straight quad.  The individual
conductors lay straight next to each other.

A better wire for your application would be two twisted pairs (while
your at it, you might want to install three or four pair to make
future expansion easy). The twisted pairs tend to keep crosstalk at a
minimum.

BTW -- have you checked for crosstalk at the demarc with your house
wiring disconnected?


Brian Vita    CSS, Inc.   Somewhere on Compu$erve

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Residential ISDN
Date: Sat 17 Apr 1993 02:22 -0400


I want residential ISDN but it seems strange that I would have to have
a line for each extension running back to the CO. Given the state of
technology isn't there a small box that would be a local (i.e.,
house-level, economical) ISDN switch? This would be a requirement for
a 90's implementation of ISDN.  If there is no such economical device,
then ISDN ain't very interesting.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #261
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23161;
          18 Apr 93 4:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31936
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 18 Apr 1993 02:27:47 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24891
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 18 Apr 1993 02:27:09 -0500
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1993 02:27:09 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #262

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 18 Apr 93 02:27:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 262

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    A Mailing List Ripped Off (TELECOM Moderator)
    Computer Professionals Call For Debate on Encryption (Dave Banisar)
    Re: White House Encryption Proposal (EFF Statement via Andrew Blau)
    Re: Zero Plus Dialing (Alan Munn)
    Re: Zero Plus Dialing (Jason Garner)
    Re: Minor But Puzzling Problem (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Telecom Archives Index of Files - Spring, 1993 (Eric Engelmann)
    Re: Crossed Lines (Brian T. Vita)
    How to Receive All Chaos Digest Issues (Jean-Bernard Condat)
    Re: Calling 800 Numbers to Harass Their Owners (S. Spencer Sun)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1993 00:27:40 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: A Mailing List Ripped Off


I am sorry to report that due to an error by myself in leaving one of
the mailing lists used by the Digest in a position where it could be
read by outsiders, a bozo came along and did just that: copied it all
out (several hundred names on that list) and no doubt is using it for
his own purposes by now. It has been fixed so it should not happen
again, but I guess I should never underestimate the extent to which
some people will go to invade the privacy of others. What is so sad is
the way so many net people squall and squeal and carry on about their
own privacy so much, then think nothing of cracking right into someone
else's account and personal files to rip them off. Admittedly, I left
a sneaky way into the file I had forgotten about, but still, don't
you feel violated when that kind of thing happens? I know I do.

Anyway, sorry, and if you get strange mail, you'll know why. Thank
goodness he only got one of the mailing lists, only about 600 names
and net addresses were copied out.


Patrick Townson

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

Organization: CPSR Civil Liberties and Computing Project
From: Dave Banisar <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 16:43:02 EST
Subject: Computer Professionals Call For Debate on Encryption


April 16, 1993               Washington, DC

               COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS CALL FOR PUBLIC
           DEBATE ON NEW GOVERNMENT ENCRYPTION INITIATIVE

    Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) today
called for the public disclosure of technical data underlying the
government's newly-announced "Public Encryption Management"
initiative.  The new cryptography scheme was announced today by the
White House and the National Institute for Standards and Technology
(NIST), which will implement the technical specifications of the plan.
A NIST spokesman acknowledged that the National Security Agency (NSA),
the super-secret military intelligence agency, had actually developed
the encryption technology around which the new initiative is built.

    According to NIST, the technical specifications and the
Presidential directive establishing the plan are classified.  To open
the initiative to public review and debate, CPSR today filed a series
of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests with key agencies,
including NSA, NIST, the National Security Council and the FBI for
information relating to the encryption plan.  The CPSR requests are in
keeping with the spirit of the Computer Security Act, which Congress
passed in 1987 in order to open the development of non-military
computer security standards to public scrutiny and to limit NSA's role
in the creation of such standards.

    CPSR previously has questioned the role of NSA in developing
the so-called "digital signature standard" (DSS), a communications
authentication technology that NIST proposed for government-wide use
in 1991.  After CPSR sued NIST in a FOIA lawsuit last year, the
civilian agency disclosed for the first time that NSA had, in fact,
developed that security standard.  NSA is due to file papers in
federal court next week justifying the classification of records
concerning its creation of the DSS.

    David Sobel, CPSR Legal Counsel, called the administration's
apparent commitment to the privacy of electronic communications, as
reflected in today's official statement, "a step in the right
direction."  But he questioned the propriety of NSA's role in the
process and the apparent secrecy that has thus far shielded the
development process from public scrutiny.  "At a time when we are
moving towards the development of a new information infrastructure, it
is vital that standards designed to protect personal privacy be
established openly and with full public participation.  It is not
appropriate for NSA -- an agency with a long tradition of secrecy and
opposition to effective civilian cryptography -- to play a leading
role in the development process."

    CPSR is a national public-interest alliance of computer
industry professionals dedicated to examining the impact of technology
on society.  CPSR has 21 chapters in the U.S. and maintains offices in
Palo Alto, California, Cambridge, Massachusetts and Washington, DC.
For additional information on CPSR, call [phone] or e-mail
<[e-mail]>.

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 19:51:37 -0500
From: Andrew Blau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: White House Encryption Proposal


The following is extracted from an EFF statement released yesterday in
response to the Clinton Administration's cryptography statement:

The Clinton Administration today made a major announcement on
cryptography policy which will affect the privacy and security of
millions of Americans.

The first part of the plan is to begin a comprehensive inquiry into
major communications privacy issues such as export controls which have
effectively denied most people easy access to robust encryption, and
law enforcement issues posed by new technology.

However, EFF is very concerned that the Administration has already
reached a conclusion on one critical part of the inquiry, before any
public comment or discussion has been allowed.  Apparently, the
Administration is going to use its leverage to get all telephone
equipment vendors to adopt a voice encryption standard developed by
the National Security Agency.  The so-called "Clipper Chip" is an
80-bit, split key escrowed encryption scheme which will be built into
chips manufactured by a military contractor.  Two separate escrow
agents would store users' keys, and be required to turn them over law
enforcement upon presentation of a valid warrant.  The encryption
scheme used is to be classified, but the chips will be available to
any manufacturer for incorporation into its communications products.

This proposal raises a number of serious concerns.

First, the Administration has adopted a solution before conducting an
inquiry.  The NSA-developed Clipper Chip may not be the most secure
product. Other vendors or developers may have better schemes.
Furthermore, we should not rely on the government as the sole source
for the Clipper or any other chips.  Rather, independent chip
manufacturers should be able to produce chipsets based on open
standards.

Second, an algorithm cannot be trusted unless it can be tested. Yet,
the Administration proposes to keep the chip algorithm classified.
EFF believes that any standard adopted ought to be public and open.
The public will only have confidence in the security of a standard
that is open to independent, expert scrutiny.

Third, while the use of the use of a split-key, dual escrowed system
may prove to be a reasonable balance between privacy and law
enforcement needs, the details of this scheme must be explored
publicly before it is adopted.  What will give people confidence in
the safety of their keys?  Does disclosure of keys to a third party
waive an individual's Fifth Amendment rights in subsequent criminal
inquiries?  These are but a few of the many questions the
Administrations proposal raised but fails to answer.

In sum, the Administration has shown great sensitivity to the
importance of these issues by planning a comprehensive inquiry into
digital privacy and security.  However, the "Clipper Chip" solution
ought to be considered as part of the inquiry, and not be adopted
before the discussion even begins.


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]

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 21:56:06 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Alan Munn)
Subject: Re: Zero Plus Dialing


It seems that some pay phones around Chapel Hill are "serviced" by
Zero Plus Dialing.  I placed a call to LA *which didn't connect* and
received a bill with my phone bill for $7.76!  They charged me for a
three minute call.  When I got the bill, I called them up 800-456-7587
and complained.  They didn't argue at all, just took my phone number
and told me a credit would appear on my next bill (which it did.)  My
guess is, though, that they make quite a bundle on those folks who
don't check their bills too closely, or place a lot of payphone calls
without worrying about the LD carrier.

Someone from ATT mentioned something about reporting payphones which
deny 10xxx access.  I don't think I've come across one yet that
*allowed* it.  Could s/he get e-mail me the information.  Thanks.

I did notice that the payphones at the Virginia interstate rest stops
have signs telling you that there's no 10xxx access along with the 800
numbers to reach MCI, ATT and Sprint.


Alan

[Moderator's Note: All the 'genuine Bell' payphones around here allow
it even if the default carrier on the phone is other than AT&T.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 22:06:40 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Jason Garner)
Subject: Re: Zero Plus Dialing


I've had problems with this company as well.  The PUC says that
they're a "billing agent" solely and do not provide long distance
service.  I disputed some Allnet charges.  Allnet removed them and
they later showed up on my bill as ZPD Long Distance.  Apparently,
this company exists just to bill for calls that there already may be
some problem with (hence the large number of complaints against it)
and when a company like MCI or Allnet doesn't want to risk their
reputations by pressing the matter (or investigating) they just turn
it over to ZPD.  ZPD is foreign owned and based out of Texas.

Since you get so many billing complaints perhaps you could set up some
sort of system where people could send the complaints directly to your
archive to be stored by company name.  When someone has a grievance
against a company they could search the archive to find similar
situations to bolster their case to the PUC etcetera.  I'm sure you
have an abundance of free time in which to do this.


DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed here are not opinions at all.  They are
            the words of God HIMSELF!


[Moderator's Note: One of the things I'd like to do eventually here as
part of my enterprises is operate such an archive where people could
share information with each other about those companies.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Minor But Puzzling Problem
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 23:31:30 GMT


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

>> It is the same four-wire line; she's on red-green and I've got
>> black-yellow.

> I think that your problem is right here ... most of the red/green/black/
> yellow telephone wire that I've seen is straight quad.  The individual
> conductors lay straight next to each other.

> A better wire for your application would be two twisted pairs (while
> your at it, you might want to install three or four pair to make
> future expansion easy). The twisted pairs tend to keep crosstalk at a
> minimum.

> BTW -- have you checked for crosstalk at the demarc with your house
> wiring disconnected?

Both suggestions are right on point.  In my experience, the wire that
has pair one as blue/white and white/blue, and pair two as
orange/white and white/orange, and so on, tends to be twisted pair.

And anybody doing their own wiring should install network interface
jacks at the demarc point ... so that tests of this kind are easy to
do just by plugging in two phones.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza    New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

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

Date: 18 Apr 1993 03:16:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Eric Engelmann 38488 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom Archives Index of Files - Spring, 1993


I think it would be interesting to put all the archives on CD-ROM with
a text search tool to locate articles on different equipment.  Could
you make a WILD guess as to how many people would buy a copy if it
cost, say, $79? Are there copyright issues? I produce a number of
CD-ROMs already, and this sounds like a fun project.


[Moderator's Note: Gee, you read my mind. Another goal of my
enterprise is to make the Telecom Archives popularly available on a
wide variety of media such as CD-ROM, a direct dialup phone number,
etc. I think people might pay $79 for such a product. We'd have to
issue updates now and then however, as the archives is always growing.
You'd have to clear it with the Holy Fathers in Usenet first though. I
think you are expected to work on it for nothing and give it away free.
I even had one of 'em ask me today if I got individual permission from
each person who had been in the Digest in the past four years before
creating the master index of subjects and author's names. I replied
that if he was trying to cause me to have a heart attack, he was doing
a damn good job. I'd say go with it if you can make just a few to test
out interest.    PAT]

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

Date: 18 Apr 93 00:47:36 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Crossed lines


> A better wire for your application would be two twisted pairs (while
> your at it, you might want to install three or four pair to make
> future expansion easy). The twisted pairs tend to keep crosstalk at a
> minimum.

A footnote to my earlier post ...

If you're going to run extra pair, be sure to ground the extra pair(s)
at one end.  Failing that, you may end up hearing an occassional
"Radio Free Europe" or "Voice of America" broadcast.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 18 Apr 93 03:59:59 GMT
Subject: How to Receive All Chaos Digest Issues


Bonjour,

You may have written me to receive the new computer security e-journal
called Chaos Digest.

The Digest presents some security aspects: frauds, hacking, swapping,
legislation, phreaking ...

The delivery costs are extremely expensive on the CCCF AT&T account,
and if you would receive all issues, don't hesitate to subscribe.


SUBSCRIBE:

Send a message to:

              [e-mail]

with a mail Header or First line containing the following informations:

                  X-Mn-Admin: join CHAOS_DIGEST

BACK ISSUES:

Available on some ftp anonymous, like:

        * kragar.eff.org [192.88.144.4] in /pub/cud/chaos
        * uglymouse.css.itd.umich.edu [141.211.182.91] in /pub/CuD/chaos
        * halcyon.com [192.135.191.2] in /pub/mirror/cud/chaos
        * ftp.cic.net [192.131.22.2] in /e-serials/alphabetic/c/chaos-digest
        * ftp.ee.mu.oz.au [128.250.77.2] in /pub/text/CuD/chaos
        * nic.funet.fi [128.214.6.100] in /pub/doc/cud/chaos
        * orchid.csv.warwick.ac.uk [137.205.192.5] in /pub/cud/chaos

Ask for file "chaos-1.xx" with "xx" as the issue number.

If you have some question, don't hesitate to ask me, directly!

Jean-Bernard Condat
CCCF, B.P. 155, 93404 St-Ouen Cedex, France
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone]
InterNet: [e-mail]   or   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (S. Spencer Sun)
Subject: Re: Calling 800 Numbers to Harass Their Owners
Reply-To: [e-mail] (S. Spencer Sun)
Organization: Society for Promotion of Entropy in the Universe (SPEU)
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1993 07:08:01 GMT


Speaking of overloading 800 numbers, a friend of mine who graduated
last year mailed me and some mutual friends (one also '92, one a
fellow '94) about 1-800-NEW-WORD, provided by one of the major
dictionary publishers... each day it had a new "interesting" word and
explained the definition and origins of it (the day he told us about
it, the word was kludge" and since we're all CS majors ... :-) )

Note use of past tense ... apparently the way this friend found out
about it was because it was posted to the net somewhere.  It doesn't
seem to have survived very long past that, because it's been
disconnected now ... (not that I think it was because of any malicious
dialing in this case ... probably just the sheer volume of the
Internet ...)


sss / PU Class of '94    Dept of Computer Science

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #262
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12655;
          19 Apr 93 3:12 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05597
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 19 Apr 1993 00:50:51 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02555
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 19 Apr 1993 00:50:00 -0500
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 00:50:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #263

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 19 Apr 93 00:50:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 263

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Lucky Number? (TELECOM Moderator)
    Caller ID Display Suggestions Wanted (Tad Cook)
    Information Sought on Video Phone (John Conwell)
    Re: White House Encryption Proposal (Richard Osterberg)
    Re: Need PD IXO Pager Software For PC - Clarification (Dub Dublin)
    Needed: Someone to Scan a Large Article For Archives (TELECOM Moderator)
    From the Archives: Old Fashioned Coin Telephones (Various, January 1988)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1993 23:17:39 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Lucky Number?


The {Chicago Tribune} for Sunday, April 18, 1993 began a multi-part
series on the changing face of telecommunications. In the first
article, entitled "Lucky Number?" {Tribune} writer Jon Van discussed
the coming of 640 new area codes two years from now and 'lifelong
personal telephone numbers'.

An Uncertain Prize in Technology Race
=====================================

(some excerpts follow) ...

"The portable, personal phone number -- one that will reach *you*
rather than reach your home or office -- is nearly here.

"You may get this number from your local phone company, but it might
also come from a cellular company, a cable-TV firm, or someone else
entirely. And, once assigned, the number may become yours for life
regardless of who is supplying your phone service. In fact, some
regulators support making not only your telephone number, but your
area code, portable. If you live now in Elmhurst (a Chicago suburb)
but move to Omaha, your area 708 telephone number might move with you.

"Whether many people will actually want lifelong personal phone numbers
is anyone's guess. But the likelyhood they'll have that choice illus-
trates just how fundamentally what used to be a monopoly business,
local telecommunications, is changing." ....

  .... Later in the article, Mr. Van discusses Ameritech (the regional
Bell Company here) plans for competition. He notes that the firm is
inviting competition to vie for its customers. In return, Ameritech
wants government regulations eliminated or cut significantly. <smile>

And how would those competitors install their network?  Well, the
competitors would rent our network, said one Ameritech executive.
<even bigger smile here!> ....

 .... Mr. Van reports that Ameritech is not alone in this approach. He
noted that Pacific Telesis has split into two companies, one retaining
the traditional regulated monopoly telephone services and the other
becoming an unregulated firm selling cellular and other communication
services.  On the east coast, Bell Atlantic recently announced it
intends to defy earlier court rulings and deliberatly offer television
services in the Washington, DC area; a Bell Atlantic spokesperson said
the company intends to challenge the government restrictions placed on
it and (if successful) forge the way for other telephone companies to
enter fields of their choosing.

 .... The article discusses in some technical detail how the existing
144 area codes are used and the reason for the expansion with 640 more
codes beginning in about two years. Ron Connors, a spokesman for
Bellcore is quoted in at length in the article. An interview with
George Gilder is included in a sidebar, focusing on 'light fiber' and
'dark fiber'.

800 number portability, now just about two weeks away is mentioned,
with notice given that the sure loser in 800 portability will be AT&T,
which presently dominates the market.

A discussion of Ameritech's 'Wisconsin Health Information Network' is
part of the article, and its plans to expand this medical communications
network into other states in the near future.

The failed 'Picturephone' service of the 1960-70's is discussed along
with the new video phone services being offered today.

Overall, this was an excellent start to a series which will be published
occassionally in the {Chicago Tribune}. If you would like to have the
complete article, let me know, as there was far too much to run it all
here.

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

To get a copy sent to your fax:  (my preference) ...

Write me and send a dollar for the toll charges or two dollars if
outside the USA. Be sure to include your fax number and anything I
need to know to connect.

To get a copy sent on paper through the mail:

I'll send it to you for the cost of copying and postage if you write
me and include a LONG self-addressed, stamped envelope with *two*
stamps on it and a dollar bill to feed the Metro Office Building
community copy machine downstairs in the building where my office is
located. If you are outside the USA, send me the dollar in US currency
if you happen to have any, otherwise skip it and just send the the
LONG self-addressed envelope. Send Postal Union coupons good for two
ounces, or give me three US dollars in total, etc.

I think it will come out on four or five legal-size (8.5 by 14 inch)
sheets of paper, and weigh in at a little over an ounce.

Write to:

Patrick Townson
ATTN: Tribune Telecom Article
Post Office Box 1570
Chicago, IL 60690-1570  USA

If you prefer to get it directly from the {Chicago Tribune} then
write:

Chicago Tribune Public Service Department
440 North Michigan Avenue
Chicago, IL 60611  USA

Ask for "Business News, Section 7", Sunday, April 18. The paper costs
$1.50 on Sunday and they like getting the postage, so I guess you
would send them a couple dollars.


Patrick Townson

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

Subject: Caller ID Display Suggestions Wanted
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 93 15:33:36 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)


U S West is finally introducing Caller ID in Seattle on May 5.  I have
two lines at home on residential Centrex service.  I looked at the
Hello Direct Catalog, and their single line display boxes that show
both name and number are about 80 bucks each.

Anyone have any cheaper suggestions?  Does anyone make a lower
cost CLID decoder that handles two lines?


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

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

From: John Conwell <[e-mail]>
Date: 18 Apr 93 11:58:13 EDT
Subject: Information Sought on Video Phone


Does anyone know when Bellcore introduced the Video Phone?  I seem to
think it was at a 1960s Consumer Product Show.  Also, if a truly
interactive video phone is available for residential use today.  I am
aware of Sony's teleconferencing, although I don't know the particulars.

Thanks for any info.

T.T.F.N!    {Ta Ta For Now!}


J.F.C.


[Moderator's Note: The {Chicago Tribune} article I mentioned earlier
in this issue said 'the failed Picturephone project' was being marketed
heavily in 1964-65. This was a comment from A. Michael Noll, Dean of
the School of Communications at UCLA who was employed by the old Bell
System at the time. 'Video phone' is the name for it now; 'Picturephone'
was the name back then. Of course there was no Bellcore back then and
there is no Bell System now.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: White House Encryption Proposal
From: [e-mail] (Richard Osterberg)
Date: 18 Apr 93 23:25:29 GMT


OK ... this all seems rather stupid ... doesn't it? What's to stop all
these "Criminals" that we'll have warrants to wiretap from simply
adding *more* encryption to the telephone system? If they simply
encrypt before going through a Clipper Chip and then decrypt on the
other end of the Clipper Chip ... then we'd be right back where we
started.  Or did I miss something here?


Rick Osterberg   [e-mail]  617-493-7784  617-493-3892
   2032 Harvard Yard Mail Center   Cambridge, MA   02138-7510   USA

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

Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1993 22:38:46 -0500 (CDT)
From: Dub Dublin <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Dub Dublin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Need PD IXO pager software for PC - Clarification


Pat:

Thanks for checking, but I had already checked the archives.  The only
thing there for the IXO/TAP protocol (at least that I could find) is
the same tpage program I'm already using on UNIX (but without the
fixes that will let it work reliably -- it kind of sucks as
distributed), a HyperCard IXO/TAP program, and a description of the
IXO/TAP protocol.

I don't really want to roll my own here -- I was searching to see if
someone on the Net has already written such a program FOR THE _PC_.
Unless you have another suggestion, please post this note to the net
and lets see if we can find something out there to do this job!


Thanks,

Dub Dublin                   Chevron Information Technology Company
email: [e-mail]     phone: [phone]   PROFS: never again...

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

Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1993 23:38:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Needed: Someone to Scan a Large Article


Kevin Bluml very kindly sent me a copy of New York Telephone's publi-
cation 'FIRE: The Second Avenue Story' -- the detailed account (from
the company's perspective) of the disasterous fire which devastated
the company's Second Avenue Building, February 27, 1975; the fire
which knocked out phone service in lower Manhattan for a month.

I'd love to put this in the Telecom Archives, but it is far to much
for (even me!) to type. There are about twenty pages of text, and
quite a few pictures, maybe forty pages in total. If someone with a
scanner would be so kind as to take this into their care, returning
the finished work to the Digest for publication here then placement in
the Archives, I'll be happy to mail it out to you. If by chance you
already have a copy of 'FIRE' and want to scan it, that would be even
better. Please let me know.


PAT

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

From: Various Writers
Subject: From the Archives: Old Fashioned Coin Phones (January, 1988)
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 00:30:00 CDT


By request, a reprint of some items from a popular thread which
appeared in the Digest during January, 1988 which originally was
entitled 'Enterprise and Other Funny Phone Numbers'.  Enjoy!

                        ---------

 Date: 7 Jan 88 22:39:45 GMT
 From: decvax!ima![e-mail]  (John R. Levine)
 Organization: Not enough to make any difference
 Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>OTHER MORE OR LESS STANDARDIZED PHONE NUMBERS IN THE 1930'S - 1950'S:
>...
>Coin phones always began with a 9, as in 9xxx. This was universally
>recognized ...

Well, not quite universally. My phone number is -9650 and as far as I
can tell hasn't been changed since the house got dial service, other
than changing the prefix from UNIversity to the equivalent 864. (I'm
not that old, but the number came with the house.) I note that -9649
is indeed a payphone in a nearby bar. -9950 used to be the local
business office, causing a certain number of strange calls.

My understanding is that they put special relays on pay phone lines
that bounced when they connected, making a distinctive ticky-ticky
sound that the operator could recognize.

For that matter, when you make a toll call from a payphone, how does
the long distance company know that it's a payphone? Special trunks?
Special bits in ANI messages? Only AT&T does anything interesting with
direct dialed calls from payphones, but the other LD companies at
least know to block them.

John Levine, ima!johnl

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

 Date: 8 Jan 88 05:32:22 GMT
 From: ptsfa![e-mail]  (R. Perlman)
 Organization: Pacific Bell Marketing
 Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John R. Levine) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>OTHER MORE OR LESS STANDARDIZED PHONE NUMBERS IN THE 1930'S - 1950'S:
>>...
>>Coin phones always began with a 9, as in 9xxx. This was universally
>>recognized ...
>
>Well, not quite universally. My phone number is -9650 and as far as I can tell
>hasn't been changed since the house got dial service, other than changing the
>prefix from UNIversity to the equivalent 864.

Actually you are both right!  In step-by-step offices the 4 and 9
levels were ofter tied together when all line thousands groups were'nt
needed.  A non-coin would be assigned the number -4xxx and a coin
-9xxx, in fact it didn't matter whether you dialed a 4 or nine, you
get the same number.

BTW, Operators have listings by area code showing all the NNXs
(actualy NXXs) that have coin stations.  Usually only 1 code per CO
has coin lines.  If a number (for 3rd number or collect calling) is a
-9xxx & is in a coin NNX then the Operator checks with Rate & Route
for a "coin check" to see if the number is indeed a coin box.  --


Richard Perlman 1E300 2600 Camino Ramon, San Ramon, CA 94583

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

 Date: 8 Jan 88 16:59:14 GMT
 From: codas!ablnc![e-mail]  (Robert Maxwell)
 Organization: AT&T, Maitland, Florida
 Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers

> >Coin phones always began with a 9, as in 9xxx. This was universally
> >recognized ...
> Well, not quite universally.

Back in the days before the TSPS operator positions, the operators had
an indexed list at their positions that they used for identifying area
codes that listed almost every city or exchange in the USA.  One of
items also listed in this index was the pay phone number series in any
exchange that used a special group of numbers. It has been a few years
since I last saw one, but I do remember the numbers for pay phones
could be anything from an exchange + 1 digit (ie: 321-9) to a group of
numbers (ie: 321-7800 to 321-8299). As I remember the instructions
with the list, this was a group to be checked for possible pay phone,
not necessarily an absolute list.

I don't consider myself very old, but I can remember when the phones
were so automatic, you didn't have to turn a dial or push buttons, you
would just speak the number you wanted into the mouthpiece and the
connection would be made. :-)

> For that matter, when you make a toll call from a payphone, how does
> the long distance company know that it's a payphone? Special trunks?
> Special bits in ANI messages? Only AT&T does anything interesting with
> direct dialed calls from payphones, but the other LD companies at
> least know to block them.

With ESS offices, the programming takes care of handling special needs
for a given line. It is reasonably simple to prevent charging LD calls
to a given line, no matter which company you use for LD. The same
basic technique that gives you 1+ dialing to your LD company can
control how the calls are accepted from a pay phone.


Bob Maxwell    AT&T DP&CT         |    All standard (and most non_standard)
Maitland, FL    ihnp4!ablnc!maxwell  |  disclaimers apply.

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

 Date: 12 Jan 88 06:43:03 GMT
 From: portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]
 Organization: The Portal System (TM)
 Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers


Perlman points out a method of detecting coin service which is
correct.  If in fact the receiving number is coin; and if the caller
insists on making the call collect, and provided some fool on the
receiving end agrees to accept the collect call then he has to deposit
the money as if he were making the call. The only problem is, the
distant operator cannot supervise the collection properly. The
operator tells called party to hang up and wait a minute....she calls
inward in the city in particular, and asks for assistance from a local
operator <in that town> in manipulating the coin collection table;
assistance in dumping the coins in the box, collecting for overtime,
etc. The local operator calls the coin box, gets the money and
connects the parties.

Does anyone on here remember when coin phones had <three slots> on the
top for nickles, dimes and quarters AND had no trap door on the coin
return AND had regular -- not armored -- cable to the handset?

As little kids we rarely paid for calls. We either applied ground to
the line through a tiny pin hole in the handset cord (which we put
there, of course) or we used a coat hanger bent in a funny way which
we stuck up the coin return. We would deposit the money which fell on
the table inside. The process was the operator would apply the tip and
ring one way to throw the table and toss the money in the box or would
apply it in reverse to throw the table in the direction of the return
slot, to give the money back if there was no answer, etc.

To make long distance calls, we would use the same quarter(s) over and
over. The operator would ask for two dollars -- in would go two or
three quarters (clung clung clung)...."just a minute operator, I am
looking for more change!..."and that coat hanger would go up the
return slot and trip the table, sending our quarters down the chute
and back to us....  "Ok operator, here is the rest of the money...."
and if we were fast enough, or the operator was not suspicious, the
coat hanger could be used to retrieve the three quarters <a second
time>...some operators immediatly collected when there was an answer,
especially if they suspected hanky panky on the other end...some would
not wait for the full collection, but grab the coins as they came in,
hitting that ring key over and over knowing the brat-child on the
other end of the line had been thwarted in the process....

Some of the older exchanges in downtown Chicago years ago had to have
the assistance of a special "trunk operator" to return the money if a
call was not complete. Your operator would give up on completing the
call and tell you to hold on...after a few seconds and a click,
someone would answer "Wabash trunking"....and your operator would say
something like "return on circuit 5096"....and the phone would clatter
and your coins would fall back out to you. And there was also
(downtown) the Franklin Coin Central Office which handled nothing but
pay phones in the downtown area.

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

If you have other favorite threads from the past, feel free to supply
them for use on a space available basis. Be sure to include the date
they appeared in the Digest if possible.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #263
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21107;
          19 Apr 93 19:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27615
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 19 Apr 1993 16:30:47 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29608
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 19 Apr 1993 16:30:02 -0500
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 16:30:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #264

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 19 Apr 93 16:30:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 264

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Wireless City (S. Spencer Sun)
    3DO Demo (Robert L. McMillin)
    USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required (Colin Smale)
    Re: White House Encryption Proposal (Dream Weaver)
    Re: From the Archives: Old Fashioned Coin Phones (Jan, 1988) (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: From the Archives: Old Fashioned Coin Phones (Jan, 1988) (Les Reeves)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept ([e-mail])
    Re: Information Sought on Video Phone (Sandy Kyrish)
    Re: Information Sought on Video Phone (Joe Bergstein)
    Re: Information Sought on Video Phone (Jim Rees)
    Re: Information Sought on Video Phone (Jon P. Knight)
    Re: Caller-ID Devices (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Motorola UDS V.32 to MAC Info Needed (Rhett Glover)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (S. Spencer Sun)
Subject: Wireless City
Reply-To: [e-mail] (S. Spencer Sun)
Organization: Society for Promotion of Entropy in the Universe (SPEU)
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 16:54:20 GMT


Taken from the current (May 1993) issue of _Discover_, page 21, all
typos are my fault.

At 12:01 AM on December 2, 1992, Quitaque, Texas, was cut off from the
rest of civilization.  But the 513 residents of this rural town 80
miles northeast of Lubbock did not notice the difference.  Moments
later Quitaque (pronounced KIT-a-kway) [why do publications, the NY
Times e.g., insist on providing the pronunciation of foreign
names/places halfway through the first paragraph, instead of after the
FIRST USAGE where it would make the most sense? -- Spencer] became the
world's first "wireless city" -- that is, the first whole community
whose telephone calls are transmitted by radio signals rather than
overhead or underground cables.

 From each of the 400 or so telephones in Quitaque, an underground
wire leads to a "cluster box" that serves 24 phone lines.  Next to
each cluster box stands a 30-foot pole bearing an antenna.  The
antenna beams and receives 454-megahertz digital radio signals to and
from a radio transmission tower ten miles to the east, in Turkey,
Texas.  From there the signal travels to a switching station 30 miles
northeast of Quitaque in Lakeview.  When a Quitaque resident picks up
the phone, a dial tone returns to him from Lakeview in about 40
milliseconds; even when he dials another Quitaquean, the call is
routed through Lakeview.

The high-frequency digital signal delivers better sound quality than
an analog cellular phone, and unlike analog signals it is encoded in
such a way as to make eavesdropping prohibitively expensive.  In
addition, the range of the digital system is greater than that of
analog cellular phones; anyone within 37 miles of the Turkey
transmitter can be connected to the network by installing a cluster
box and antenna.  Some isolated ranches north of Quitaque are now
getting telephone service for the first time.  Residents of Quitaque
itself are getting modern conveniences -- call waiting, call
forwarding, speed dialing, and teleconferencing -- that had been
unavailable on their antiquated system.  "We're glad to be the first,
and I'm excited by all the features," says Quitaque mayor Elgin
Conner.

"The major advantage of this product is what it does for rural
America," says Reynold (Bob) Wolter of InterDigital Communications
Corporation, the firm that patented the technology.  InterDigital is
planning to install a similar system in Haviland, Kansas, later this
year.  but since telephone cable is already strung all over the United
States, the greatest market for digital radiotelephony may be in Third
World countries that are just now developing a telecommunications
infrastructure -- or have recently lost one.  After the Gulf War, for
instance, InterDigital provided telephone service to the royal family
of Kuwait.


sss / PU Class of '94   Dept of Computer Science

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

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 05:14 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: 3DO Demo


Last Thursday night I got to see a demonstration of the 3DO game box
at the Electronic Cafe in Santa Monica.  The hardware consisted of
what essentially was late beta (pre-production) silicon, code-named
'blue'.  Everything was running out of a Macintosh Quadra and two PC
clone boxes that supposedly had Quadra guts lying in them because of
the larger capacity available.

The name 3DO is a take on audio -- video -- 3DO; some of the software
wags say that it really means "Three Dollars Only", referring to their
licensing arrangements, which are much more agreeable than those
Nintendo enforces.  The 3DO Company will put out its first stock
offering some time in the second quarter, probably May.  3DO only
licenses its technology, manufacturing nothing.  (They should ask
Chips & Technologies how that works out if your competitors are your
customers!)

Two people led the demo, one from the marketing side of the 3DO
organization and one from the engineering side.  The engineer was
really quite funny.  I guess he needed a sense of humor: as he brought
up the 'red' (first beta) hardware, it proceeded to break!  That was
really too bad, because most of the demo software was designed to run
on the 'red' machine.  Later on, he was able to move the 'blue'
chipset over to the 'red' machine and cripple it appropriately for us
to see the demo.

We saw a lot of texture mapping on shaded polygons.  For instance,
they brought up a cube with three images on it, each image appearing
on two faces of the cube.  My guess is that they can draw shaded polys
til the cows come home, but really good texture mapping isn't quite
there yet, or may not even be in the plans.  It may be hard to do a
fly-through of a forest, for instance, the way you could with an SGI
box, because you'd need to texture map large areas.

Full-motion animation in the best compression mode looks as good as
VHS videotape.  They cut a tape of their Japanese show, which they
later compressed and put on a 3DO CD (which runs at double speed, for
a net bandwidth of ~300 KB/s).  This will be a very nice effects box
for home video use, and they have anticipated this use of it.

Each disk holds a half-hour of full-motion video in the best
compression mode.  We saw clips from "Backdraft" (to prove the box
doesn't drive video into color saturation), "Jaws", and the "old"
trailer from "Jurassic Park."  (My friend at Paramount assures me that
the new one is much cooler.)

They are using AT&T for their silicon foundry, which is odd, since
Matsushita is really the big force behind 3DO.  On the other hand,
Matsushita doesn't have that much experience building digital systems,
either.  The first production boxes will carry the Panasonic label,
natch.  AT&T is very interested in selling networked versions of these
boxes, possibly with ISDN or some other similar interface for
networked game play.  The Panasonic machines will arrive in October,
and the AT&T machines some time in 1994.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Colin Smale)
Subject: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required
Date: 19 Apr 93 16:51:14 GMT
Organization: Integrity BV, Woerden, Holland


My company has a fax product for Unix and Windows which is currently
being marketed in Europe. We are seeing a lot of interest in our
product in America. We would like to be able to produce a version for
the North American market, but I think we are rather spoiled by the
simple area code system which (in most European countries) years of
state monopoly has produced. Can anyone help me get hold of an 'idiots
guide' to the US telephone system so we can get our product set up
properly?

Questions which spring to mind include:

    When does one need to dial a '1' before a ten-digit number?
    When does one need to dial a '1' before a seven-digit number?
    Is it acceptable to use ten digit numbers exclusively, even
        within one's own area?
    If a phone is connected to a private exchange, what is the
        conventional digit to obtain an outside line?
    Would a product such as ours be expected to explicitly choose
        a LD carrier by using prefix codes? If so, how does that
        work?
    How many of these things need to be configurable because they are
        liable to vary from state to state for example?

Well, that's a rough description of my problem. Can anyone help? Is
there perhaps a few pages in a US phone directory which describe the
procedures that someone might be able to fax to me?

Please reply be mail as I don't get to read this group often. If
anyone asks, I'll summarise to the net.

Thanks in advance!


Colin Smale  [e-mail]
Integrity Software Consultants BV
Woerden, Holland


[Moderator's Note: Unfortunatly things are not yet totally
standardized in the USA regards when and when not to use 1+ on long
distance and/or inter/intra LATA calls. The front pages of any given
telephone book would give instructions peculiar to that location. The
general rule -- although as noted, exceptions exist -- is that you
either dial seven digits or you dial 1 plus ten digits. In the Telecom
Archives, some files of interest will be 'areacode.guide', 'history.
of.area.splits' and others with 'area' or 'npa' as the first word.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dream Weaver)
Subject: Re: White House Encryption Proposal
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 14:13:50 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Richard Osterberg) writes:

> OK ... this all seems rather stupid ... doesn't it? What's to stop all
> these "Criminals" that we'll have warrants to wiretap from simply
> adding *more* encryption to the telephone system? If they simply
> encrypt before going through a Clipper Chip and then decrypt on the
> other end of the Clipper Chip ... then we'd be right back where we
> started.  Or did I miss something here?

This is exactly the reason for the uproar in some groups.  Most agree
that the Clipper Chip increases security, by adding a layer of
encryption that is difficult for the average hacker to break and a
bother for authorities.  There also seems to be a consensus that to
make this workable ALL other private cryptology and nonregistered keys
will be outlawed.


Tom Hilquist                         Internet:[e-mail]
Disclamer: I didn't write this!      Email for PGP Public Key
PGP 2.2 Key fingerprint = 20 FF CA 46 1D B8 CD 55  F7 9D 71 B0 BD B7 B3 B5

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

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 09:15:49 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: From the Archives: Old Fashioned Coin Phones (January, 1988)


In TELECOM Digest V13 #263 many people wrote about Old Fashioned Coin
Phones (January, 1988) and the mention of using a 9 as the first
number in a phone number (XXX-9XXX) and how it was used for coin
phones.

Yesterday, I received a call from my wife's boss and his number is
XXX-9XXX.

Someone also mentioned that one exchange would carry the 9XXX as the
coin phone numbers leaving any other exchanges in that community or
communities available to use that series.

I would tend to suspect that is the case here since he called from the
third oldest exchange in that community and there were coin phones
available prior to that.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 19 Apr 93 15:52:23 GMT
Subject: Re: From the Archives: Old Fashioned Coin Phones (January, 1988)


Re: Enterprise numbers and other funny phone numbers.

As late as 1977, it was still possible to,uh-hum,"access" TTC
(Terminating Toll Completing) Codes.  The Rate and Route operator (TTC
code 141) provided validation of Bell Coin Phones. When Rate and Route
answered you blurted out "Checking for coin; NNX-XXXX" and R&R would
look it up in the multi-leaf.  This was long before TSPS/TOPS had a
database in which such information now resides.  If the number was
non-coin, it could receive collect calls.


[Moderator's Note: Besides doing coin number look ups, Rate and Route
(which was a service operated by Illinois Bell in Morris, IL for all
the Bell System companies) located dialing codes used by operators to
place calls to 'inward' in other cities, etc. They also did the look-
ups for 'Enterprise' numbers and other stuff.  But you *could* call
'collect' to a payphone -- there had to be someone there willing to
stick the money in the box of course, and the operator placing the
call had no control over the collection of the coins in the box so she
had to call 'inward' in the city where the pay station was located
and ask them for assistance in grabbing the coins as they went in the
phone. Those calls were rare I imagine.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Organization: Honeywell Air Transport Systems Division
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 07:02:20 GMT


Ok, so many different people called that number, which the original
poster described as giving "A very interesting intercept" although
he/she didn't tell us what exactly it was.  From the postings on this
topics, it seems like there is something of some "interest" in this
intercept, but since not everyone is getting the same intercept (since
they call from different area codes, I am assuming), WHAT DID THE
ORIGINAL POSTER OF THE MESSAGE hear -- and what did he/she find
interesting?

I can tell you to call 1-800-BAD-TIME and listen because I think there is
something "very interesting"  ;-)        [BTW, I am NOT asking you to].

Or may be a 900 #   ;)


[e-mail]
Opinions, if any expressed, are mine and may not represent my employer's.


[Moderator's Note: Perhaps someone who got through to the annoucement
will transcribe it and mail it to this reader.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 13:30 GMT
From: Sandy Kyrish <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information Sought on Video Phone


John Conwell asked when the Picturephone was introduced: the answer is
the 1964 World's Fair.  It used 1 MHz of bandwidth as I recall. (From
the literature, not from a purchase!)  I believe I remember a
demonstration of one at Hemisfair '68 in San Antonio Texas ...

AT&T is not having success with its residential videophone; it is
cutting prices.  IMHO, as a member of the teleconferencing industry,
it will be a good while before residential videophones will be
available.  We are all very excited now because business vidphone
prices have dropped to $13,000 each, and we all salivate at the
tantalizing thought of $5,000 vphones coming around through use of the
Pentium chip and the like.  So there's a pretty far drop from $5K to
home prices -- people don't spend $5K on TVs, stereos, even computers
really.  And to say that people might be willing to buy lesser quality
at a lesser price -- well, what's out there for $13K now, over dual 56
kbps lines, is not the most fabulous image quaity in the world.  Drop
to a single 56K line, take out the heavy duty image processing, and
you will get what you pay for -- not much.  While people were willing
to put up with a noisy phone line for cheap LD prices, what's the
point of having a fuzzy, jerky video image.  There's a big difference
between hiss in the background that doesn't really obscure speech, and
a "noisy" video image.

And, the only real way to do heavy duty compression of video is with
digitalization, so you won't see much til ISDN to the home.


Sandy Kyrish [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Bergstein)
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 09:29:43 -0500
Subject: Re: Information Sought on Video Phone


In a message on Sun. 4/18, John Conwell asked:

> Does anyone know when Bellcore introduced the Video Phone?  I
> seem to think it was at a 1960s Consumer Product Show.

AT&T introduced the original video phone at the 1964 Worlds Fair in
Flushing Meadow New York.

> Also, if a truly interactive video phone is available for
> residential use today.

Both AT&T and MCI are selling versions of a slow motion interactive
video system available for residential use.  I believe the cost
is around $1,000 per unit.


[Moderator's Note: So is Sharper Image or DAK, or one of those
catalogs. I forgot the price; they are the slow scan variety.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Information Sought on Video Phone
Date: 19 Apr 1993 15:53:18 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI


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

> Does anyone know when Bellcore introduced the Video Phone?  I seem to
> think it was at a 1960s Consumer Product Show.

If you mean the Picturephone, I think the first public installation
was a three-way hookup between the 1964 New York World's Fair (Bell
System exhibit building), the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry,
and Disneyland.  This is from memory so I could have it all wrong.
PAT, do you remember when the one in Chicago was removed?  And, while
we're on the subject, do you remember the tic-tac-toe machine made out
of Strowger switches?  (Maybe it was crossbar, I'm not sure.)


[Moderator's Note: After the New York Fair, Chicago MSI hooked it up
to Disneyland for awhile if I recall correctly. The 'phone company'
had a wonderful exhibit at MSI for many years. Yes, I remember the
tic-tac-toe game, where you dialed your selection with a rotary dial,
watched the stepper switch move and your choice light up on the
display board. They also had a pay phone which was a speakerphone;
demonstrations on a cross bar switch and other stuff. I lived directly
across the street from MSI (56th and Hyde Park Blvd) for a number of
years in the 1960-70 period. There was seldom a weekend I did not go
over for lunch in the cafeteria and an hour or two brousing. When the
Picturephone was operating, it was left continuously connected to the
World's Fair. Anyone on that end who walked past stared into the
camera at whoever walked past on the other end. Depending on the
chemistry of the people involved, quite often the people on both ends
who as luck had it walked past at the same time would sit down and
chat. I talked to a lot of neat people on that thing.  Chicago MSI
happens to be one of the two buildings still remaining from the
World's Fair of 1892-93 in Chicago, commonly known as the Columbian
Exposition.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon P. Knight)
Subject: Re: Information Sought on Video Phone
Organization: Dept of Comp. Studies, Loughborough University of Tech., UK.
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 08:20:39 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> John Conwell <JCONWELL@
LAWLIB.VILL.EDU> writes:

> Also, if a truly interactive video phone is available for
residential use today.  I am aware of Sony's teleconferencing,
although I don't know the particulars.

In the UK, British Telecom have recently released an interactive video
phone which can be used for either business or residential use.  I
don't know much about the technical details (Richard Cox or one of the
other uk.telecomers who read this forum might like to fill in the
details), but I do know that they cost 300-400 pounds each (with a
special deal on buying more than one - handy! ;-) ) and are advertised
to work practically everywhere in the world except for some Third
World countries (I'm not sure why they can't be used in those
countries; it could be either political reasons or something to do
with the poor telephone service offered).


Jon Knight, Research Student in High Performance Networking and Distributed
Systems in the Department of _Computer_Studies_ at Loughborough University.

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

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 08:43:58 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID Devices


Tad Cook asks about Caller-ID devices. Well I have two and both
connect to my PC for call filtering. The first was purchased about a
year ago and is aptly named "Whozz Calling" and came from a copmany in
Atlanta.  It consists of a box with rj-11 in, rj-11 out and a serial
cable for the PC.

When a call comes in a database is queried and if accepted a signal is
sent back to the box to let the call through to the "out" rj-11. If
not in the db or marked "do not answer", the calling party just hears
unending rings. This cost about $80.00 US.

The other is a Supra 14,4 FAX Modem that I paid just under $300 for (I
understand that they have an internal for $200 now and a 2400 baud for
less).  $20 US puchased the optional Caller-ID ROM and I wrote a
PROCOMM + .ASP file to do essentially the same as the above.

I also have a Gemini box purchased for $35 US at Home Depot that just
records/displays the time and number.

The downside of all this is that Southern Bell charges $7.50 US per
month per line for Caller-ID service and IMHO the coverage is not
broad enough.  The last ten calls to come into the one line I have it
on were all "Out of Area" (call blocking produces a different
message). In fact calls from a subdivision less than three miles away
(yes, it is inside my LATA and a free call) comes in as "Out of Area".
Overall I am running about one in four identified calls. This is not
worth $7.50 a month and if I were not using it for testing, would have
it taken out.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 10:51:41 EST
From: Rhett Glover <[e-mail]>
Subject: Motorola UDS V.32 to MAC Info Needed


Hello net land,

I picked up a Motorola UDS V.32 modem, Model # LCD RM 16M SA, at a
computer auction this weekend. Only problem is ... no documentation!.

Can anyone help me get this thing hooked up to my Quadra 700?

Any pointers to Documentation would be appreciated.


Thanks,

Rhett Glover  USAF Air Warfare Center   Eglin AFB Fl 32542
904 882-9341   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #264
******************************





^A^A^A^A
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16460;
          20 Apr 93 6:06 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09769
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 20 Apr 1993 03:15:51 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29612
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 20 Apr 1993 03:15:03 -0500
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 03:15:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #265

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 20 Apr 93 03:15:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 265

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System (Jim Hart)
    Followup: How to Busy Out a Line (Jeff Wasilko)
    Looking to Sell PBX's (Bonnie J. Johnson)
    Still Another New AT&T Plan (TELECOM Moderator)
    Emergency Changes Made by Data Broadcasting News (Darren Ingram)
    Re: CD-ROM Archives (Steve Forrette)
    Strange Intercept on Personal 800 Number (Brian Gordon)
    Re: Information Sought on Video Phone (John R. Levine)
    Reaching Out and Touching Someone, Anyone (Mark Brader)
    Re: Wireless City (Sean Malloy)
    Re: Mysterious Charges on Phone Bill (Russell Blau)
    Re: A Very Interesting Intercept (Paul Robinson)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Hart)
Subject: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Organization: Open Communications Forum
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 19:47:49 GMT


All the world should be made aware of the National Security Agency
(NSA) wiretap chip, called the "Clipper Chip" in confusion with
Intergraph's popular CAD station chip.  The wiretap chip is being put
in AT&T's new line of "secure" phones sold as a "privacy system" to
domestic and international customers alike.  The announcement, and the
endorsement by naive Clinton Adminstration rookies, has been posted in
sci.crypt.  (If you are in another country and did not get to see
these posts, please request and I will repost them publicly with
international distribution).

In this chip, the "private" encryption keys are in fact stored at the
NSA's headquarters.  This allows the NSA to monitor and store billions
of of domestic and international telephone calls between businessmen,
diplomats, government leaders, lawyers and psychiatrists and religious
leaders and tax accountants and their clients, tourists, and everyday
citizens.  The NSA has spent several $billions on terabyte disk
archives; they can search telephone calls recorded on these archives
at their leisure with more $billions worth of high-speed computers.
The U.S. government will soon be spending $28 billion per year for
such intelligence purposes.  Furthermore, NSA refuses to divulge its
top-secret code in the chip, which may allow it to wiretap even if
political pressure is applied on them to give up their key-archive
system.

It's time to take action now:

* Boycott AT&T -- this is in your own best interest; you're an
idiot if you use a phone service that has demonstrated its lack of
respect for your privacy.

* Lobby governments to take the following actions:

    -- Forbid the import of key-escrow phones, which
        jeopardize national security as well as
        the integrity of business and privacy of citizens;

    -- Forbid domestic government agency key-archiving schemes;

        -- Remove obsolete Cold-War restrictions on private use of
        electronic cryptography for private communications;

    -- (In U.S.) Publish the NSA Clipper algorithm immediately;

    -- Get government out of the crypto business;

* Develop an open, international, non-archive, free market system of
cryptography as a de facto standard for real telephone privacy.
Accept no NSA-crackable weak algorithms, top-secret algorithms, key
archiving, or secret government collusion with megacorporations like
AT&T.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Subject: Followup: How to Busy Out a Line
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 22:58:45 EST
Organization: Air Age Publishing, Wilton CT USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


A few weeks ago I asked for the best way to busy out a line. A few
people wanted to know why I needed to busy the line out: after hours,
our Auto Attendant transfers calls to our answering service via two
OPX lines when the customer wants to place an order. The problem was
that we have three lines in the 800 hunt group, and only two OPX lines to
our answering service. Unfortunatly our phone system and auto
attendant (a Norstar) is really stupid in the way it handles analog
lines, forcing us to limit incoming calls to two at a time.

Many people suggested 600-1000 ohms or so ohms across tip and ring,
and others suggested a dead short would be the same to the CO. After
talking to the test board tech, I installed a switch to short tip to
ring, and it's been working fine for two weeks. The test board tech
marked our records about the fact that we are busying out the line in
case an error is ever generated.

We've had it busied out over a three-day weekend (Easter) and we get
dial tone back in less than a minute every time when we remove the
short.

Thanks for everyone's help.


Jeff
Jeff's Oasis at Home.          Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                                             [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 15:55:55 EDT
From: Bonnie J Johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking to Sell PBX's


Two 4600 GTD Electronic digital PBX telephone switches;
Manufactured by Automatic Electric;
Feature rich, 15,000 line capacity when connected by tie lines;
Software version on switch 1-1321, switch 2-1411;
Recent change terminals for adds, moves and changes and traffic studies;
Seven attendant consoles;
Battery power plant used for back up;
Available January 1994.

Any ideas netters might have other than overseas and the salvage yard?


ty, bj

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

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 22:49:58 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Still Another New AT&T Plan


A letter in the mail today from AT&T tells of still another plan for
long distance calling, called "Simple Savings", and later it is said
to be part of "The 'i' Plan. There are so many of these things
anymore, it is even starting to get confusing to me!

This deal is based on your making $30 per month or more in long
distance calls. If you do, then you get a 25 percent discount on calls
to any one area code of your choice, and 15 percent discount on your
calls to all other area codes. These discounts will be automatically
deducted from your bill each month. This sounds a lot like the old
'Pick a Point' plan that Illinois Bell used to offer (maybe still
does) on calls within their LATA in Illinois.

I guess this turns out to be a better deal than Reach Out America,
depending on your application; the time of day you make your calls,
etc.

To sign up, you call AT&T at 1-800-358-8231, extension 3269, tell them
which area code you want, then continue calling as always.

The two things I am curious about are a caveat emptor at the bottom of
the letter which says 'subject to billing availability' and some code
numbers.

I guess they must bill for this through the local Bells like most of
their other calling plans; apparently they are still at the mercy of
those billing offices which do not have the software installed yet.

At the very bottom of my letter, in small print is this legend:
It includes one of my phone numbers, which I replaced with xxx.

           C31 312 xxx xxxx Y 074 VEI IWS SS01 9627  $

I think the 074 refers to the billing office at Illinois Bell here in
Chicago. Does anyone know what the other letters and numbers mean?
Most important, note the dollar sign on the right side ... does this
mean I'd get money for leaving them then being lured back by the
promise of some filthy money?  :) I wonder how much?  :) Or does the
lack of figures after the dollar sign mean I get nothing?  :(


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (Darren P. Ingram)
Subject: Emergency Changes Made by Data Broadcasting News
Organization: Darren Ingram Media Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 22:47:14 +0000


This may interest some of you ...

                   IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR
                DATA BROADCASTING NEWS READERS

TELE-satellit, the operators of the facsimile polling service
currently used by DBN, have advised that this service is to be
withdrawn by the end of May 1993.  Unfortunately it will not be
possible to get a pollable fax service operational by this time.

Arrangements have been made to ensure a faxed out or mailed out
service for DBN readers, and in time a new polling service should be
available.  In order to be kept advised of developments, please fax
the following sheet back to DBN.  You will not be under any obligation
by doing so, but it will enable DBN to advise you on the best methods
of receiving Data Broadcasting News.

You are advised to fax [phone] immediately, as this fax
service will shortly be discontinued and you may not have any point of
contact with DBN.

We hope that you will remain an avid reader of Data Broadcasting News, so
please fax today.

Darren Ingram, Editor.

                            ----------

FAX TO [phone] (0203 717418 IN UNITED KINGDOM) OR POST
TO DBN, 184 BROOKSIDE AVENUE, COVENTRY CV5 8AD, UK

[   ] Please send me details of the various ways of reading Data
      Broadcasting News after the fax polling service closes.  I
      understand that I   will not be under any obligations whatsoever.

[   ] Please send me details of Satnews, the sister title to Data Broadcasting
      News, which provides a fortnightly insight into the worldwide satellite and cable markets.

[   ] Please send me details of Tele-satellit, the monthly GERMAN language
      glossy features magazine.

Name:


Address:


Country:


Telephone:                           Facsimile:

Darren P. Ingram / DIMS ([e-mail])   - Views expressed do
184 Brookside Avenue, Whoberley, Coventry CV5 8AD UK - not automatically
Tel:[phone]/Fax:[phone]/Tlx 94026650 - represent those of
24-HOUR response number:[phone]              - DIMS or its clients
News, features, marketing & PR support and research/consultancy services

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

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 14:06:07 -0700
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: CD-ROM Archives


Sounds like a great idea to me.  I'd certainly be willing to pay $79,
although I think that many people might find that price a bit too
high.  They key part of it in my opinion would be the searching.  I've
tried sometimes to find an article in the archives that I remembered
reading, but the volume of information in the back issues is so great
that it takes a lot of time under the current system.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Yes, the Telecom Archives in its present condition
is hard to search at times. One of the reasons I compiled the subject
and author index was to partly ease the task of locating things in the
past, but there is still a lot of work to be done there. As my own
personal circumstances change for the better -- and they will, they
always have because I keep looking up! -- I'll be able to spend more
time making the archives what they ought to be. Ditto here in the
Digest, where I see many things in the editing and layout which need
attention. I am oppressed by things undone.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 12:34:50 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Brian Gordon)
Subject: Strange Intercept on Personal 800 Number


Over the weekend, one of the kids was at a "retreat" at Camp
<whatever> in the Santa Cruz Mountains (in CA).  The only accessible
phone was a Pac*Bell payphone (although I though that that was the
heart of GTE territory).  When he tried to call the home 800 number (a
Pac*Bell Personal 800 number, to be exact), the call was intercepted
by an operator (presumably Pac*Bell, but he didn't think to ask) who
wanted to know if he was calling from jail.

When (s)he was satisfied that the call was from a normal pay phone,
(s)he wanted to know whose 800 number he was calling.  When (s)he was
told that it was just our own home 800 number, (s)he was shocked and
said (s)he had never heard of such a thing -- but the call did go
through.  Of course, since there was now a long line at that one and
only phone, he could then only talk for a few seconds ...

I wonder if Pac*Bell still has switchboards in somebody's living room?

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

Subject: Re: Information Sought on Video Phone
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 19 Apr 93 16:41:45 EDT (Mon)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> Does anyone know when Bellcore introduced the Video Phone?

AT&T, also known at that time as the Bell System, introduced the
Picturephone with great fanfare at the 1964-65 New York World's Fair.
I used one of the demos there to talk to other family members in the
next booth.  At that time the major technical problem was that the
bandwidth was prohibitively expensive.  That problem has largely gone
away (128KB ISDN is enough for the kind of cruddy video that
picturephones provide) and now the issue seems to be that except for
group-to-group teleconferencing there isn't a lot of interest in it.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Reaching Out and Touching Someone, Anyone
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 18:10:40 GMT


A co-worker recently posted the following wrong-number story to a
local newsgroup, and I thought it worth forwarding here.  For foreign
readers: both the Subject line and the last line are plays on slogans
in Bell Canada advertisements.

   My home phone number must be similar to Bell's for the area that I
   live in and over the last six months I've had several calls but the
   one on sunday was the best one yet. It went something like this ...

   Me: Hallo
   Caller: This is Bell, right?
   Me: No, it's not.
   Caller: Oh, well anyway, my answering machine doesn't do blah,
      blah, blah
   Me: This is not Bell!
   Caller: Oh, it's not, oh, um ... but can I tell you anyway?
   Me: No!

   Ma Bell's surrogate partner answering your call!


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Sean Malloy)
Subject: Re: Wireless City
Date: 20 Apr 1993 00:08:44 -0500
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX


This sounds very similar to a GTE (of all people ;-) offered service
called UltraPhone.  According to a guest lecturer in one of my telecom
classes whose name escapes me, GTE is testing the service in remote
areas, such as West Texas, where the current facilities are well below
average, but the low subscriber-density makes it undesirable to lay
new cable.

I'm going from sketchy notes and handouts, but I'll relate what I
remember.

An UltraPhone CO Terminal terminates up to 6 T1 spans which go out to
a Radio Carrier Station (of which the antenna is a part of).  Here,
the T1s are compressed (RELP), multiplexed (TDM), modulated (16 PSK),
and transmitted.  According to the speaker, the compression gets a VG
channel down to 16kbps or so before transmission (which I personally
find stunning, since he also claims that the system can handle 9600
fax -- though they had some "problems" with that at first).

The subscriber location has a transceiver located near the premesis
(usually located at the top of a pole, he claims) which receives, I
believe, 16 channels.  One of the channels is used for control and
signaling, and the customer station tunes itself to the appropriate
channel when a call is made or recieved.  The subscriber station takes
the incoming digital signal and expands it into a standard VG line,
which is hardwired to the customer premesis.

The subscriber station communicates nearly continuously with the RCS,
and the status of a station can be monitored at the CO Terminal.

Each Radio Carrier Station can serve up to 564 customers (obviously
with a fair amount of blocking) in a 37.5 mile radius from the
station.  The distance limitation has to do with sychronization, and
not with transmitter power.

Forward radio path (network station to subscriber) is 454.025 to
454.650 MHz.  Reverse radio path is 459.025 to 459.650 MHz.  20kHz
bandwidth per channel, 25kHz bandwidth spacing, 5kHz guard band.

No switching (concentration?) is done at the RCS, so if one subscriber
wants to call his neighbor who is served by the same RCS, the call
still has to be switched at the CO.


Sean C. Malloy  -  Texas A&M University  -  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Russell Blau)
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 13:29:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Mysterious Charges on Phone Bill


[e-mail] (Joe Roden) wrote:

> Can anyone explain to me how I could receive a charge on my phone bill
> when someone called me from a hotel while using her own AT&T calling
> card?

> [Moderator's Note: The party calling you from a hotel used one of the
> AT&T calling cards with a scrambled number -- a number which has no
> direct, obvious relationship to the telephone number to which it is
> assigned. They were probably tricked into thinking their call was
> being placed over AT&T when in fact 'Zero Plus Dialing' intercepted
> the call. Once 'Zero Plus Dialing' got the call and realized they had
> no way to bill the calling party (the rip off carriers are no longer
> getting a free ride via the AT&T data base, etc) they simply decided
> to reverse the charges, putting them through to *your* line instead.
> I've received many complaints about this outfit; almost as many as
> Integretel.

Pat, it may interest you to know that Zero Plus Dialing Inc. is *not*
an operator service provider.  It is a billing clearinghouse that
compiles and process billing records on behalf of a number of
different OSPs and forwards these to the local phone cos. for
collection.  Therefore, assuming your scenario is accurate, it was one
of ZPDI's client companies that decided to put the call through as a
collect call, not ZPDI itself.  ZPDI simply received an apparently
legit call record for a collect call and sent it along to the LEC.


[Moderator's Note: In a personal note to me, Mr. Blau pointed out that
his experience with Zero Plus Dialing, Inc. had been when errors of
this sort were pointed out to them, they either corrected them or made
a referral direct to their client. I hope Joe Roden will post a note
soon following up and letting us know how ZPDI handled his case.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 01:21:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: A Very Interesting Intercept
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


I am the original poster of the message.  The interrupt tells the
caller they have called an invalid number in Japan.  The interesting
thing was not that some systems won't complete the call, but that the
recording was in clear, American English *before* the announcement in
Japanese:

  (music in background)

"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."

  (new voice)
"Okida a KDD day. Okakinima fa dee o dango wa .... "


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #265
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06898;
          21 Apr 93 4:06 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11660
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 21 Apr 1993 01:37:50 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30220
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 21 Apr 1993 01:36:56 -0500
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 01:36:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #267

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 21 Apr 93 01:34:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 267

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    GTE in California (Tony Harminc)
    Bell of PA A/C Split - Work Effort (David Horvath)
    Need: Coupler With Answer Supervision (Jim Fenton)
    Supercomm Atlanta (Les Reeves)
    Radio Transmitter Information Needed (Yuxing Tian)
    Problems in Austin TX (Monty Solomon)
    Acoustic Modem Vendors Wanted (Mike Crowe)
    Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (James Gleick)
    What States or PUCs Have Caller ID? (David Schanen)
    Looking for Database Software (Tony Dal Santo)
    NPA Stuff Wanted For United States (Aaron Woolfson)
    Bell Canada Restricts International Calls From Pay Phones (Mark Brader)
    From the Archives: Telecom Humor (Douglas W. Martin)
    Re: Need Computer Interface to a Pager (Ken Thompson)
    Re: Telco Uses My Lines (Patton Turner)
    Re: A Mailing List Ripped Off (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: CD-ROM Archives (Bob Frankston)
    Re: Still Another New AT&T Plan (Gil Kloepfer Jr.)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 00:18:43 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: GTE in California


I was in California recently, and passed through several parts of
GTEland on the way down the coast from SF to LA.  Some curiosities and
questions:

A bank of pay phones in Santa Monica with numbers like nxx-9401,
nxx-9502, nxx-9603.  Coincidence, or some GTE pay station numbering
scheme ?  (Two of the three were out of order, BTW.)

In either Santa Monica or Santa Barbara (I forget) a manhole cover
labeled "B T Co.".  Wasn't this a Bell System name?  This led me to
wonder about the history of GTE and the Bell System before the breakup
and before LD competition.  Was the Bell System ever the provider of
local service in what are now GTE locations?  And how did GTE make LD
connections in those dim and distant days?  Did GTE have lines between
(say) Santa Barbara and Santa Monica?  How about closer places such as
Santa Monica and GTE parts of LA that would now be in one LATA?

GTE pay phones in a couple of cases listed AT&T as the 0+ carrier, but
actually used something else.  It was MCI in one case (which was OK
with me and accepted my Bell Canada calling card) but one in Santa
Monica said nothing at the calling card ka-bong, but after entering
the number (I know - I should have listened) said what sounded like
"Encore".  I didn't let it go through -- are they teleslime or
reasonable?  And is it accepted that GTE lists AT&T but actually uses
another carrier?  (I tried 10xxx and it did work.)

What idiot designed those payphone keypads that break a fingernail
on each use?  The tiny rectangular keys with sharp metal bits on
each side.  What on earth was the point?  I notice that newer
phones have more normal keypads.

And finally a non GTEland question: at the hotel in San Francisco, the
0+ ka-bong said the (one word) name of the hotel.  It's a small hotel,
and although part of a small chain its name is not that of the
chain/owner.  Is this common ?  (10xxx worked fine.)


Tony Harminc

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

From: [e-mail] (David Horvath)
Subject: Bell of PA A/C Split - Work Effort
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 18:06:11 EDT


I got a telephone call today from a contract programming broker in the
Philadelphia Pennsylvania area. Bell of Pennsylvania (a Bell Atlantic
company) is looking for seven to thirteen IBM mainframe assembly and
COBOL programmers.  According to the broker, the additional staff
needs are due to the area code split in the area.

 From our brief conversation, it seemed like they needed seven people
yesterday and another six in the very near future.  Any ideas why the
heavy needs?

I'm not affilitated with the contract broker *or* Ma Bell.  If you're
looking for work as a contractor and *know* IBM mainframe assembler
very well and also know COBOL, I'd be willing to give you the name and
number of the broker.


David Horvath

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 17:10:36 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Jim Fenton)
Subject: Need: Coupler With Answer Supervision


For an upcoming demo, I need to find a coupling device to which I can
feed audio that will answer when the line "rings", supply the audio
over the line, the hang up when the far end does.  Who might make such
a device?


Jim Fenton      <[e-mail]>
Watkins-Johnson Company, San Jose, CA   408 435-1400

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 20 Apr 93 20:02:14 GMT
Subject: Supercomm Atlanta


Patrick, I plan to go to Supercomm Wednesday.  Are there any vendors
or particular industry groups that might interest you or TD?  I went
by the press room yesterday and got copies of of all releases and
annoucements they had.  It was slim pickings but the show did not
actually begin until today.


[Moderator's Note: I'll leave it to your option and let you be the
Digest press correspondent. Bring us back a report on the show in
general, and a vendor or two or three of your choice.  Have a nice
time. With all the money I'm supposed to be making from the
commercialization of the net these days with the Orange Cards, etc,
maybe I should use the liberal expense account the Digest Mega-
corporation gives me to fly down today and cover the show myself.
I'd fly first class of course ... <snicker> ... be sure and turn in
your expense account to the Comptroller of Digest Currency when you
get back.  :)   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 14:17:41 -0500
From: Yuxing Tian <[e-mail]>
Subject: Radio Transmitter Information Needed


Hello,

Does anybody know where I can get technical information of small radio
transmitters, like the one used on wild animals.

Thanks in advance.


Yuxing


[Moderator's Note: It appears to me you might be in Chicago, in which
case you could try contacting the Lincoln Park Zoological Society,
managers of the Lincoln Park Zoo here. I think they may use them on
occassion in their wildlife exhibition areas sometimes. They'll know
who/where to ask if they do not have the answers.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 15:16:59 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Problems in Austin TX


I reached the following recording today trying to reach a business in
Austin, TX.

"Due to telephone company facility trouble, your call cannot be
completed at this time.  Please try your call later.  512 4T"

This recording was on both their 800 and direct dial numbers.


[Moderator's Note: After getting your note, I queried 512-555-1212.
She knew of nothing amiss after asking the supervisor. Maybe it was
just a fluke, a very temporary failure of some sort.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Crowe)
Subject: Acoustic Modem Vendors Wanted
Date: 20 Apr 1993 13:08:43 GMT
Organization: Hand Held Products, Inc.


Greetings,

We are looking for a small, battery powered acoustic modem system with
muffs for a battery powered application.  We have located the company
below, but would also like any information on other companies who may
have similar products.

We have located a company called 'Unlimited Systems Inc.' in San
Diego, CA.  They make a Konexx Modem/Acoustic coupler that is powered
by a 9 volt battery, has integrated muffs, uses V.22bis/group3, and
will send data at 2400 baud (9600 baud on digital lines).  Their modem
number is 305.

Has anyone had experiences, positive or negative, with this
company/product?

Any information would be appreciated.


Mike Crowe, Hand Held Products, Charlotte, NC
Views expressed herein do not reflect the views of Hand Held Products

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

From: [e-mail] (James Gleick)
Subject: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 13:14:54 GMT


David Feldman, author of "Why Do Clocks Run Clockwise?" and other
Imponderables books, is asking for help with several telephone-related
mysteries for his next book.  Can anyone offer knowledgable assistance
with any of the following?

1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company buildings?

2) How were area codes assigned? The most populous areas seem to have the
lowest numbers, but is there any geographic logic?

3) Why were the old crank phones (at least as depicted in movies) placed
so high on the wall the users stretched to reach them.

4) Why do marketers sometimes have one 800 number nationally and another
within their own area?

5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the phone
companies money?

6) Why do telephone poles extend far above the highest wire or crosspiece?

7) Where do utilities get telephone poles? Are they from special logs? Are
there particular specifications?

Thank you in advance. Comments may be posted here or e-mailed to Dave in
care of:


James Gleick    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: By all means, post the answers here. A couple of
the questions should have fascinating answers.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Schanen)
Subject: What States or PUCs Have Caller ID?
Date: 20 Apr 1993 13:06:37 -0700
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.


Thanks!


David Schanen <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Dal Santo)
Subject: Looking for Database Software
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 16:24:25 GMT


I am looking to buy some software for storing information about our
network.  The information I want to store includes the wiring plan
(twisted pair, coax, fiber), along with host information like IP
address, Ethernet address, administrator, etc.  This software should
also be able to store the information for the phone system (phone
number, circuit origin, cable pair, etc).  The ability to store
billing info is a big plus.

Does anyone know of some software that can meet some or all of these
needs?  If so, I would REALLY like to hear about it.  I would
appreciate replies by mail ([e-mail]) since my news feed isn't the
most reliable.


Thanks,

Tony Dal Santo   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 00:18:40 -0700
From: Aaron Woolfson <[e-mail]>
Subject: NPA Stuff Wanted For United States


Hi!  I am trying to locate a few files which would help me greatly in
my efforts.  I am searching for a listing of NPA.xxx.exchanges-united
states for area code 201 through 919 -- basically all of the NPA
exchanges, etc.  Also it would be nice to be able to get longitude/
latitude and lata- number for each prefix or switch serving a group of
prefix'es ... I didn't want to send Bellcore the $990 for their stuff.
Anyway, thanks a million!


Aaron ... [e-mail]

Are there also any other ftp'able sites which have such an extensive
amount of telecommmunications data? Thanks!


[Moderator's Note: I expect at least a couple people here who collect
this information in great quantities will be in touch with you soon.
Other than our own Telecom Archives, I do not know of an ftp-able site
with an extensive set of telecom files. But ours has only started!
Wait until I get the time to work on it right ... I would like to add
all the npa-usa files to ours over the next couple months or so.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Bell Canada Restricts International Calls From Pay Phones
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 16:35:56 GMT


I didn't send this in sooner because I expected that Nigel Allen or
someone else would do so, but I haven't seen it in comp.dcom.telecom.

According to a note on my last phone bill from Bell Canada:

Due to a growing fraud problem, it is now no longer possible to make
Calling Card or credit card calls from Bell payphones to overseas
destinations.  Temporarily, card reader payphones will not accept cash
for calls to China, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Macao or Hong Kong.  Please
call your business office for more information.

Bell Canada's service area, of course, includes most of Ontario and
Quebec and the eastern Northwest Territories.  The restrictions were
also noted in the newspapers, but I didn't see any further information
there -- I'm particularly surprised that credit card calls need to be
cut.


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


[Moderator's Note: We did have mention of this a month or two ago. But
if the card reader phones won't accept cash to those points, and telco
refuses to allow credit, then *what can* the card reader phones be
used for where international calls are concerned?   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 08:55:12 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Douglas W. Martin)
Subject: From the Archives: Telecom Humor


     Sorry, I lost both the poster and the date, but if we're going to
requote the story of the dog ringing the phone, we mustn't forget this
one.

  Subject: More True Stories of Telephony

One of the best telephone jokes I've ever heard.  And like any good
telephone joke, it strikes a chord in all of us from the industry.  If
you haven't worked with Special Services, you may not appreciate it
fully ...

Did you hear about the Telephone Man who was drafted into the Army?
Seems he did well enough until he got out on the rifle range.  As the
sergeant approaches, he notices the Telephone man has his M-16 on full
automatic and is blazing away firing rounds at a phenomenal rate.
There's a rapidly growing pile of spent cartridges on the ground next
to him.

The Sergeant lifts his field glasses to observe the accuracy of this
over confident trainee, and sees absolutely no marks on the target.
Now, Sergeants are painstakingly trained by Uncle Sam to build the
confidence and ability of all boot camp soldiers, so the Sergeant
sizes up the situation and acts:

"Soldier, you've wasted hundreds of perfectly good rounds of ammuntion
and a thousand dollars of the taxpayer's good money and you haven't
hit the target once! What in the [several arcane military terms
deleted] is wrong here?"

Now the Telephone Man knows he must immediately analyse the situation
and correct the problem.  His years of technical training from Ma Bell
are called into play:

The Telephone Man looks down the barrel of the gun.  Then he carefully
inspects the chamber.  (Probably looking for the KS number so he can
refer to the correct BSP for this weapon, no doubt.)  He then rams a
cartridge home into the chambers, arms the weapon, puts his finger
over the end of the barrel and pulls the trigger.  Of course, this
neatly blows off the tip of his finger.

The Telephone Man inspects the end of his finger, and thinks for a
moment ... "Well, gee, Sarge, I don't rightly know what the problem is
 ... but it must be at the other end, 'cause its leaving here just
fine!"


Doug Martin     [e-mail]

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

From: Ken Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Need Computer Interface to a Pager
Date: 20 Apr 93 17:26:58 GMT
Organization: NCR Corporation Wichita, KS


[e-mail] writes:

) ATDT5551234@98*25*26

) Where the first part is the standard dial string, the @ waits for
) silence and the *, in some systems, is a dash.

) No board necessary, just a com port.

 ... and a modem!


Ken Thompson    N0ITL
NCR Corp.  Peripheral Products Division   Disk Array Development
3718 N. Rock Road  Wichita KS 67226   [phone]
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 17:06 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telco Uses My Lines


Fred Goldstein writes, refering to Nynex:

> No cellular phones.  No land mobile radios.  Nothing in the trucks at
> all.  When they need to communicate, they need a live phone line, and
> think it's their right to beg, borrow or steal one.  And this is part
> of the same conglomerate that owns the local cellular (B) carrier.

This seems to be a growing trend.  I have noticed several telco's
sending techs out with only pagers.  Most of the affected techs I have
talked to (Special Service, Toll, Cable, most everybody but residental
installers) don't like it worth a damn, for safety reasons in addition
to having problems calling into the office.  I suggested to one
craftsperson who shot cable problems on several mountaintops that he
take it up with the CWA.  He said their union reps prefer it because
it reduces accountability (his words).  At least one tech with a rural
co-op in SC disconnected his land mobile to make room for a ham rig.
He did still have an IMTS !! rig in the van.

With some of the dispatch/test equipment combos out there, they have
no choice but to steal your pair in order to get their next ticket.

I suppose the cellular contract has to be bid out to prevent cross
subbing?

If the proposed Part 90 changes are implemented, the telcos may have
to buy new radios anyway. I wonder if they will go cellular, or steal
even more pairs.  What happens if all you have are Special Service
circuits?


Patton Turner  KB4GRZ   FAA Telecommunications   [e-mail]

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: A Mailing List Ripped Off
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 14:25:00 PDT


Patrick,

Actually, I'd like to know who else is out here on the Digest.  It
doesn't particularly disturb me that one individual happened to obtain
a copy.  But, I believe in full disclosure.  Many of the internet mail
list servers support REVIEW and WHO commands, so users can obtain
subscriber lists.  Sometimes it can be handy to know Who's Who out
here in the interland!  I'd like to know WHO's out here with us.


Regards,

Lynne

[Moderator's Note: Like almost all mailing lists, there are people who
ask to be added with the explicit understanding their name and net-
address will NOT be given out to anyone. Not everyone necessarily
wants everyone else to know who/where they are. I've always respected
the privacy of readers here by keeping the lists confidential, letting
users who want to correspond with others make their own arrangements.
The telecom lists are not for sale or free giveaway, and believe me, a
few companies have asked, usually the second way, and after resistance
by myself, the first way. It still won't happen. Now the person who
grabbed one of the lists the other day agrees his act was inappropriate
and claims he destroyed the copies he made ... but then he adds there
is nothing to prevent him from compiling a list of authors in each
issue and using that instead. Well yes, there is: I could do like one
Digest does and only print the names without the net addresses,
forcing all correspondence to come through me, but that seems to me to
unethically and needlessly restrict the exchange of mail and informa-
tion between users.  He's probably busy compiling his author's list now;
so he can show his stuff one of these days with a splash mailing to
everyone.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: CD-ROM Archives
Date: Tue 20 Apr 1993 21:06 -0400


For reference, the street price for CD's of data is now about $29 or
less. On the other hand, it would be helpful to have a full telecom
reference disk.  600MB can provide lots of reference info. Perhaps
more info from the mythical (yeah, I know they are real to some
people) V&H tapes, dialing codes for all the cities in the world.
Perhaps even a magic table that tells when one needs to dial one to
each one exchange from another within a dialing area as well as other
anomalies. For small amounts of info, going to the archives online is
fine, but if making large amounts of data available locally would be
valuable. Of course, the more valuable, the higher the price and/or
the wider the distribution.


[Moderator's Note: Ah, just give me a few months alone with the
archives to whip them into shape.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 20:42:23 -0500
From: Gil Kloepfer Jr. <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Still Another New AT&T Plan
Organization: Southwest Systems Development Labs, Sugar Land, TX


In Pat's article, he writes:

> [...] I am curious about are a caveat emptor at the bottom of
> the letter which says 'subject to billing availability'

Must be, in part, due to all the complaining I did after Sugar Land
Telephone (an independent) claimed not to be able to bill for one of
the services I tried to order a year ago (something about still
negotiating with AT&T regarding the billing arrangements).  Since I
work for the company which provides SLT's software (not SSDL, but my
daytime job), I was able to locate someone who said that our software
did, indeed, support it (the plan I was inquiring about).

My own experience is that some of the independent local phone
companies need some training on how to handle these calling plans as
well as in customer relations.

I never did get the AT&T calling plan I originally asked for, and I'm
scared to death to try to change it now!


Gil Kloepfer, Jr.   [e-mail] / ...!ames!limbic!gil

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #267
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08766;
          21 Apr 93 5:06 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12731
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 21 Apr 1993 02:33:37 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23890
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 21 Apr 1993 02:33:03 -0500
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 02:33:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #268

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 21 Apr 93 02:33:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 268

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (J. Maddaus)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (S. Forrette)
    Re: White House Encryption Proposal (Brent Capps)
    Re: Wireless City (Jim Kresse)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 16:52:28 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Organization: AT&T


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

> All the world should be made aware of the National Security Agency
> (NSA) wiretap chip, called the "Clipper Chip" in confusion with
> Intergraph's popular CAD station chip.  The wiretap chip is being put
> in AT&T's new line of "secure" phones sold as a "privacy system" to

If you are implying that your average everyday AT&T phone available
through AT&T Phone Center Stores contains Clipper, you are wrong.

> domestic and international customers alike.  The announcement, and the
> endorsement by naive Clinton Adminstration rookies, has been posted in
> sci.crypt.  (If you are in another country and did not get to see
> these posts, please request and I will repost them publicly with
> international distribution).

> In this chip, the "private" encryption keys are in fact stored at the
> NSA's headquarters.  This allows the NSA to monitor and store billions

NOT TRUE ... See below

> of of domestic and international telephone calls between businessmen,
> diplomats, government leaders, lawyers and psychiatrists and religious
> leaders and tax accountants and their clients, tourists, and everyday
> citizens.  The NSA has spent several $billions on terabyte disk
> archives; they can search telephone calls recorded on these archives
> at their leisure with more $billions worth of high-speed computers.
> The U.S. government will soon be spending $28 billion per year for
> such intelligence purposes.  Furthermore, NSA refuses to divulge its
> top-secret code in the chip, which may allow it to wiretap even if

Why should they?

> political pressure is applied on them to give up their key-archive
> system.

> It's time to take action now:

> * Boycott AT&T -- this is in your own best interest; you're an
> idiot if you use a phone service that has demonstrated its lack of
> respect for your privacy.

> * Lobby governments to take the following actions:

>     -- Forbid the import of key-escrow phones, which
>         jeopardize national security as well as
>         the integrity of business and privacy of citizens;

>     -- Forbid domestic government agency key-archiving schemes;

>         -- Remove obsolete Cold-War restrictions on private use of
>         electronic cryptography for private communications;

>     -- (In U.S.) Publish the NSA Clipper algorithm immediately;

>     -- Get government out of the crypto business;

> * Develop an open, international, non-archive, free market system of
> cryptography as a de facto standard for real telephone privacy.
> Accept no NSA-crackable weak algorithms, top-secret algorithms, key
> archiving, or secret government collusion with megacorporations like
> AT&T.

Please take two anti-paranoia pills and call your doctor in the morning!

Sorry, but the misinformation in this article forces me to respond.
Standard disclaimer's apply, I speak for myself and not my employer.

This is just not true.  The current offering is in stand-alone devices
which YOU can buy at YOUR discretion.  There is no purposefully
crippled telephone system.  No one is forcing you to attach these
devices to your telephone or buy a telephone which has the Clipper
chip in it.  Even if you attach one of the Telephone Security Devices
to your phone, it does nothing unless you push the little red button,
i.e. you have the choice of enabling/disabling the security feature
completely on each call.

There is however a strong need for multi-national U.S. companies such
as AT&T to be able to secure voice/data/fax from foreign agencies and
competitors.  This is a documented need that DOES NOT impact your
rights as an individual for privacy from anyone, including the
government.  As far as that is concerned, you can be no worse off than
you are currently with no voice protection.  To put it bluntly, the
only reason you may consider your telephone conversation private is
because any number of foreign agencies, companies and individuals have
made a conscientious decision that your phone conversations are not
worth listening to!

I do take issue with the current thread in some Usenet groups that
implicates AT&T (and therefore I presume those working on the TSD and
other secure products) as subverting a person's individual right to
privacy by offering a product line with the Clipper chip installed.
As a Product Manager who's function in life is to place a TSD (with
Clipper) in the cellular market-place, I would hope that most would
realize that many things are said on Usenet that are based upon
assumptions gleaned from reading more between the lines than really
exists.

The facts are that there is no government mandate to prevent people
from choosing the encryption scheme of their choice.  There are others
available.  You can purchase them now.  What the government has said
you can not do all along is export them, UNLESS you get their prior
approval which is not often granted.  Clipper is a compromise.  In my
mind, it is the best compromise (actually the only viable one I've
seed to date) obtainable now.  Despite the whining on other news
groups, I have never seen a solution suggested that satisfies the
needs of law enforcement and U.S. business in an equitable manner.
The decision to use Clipper was not made lightly or without
investigation by knowledgeable people in AT&T (and we do have what I
would consider to be experts in the field).

For your edification, I am attaching a post which appeared on
sci.crypt that will explain a bit more about Clipper.  Hope you find
it interesting.


John S. Maddaus     Product Manager
Secure Cellular Communications
AT&T Bell Laboratories   [e-mail]


 Subject: THE CLIPPER CHIP: A TECHNICAL SUMMARY
 Date: 19 Apr 93 18:23:27 -0400
 Organization: Georgetown University


The following document summarizes the Clipper Chip, how it is used,
how programming of the chip is coupled to key generation and the
escrow process, and how law enforcement decrypts communications.
Since there has been some speculation on this news group about my own
involvement in this project, I'd like to add that I was not in any way
involved.  I found out about it when the FBI briefed me on Thursday
evening, April 15.  Since then I have spent considerable time talking
with the NSA and FBI to learn more about this, and I attended the NIST
briefing at the Department of Commerce on April 16.  The document
below is the result of that effort.


Dorothy Denning


                THE CLIPPER CHIP: A TECHNICAL SUMMARY
                          Dorothy Denning
                          April 19, 1993


INTRODUCTION

On April 16, the President announced a new initiative that will bring
together the Federal Government and industry in a voluntary program to
provide secure communications while meeting the legitimate needs of
law enforcement.  At the heart of the plan is a new tamper-proof
encryption chip called the "Clipper Chip" together with a split-key
approach to escrowing keys.  Two escrow agencies are used, and the key
parts from both are needed to reconstruct a key.

CHIP STRUCTURE

The Clipper Chip contains a classified 64-bit block encryption
algorithm called "Skipjack."  The algorithm uses 80 bit keys (compared
with 56 for the DES) and has 32 rounds of scrambling (compared with 16
for the DES).  It supports all 4 DES modes of operation.  Throughput
is 16 Mbits a second.

Each chip includes the following components:

   the Skipjack encryption algorithm
   F, an 80-bit family key that is common to all chips
   N, a 30-bit serial number
   U, an 80-bit secret key that unlocks all messages encrypted with the chip

ENCRYPTING WITH THE CHIP

To see how the chip is used, imagine that it is embedded in the AT&T
telephone security device (as it will be).  Suppose I call someone and
we both have such a device.  After pushing a button to start a secure
conversation, my security device will negotiate a session key K with
the device at the other end (in general, any method of key exchange
can be used).  The key K and message stream M (i.e., digitized voice)
are then fed into the Clipper Chip to produce two values:

   E[M; K], the encrypted message stream, and
   E[E[K; U] + N; F], a law enforcement block.

The law enforcement block thus contains the session key K encrypted
under the unit key U concatenated with the serial number N, all
encrypted under the family key F.

CHIP PROGRAMMING AND ESCROW

All Clipper Chips are programmed inside a SCIF (secure computer
information facility), which is essentially a vault.  The SCIF
contains a laptop computer and equipment to program the chips.  About
300 chips are programmed during a single session.  The SCIF is located
at Mikotronx.

At the beginning of a session, a trusted agent from each of the two
key escrow agencies enters the vault.  Agent 1 enters an 80-bit value
S1 into the laptop and agent 2 enters an 80-bit value S2. These values
serve as seeds to generate keys for a sequence of serial numbers.

To generate the unit key for a serial number N, the 30-bit value N is
first padded with a fixed 34-bit block to produce a 64-bit block N1.
S1 and S2 are then used as keys to triple-encrypt N1, producing a
64-bit block R1:

        R1 = E[D[E[N1; S1]; S2]; S1] .

Similarly, N is padded with two other 34-bit blocks to produce N2 and
N3, and two additional 64-bit blocks R2 and R3 are computed:

        R2 = E[D[E[N2; S1]; S2]; S1]
        R3 = E[D[E[N3; S1]; S2]; S1] .

R1, R2, and R3 are then concatenated together, giving 192 bits. The
first 80 bits are assigned to U1 and the second 80 bits to U2.  The
rest are discarded.  The unit key U is the XOR of U1 and U2.  U1 and
U2 are the key parts that are separately escrowed with the two escrow
agencies.

As a sequence of values for U1, U2, and U are generated, they are
written onto three separate floppy disks.  The first disk contains a
file for each serial number that contains the corresponding key part
U1.  The second disk is similar but contains the U2 values.  The third
disk contains the unit keys U.  Agent 1 takes the first disk and agent
2 takes the second disk.  The third disk is used to program the chips.
After the chips are programmed, all information is discarded from the
vault and the agents leave.  The laptop may be destroyed for
additional assurance that no information is left behind.

The protocol may be changed slightly so that four people are in the
room instead of two.  The first two would provide the seeds S1 and S2,
and the second two (the escrow agents) would take the disks back to
the escrow agencies.

The escrow agencies have as yet to be determined, but they will not be
the NSA, CIA, FBI, or any other law enforcement agency.  One or both
may be independent from the government.

LAW ENFORCEMENT USE

When law enforcement has been authorized to tap an encrypted line,
they will first take the warrant to the service provider in order to
get access to the communications line.  Let us assume that the tap is
in place and that they have determined that the line is encrypted with
Clipper.  They will first decrypt the law enforcement block with the
family key F.  This gives them E[K; U] + N.  They will then take a
warrant identifying the chip serial number N to each of the key escrow
agents and get back U1 and U2.  U1 and U2 are XORed together to
produce the unit key U, and E[K; U] is decrypted to get the session
key K.  Finally the message stream is decrypted.  All this will be
accomplished through a special black box decoder operated by the FBI.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND DISTRIBUTION NOTICE.  All information is based on
information provided by NSA, NIST, and the FBI.  Permission to
distribute this document is granted.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Date: 20 Apr 1993 20:53:43 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> In this chip, the "private" encryption keys are in fact stored at the
> NSA's headquarters.

This is not true.  There will be two key escrow agencies, which have
not been named as of yet.

> Furthermore, NSA refuses to divulge its top-secret code in the chip,
> which may allow it to wiretap even if political pressure is applied on
> them to give up their key-archive system.

This is really stupid on the part of the government, IMHO.  How do
they expect to build public confidence in a system where public
scrutiny of the algorithms is not possible?  One reason mentioned for
them keeping it secret is to prevent other companies from producing a
compatible chipset that doesn't have the keys deposited with the
escrow agencies.

> * Boycott AT&T -- this is in your own best interest; you're an
> idiot if you use a phone service that has demonstrated its lack of
> respect for your privacy.

So I guess you don't plan on using any phone, ever again?  I don't see
how introducing the Clipper Chip in cordless phones does anything to
compromise personal privacy.  If the government wishes to listen in on
your calls, it is far more efficient to just place a tap at the telco
(which would pick up all of your calls), rather than park a van in
front of your house and intercept only your cordless telephone calls.
But, this technology will provide some measure of protection from
non-government interceptions, which at least for me are much more of a
concern.  Since the current telephone system (landline, cordless,
cellular, etc) has absolutely no encryption of any kind in it, you
don't plan on using it at all?

> * Lobby governments to take the following actions:

>    -- Forbid the import of key-escrow phones, which
>        jeopardize national security as well as
>        the integrity of business and privacy of citizens;

>    -- Forbid domestic government agency key-archiving schemes;

>        -- Remove obsolete Cold-War restrictions on private use of
>        electronic cryptography for private communications;

>    -- (In U.S.) Publish the NSA Clipper algorithm immediately;

>    -- Get government out of the crypto business;

I couldn't agree more.

> Accept no NSA-crackable weak algorithms, top-secret algorithms, key
> archiving, or secret government collusion with megacorporations like
> AT&T.

There is no secret collusion going on here -- it seems to me that AT&T
is being quite open about their use of the Clipper Chip.  I think we
need to have a much more reasoned approach to opposing government
proposals such as the Clipper Chip.  It has uses which can benefit
society (such as in protecting the link layer of cellular and cordless
telephones), and other areas where society's privacy concerns could be
severely compromised (such as statutes restricting non-approved
encryption systems).  Let's not spend our time worrying about the
former.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: White House Encryption Proposal
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 16:07:57 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Dream Weaver) writes:

> Most agree that the Clipper Chip increases security, by adding a
> layer of encryption that is difficult for the average hacker to break
> and a bother for authorities.  There also seems to be a consensus that
> to make this workable ALL other private cryptology and nonregistered
> keys will be outlawed.

I seriously doubt whether a prohibition like this would stand up to a
court challenge.  This would be tantamount to the government setting
up an official approval process for certain kinds of speech
(encrypted) which it is clearly forbidden to do under the First
Amendment.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Kresse)
Subject: Re: Wireless City
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Panasonic ATVL
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 16:02:13 GMT


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

> This sounds very similar to a GTE (of all people ;-) offered service
> called UltraPhone.  According to a guest lecturer in one of my telecom
> classes whose name escapes me, GTE is testing the service in remote
> areas, such as West Texas, where the current facilities are well below
> average, but the low subscriber-density makes it undesirable to lay
> new cable.

I used to work for International Mobile Machine (IMM, now known as
InterDigital Communications), which built these systems.  With some
refinements (such as the cluster box), it is the same system which GTE
uses in West Texas.

> I'm going from sketchy notes and handouts, but I'll relate what I
> remember.

> An UltraPhone CO Terminal terminates up to 6 T1 spans which go out to
> a Radio Carrier Station (of which the antenna is a part of).  Here,
> the T1s are compressed (RELP), multiplexed (TDM), modulated (16 PSK),
> and transmitted.  According to the speaker, the compression gets a VG
> channel down to 16kbps or so before transmission (which I personally
> find stunning, since he also claims that the system can handle 9600
> fax -- though they had some "problems" with that at first).

The RELP actually runs at less than 16kbps.  The original system could
only handle data up to 1200 bps.  I worked on a modification to the
system to add 2400 bps data and fax capability (and yes, it was
difficult to do!).

> The subscriber location has a transceiver located near the premesis
> (usually located at the top of a pole, he claims) which receives, I
> believe, 16 channels.  One of the channels is used for control and
> signaling, and the customer station tunes itself to the appropriate
> channel when a call is made or recieved.  The subscriber station takes
> the incoming digital signal and expands it into a standard VG line,
> which is hardwired to the customer premesis.

Only one time slot on one RF channel is used for control and
signaling.

> The subscriber station communicates nearly continuously with the RCS,
> and the status of a station can be monitored at the CO Terminal.

> Each Radio Carrier Station can serve up to 564 customers (obviously
> with a fair amount of blocking) in a 37.5 mile radius from the
> station.  The distance limitation has to do with sychronization, and
> not with transmitter power.

> Forward radio path (network station to subscriber) is 454.025 to
> 454.650 MHz.  Reverse radio path is 459.025 to 459.650 MHz.  20kHz
> bandwidth per channel, 25kHz bandwidth spacing, 5kHz guard band.

> No switching (concentration?) is done at the RCS, so if one subscriber
> wants to call his neighbor who is served by the same RCS, the call
> still has to be switched at the CO.

This was at least partially due to the fact that it was desired that
the system look like a subscriber loop carrier system instead of a
switch.


Jim Kresse   [e-mail]    Standard disclaimers apply

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #268
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27629;
          22 Apr 93 2:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04623
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 21 Apr 1993 23:58:22 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19890
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 21 Apr 1993 23:57:16 -0500
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 23:57:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #266


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 20 Apr 93 14:22:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 266

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (James Ebright)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Henry Mensch)
    Re: Information Sought on Video Phone (Jim Rees)
    Re: Information Sought on Video Phone (John Marvin)
    Re: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required (Carl Moore)
    Re: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required (Richard Cox)
    Re: Still Another New AT&T Plan (John C. Fowler)
    Re: Problems With the GSM Subscriber Units (Nigel Elliot)
    Re: Wireless City (Bill Walker)
    Re: Telecom Archives Index of Files - Spring, 1993 (Ed Greenberg)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (James R Ebright)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 13:40:03 GMT


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

> All the world should be made aware of the National Security Agency
> (NSA) wiretap chip, called the "Clipper Chip" in confusion with
> Intergraph's popular CAD station chip.  The wiretap chip is being put
> in AT&T's new line of "secure" phones sold as a "privacy system" to
 [...]

> In this chip, the "private" encryption keys are in fact stored at the
> NSA's headquarters.  This allows the NSA to monitor and store billions
> of of domestic and international telephone calls between businessmen,
> diplomats, government leaders, lawyers and psychiatrists and religious
> leaders and tax accountants and their clients, tourists, and everyday
> citizens.
 [...]

Well, they CLAIM this isn't true.  And I doubt it is.  NSA would not
design an encryption scheme for the public market that they could not
crack even WITHOUT the keys :)

But we may never know, because, as the original poster points out, the
NSA won't let the public know just how the chip works. While the chip
will keep kids and scanners from listening in on your conversations,
It certainly won't stop Big Brother or the friends of Big Brother or
Big Brother wannabees.

The trap door which will always let the govenment listen to your
conversation is justified because only bad people like drug dealers
would not like that :)

Of course, I wonder how many big time drug dealers are going to use
the government's wiretap phone?  There are plenty of real encryption
systems available to them ... (the only thing WE have is PGP!).

The real problem with this new technology is it makes it very easy for
the government to do centralized wiretaping. It effectively automates
the system for them.

>        -- Remove obsolete Cold-War restrictions on private use of
>        electronic cryptography for private communications;

Hey ... right now there are NO restrictions for electronic
cryptography in the US ... the Clintons are getting ready to put them
ON! And I voted for them :(

George Orwell got the year wrong ... Where is Thomas Jefferson now
that we really need him?

Bitch to your congressperson ... political pressure works, I hope.


Information farming at...    For addr&phone: finger
THE Ohio State University  [e-mail]
     Jim Ebright             e-mail: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Many people believe the Clintons will oversee the
dismantling of the Bill of Rights during their term in office. For
example, the Second Amendment will most likely be repealed during
their term. National Identity Cards, to be issued at the time a person
is born, will begin. The Clipper Chip is just one of several
distasteful things we'll see during the president's term in office.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 06:18:06 -0700
Subject: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Jim Hart) wrote:

> In this chip, the "private" encryption keys are in fact stored at the
> NSA's headquarters.

If you're going to publish such a warning, you ought to (at least)
tell the whole story ... the proposal states that incomplete keys will
be kept at two separate government agencies, and petitions must be
made to both in order to get a complete, useful key.

(I don't advocate this approach; I just think it's important to tell
the whole story).

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


[Moderator's Note: And it will be almost as hard to get approval from
both agencies for use of the keys as it is now for a police officer
standing at your door to get a search warrant on the fly if you insist
on the officer 'respecting your rights'.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Information Sought on Video Phone
Date: 20 Apr 1993 16:07:02 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI


Here is a very old message I have from the proud owner of an original
Picturephone.

  Date: mon, 26 aug 85 03:42:50
  From: ...
  Subject: Picturephone data

Well, the Picturephone has the following dimensions -

Base -to- top of head        15 1/4 inches
head height            9 1/4 inches
head width (at bottom)        8 inches
screen                5 1/4w x 4 3/4h
circular base            10 1/2 inches
weight                26 pounds

control box            6w x 3 1/2h   *

Ok, the face plate and internal frame is made out of case aluminum.
The face plate is matt black with the camera "eye" on top and the tv
screen below it.  The base is made of magnesium (?)  and is plated in
matt finish nickel (?).  The cover is not-so-high impact plastic
(green in this case, most were beige) and can be taken off by removing
two screws on the bottom.  Vent slots are located on the top and
bottom of the unit.  The base has a neck that sticks up at a 45 deg
angle from the back of the base (where the cables go in and out).

The control box is the little box that has the following controls:

 -----------------------------------------------------------------
|   -                               -    |
|  | |           ---------- ----------- -----------         | |   |
|  | | BRIGHT   | PRIVACY  |   ON OR   |  VU SELF  |  ZOOM  | |   |
|  | |          |          |   QUIET   |           |        | |   |
|   -           |          |           |           |         -    |
|   -           |          |           |           |         -    |
|  | |          |          |           |           |        | |   |
|  | | VOLUME   |          |    OFF    |           | HEIGHT | |   |
|  | |           ---------- ----------- -----------         | |   |
|   -                                                        -    |
|                                   |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------

The three middle boxes are flat-top rocker switches, the thin things
are thumbwheel pots.

The Picturephone had a few major drawbacks.

1) It didn't really run on normal phone lines. They had to be
   conditioned and couldn't contain any non-picturephone repeaters
   or other hardware attached.  Normal local lines worked ok but
   long distance lines (normal) were out.

2) For each two PP's there was a power supply, line control, audio
   video filter/amps and other misc junk in a box about 3w x 2.5h x 1.5d (ft).
   these boxes had tons of option connections that were
   used to "tune" the lines.  Audio and video were sent
   on separate lines.

3) The video ran at 1/2 the normal TV sweep freq. with
   1/2 (or less) the number of lines and about 1/2 the
   resolution (per line).

4) You had to know someone else with one.

The picture tube was a custom-blown job and the vidicon tube went out
of production so long ago that Hitachi doesn't even have the part
number on record!  There are no IC's in the unit.  Connection to the
head is through a 25 pair ribbon connector (like a standard keyset).

I hate to say this but I doubt that I am going to get rid of this
fossil but I can check with the only other guy I know with one that
might want to get rid of his (not too likely).

My unit showed up when the construction crew were putting in a new
hallway to an old building.  They had to break through a wall and
connect the new building with the old.  The room that they had to turn
into a hallway was a very old storage room with some old unclaimed
video test gear and about 45 dead Picturephones (in their original
boxes).  The construction crew said that if they didn't get moved in
24 hours, they'd be chucked in the dumpster (a flatbed tractor trailer
that gets hauled once every two weeks).  My department sucked-up about
four of them and the rest got trashed.  I ended up with one of the
four remaining Picturephone test-sets in existence as well.  Too bad
there's no way to power them up!  (No one has any idea about the
schematics -- let alone the custom parts labled "AX-1" and "AX-4", etc.)

Well, so much for that, I've got to go to bed ... I hope that's
answered your questions about it.

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 02:11:54 -0600
From: John Marvin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information Sought on Video Phone


In article <[e-mail]>, John Conwell <JCONWELL@
LAWLIB.VILL.EDU> writes:

> Does anyone know when Bellcore introduced the Video Phone?  I seem to
> think it was at a 1960s Consumer Product Show.

As mentioned previously, it was introduced at the 1964 Worlds Fair.

Now, does anyone know how many Picturephones were manufactured?  Were
they ever actually used for anything other than demonstration purposes
(i.e. were there any commercial customers)?

One reason I ask is that we had three or four of the Picturephones
installed in our high school physics laboratory (1973-1974).  Our
physics teacher obtained them from a friend who worked for Western
Electric.  We were led to believe that these phones were the actual
ones installed at the 1964 Worlds Fair, and that there were not many
others in existence.


John Marvin    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: There were others. Here in Chicago, all the Picture
Phone customers were on the 312-467 exchange. At the IBT Building
downtown, they had something called the 'video shopping mall' with
three or four Picture Phones, each in an individual booth. You sat
down in one then could call for free to one of about a dozen business
places which had them installed to display their merchandise.  You
could order over the phone and pay with your Diners or Amex card.  (We
did not have VISA (it was called 'BankAmericard' originally) in those
days; it got underway about the same time.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 11:05:43 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required


(I've been supplying the archive file history.of.area.splits ; let me
know if you want that file and cannot get the archive yourself.  It
has a few notes in it about dialing instructions, which are expanded
on below.)

The original author wrote:

> When does one need to dial a '1' before a ten-digit number?

As far as I know, you can always insert a 1 before a 10 digit number.
This would even be true in published instructions which tell you to
dial area code + 7 digits (i.e. may omit leading 1):

1. local calls to another area code (I know of Washington DC and
Dallas-Fort Worth area in Texas)

2. long distance calls from San Jose, California, and from parts of
New York City area (Long Island suburbs and southern Westchester) to
other area codes.  Some other places, such as New York City, used to
make other-area-code long distance calls that way but now have to
use leading 1, due to their need for N0X/N1X prefixes.  The remaining
examples I cited should go away (I have received definite word for
the California case) when it is time to accommodate NNX area codes.

> When does one need to dial a '1' before a seven-digit number?

As explained in the history.of.area.splits file mentioned above, 1+7D
should be going away in preparation for the NNX area codes.  Many
areas are still using it at this writing for long distance within an
area code.

> Is it acceptable to use ten digit numbers exclusively, even
> within one's own area?

I doubt it.  That setup does appear with the Orange Card (noted
recently in the Digest) and with the phone service I once used from on
board an airplane.  If you don't always require a 10 digit number, you
have to use leading 1 to signal "area code follows", or you get
situations that can only be resolved with time-out (example: 413-abcd
versus 413-abc-defg, where 413 is the area code in western
Massachusetts).

> If a phone is connected to a private exchange, what is the
> conventional digit to obtain an outside line?

9 is often used for this.  My office has such, but I do NOT get a
second dial tone.

> Would a product such as ours be expected to explicitly choose
> a LD carrier by using prefix codes? If so, how does that
> work?

If you do not supply a prefix code (of the form 10xxx), you will get
the default LD carrier assigned to that telephone.  So you are not
REQUIRED to make explicit choice here.

> How many of these things need to be configurable because they are
> liable to vary from state to state for example?

Most of the above varies from place to place; some instructions have
been made statewide-uniform and/or areawide-uniform.

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 11:35 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Colin Smale) asked:

>> How many of these things need to be configurable because they are
>> liable to vary from state to state for example?

Whenever you are designing telecom equipment, you should always make
it configurable, because the network administrators are bound at some
stage to come along and change things.  When they do, some equipment
will continue to work -- while other equipment will fail.

If you were the supplier of the equipment that failed, you may make a
few quick bucks or guilders selling the modifications: but you can be
sure that next time, customers will go to the suppliers who made sure
their equipment would not need modification!


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

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

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 14:45 GMT
From: John C. Fowler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Still Another New AT&T Plan


I got a similar letter a month or two ago.  After scrutinizing the
plan closely enough to determine that "no startup charges apply," I
figured, why not?  So I signed up.  I've already received one bill,
which saved nearly $15.

There's no code on my original introductory letter, but they did print
a similar code on my confirmation letter.  In my case, it's:

C16 303 545 xxxx Y  078 VE1B VEW  ATL OCPZ1 ATL  L68 E

Again, for comparison, Pat's was:

C32 312 xxx xxxx Y  074 VEI IWS SS01 9627 $

So it looks like they have more info on me, but they wouldn't be
willing to pay me anything to switch.  :-)


John C. Fowler, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Elliot)
Subject: Re: Problems With the GSM Subscriber Units
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 11:07:01 GMT


> Recently I learned that using GSM portables inside vehicles cause some
> problems. Either the GSM waveform or the way they turn the power up or
> down can accidentally activate the airbag system also can interfer
> with the automobile automatic break system (ABS). Also it has been
> noticed that the GSM mobile interferes with people with hearing aids!
> The problem has to do with the GSM waveform more than the frequency
> band. Does anyone have more information on these issues? There there
> any recent articles that address these problems.

I think you'll find the problem lies with the systems that fail (ie their
EMI immunity) rather than with the GSM mobiles !

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Walker)
Subject: Re: Wireless City
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc.
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 16:54:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Sean Malloy) wrote:

> This sounds very similar to a GTE (of all people ;-) offered service
> called UltraPhone.  According to a guest lecturer in one of my telecom
> classes whose name escapes me, GTE is testing the service in remote
> areas, such as West Texas, where the current facilities are well below
> average, but the low subscriber-density makes it undesirable to lay
> new cable.

It should sound similar to Ultraphone.  It's from the same company (it
may even be the same system, or a variation on it).  Ultraphone was a
product of International Mobile Machines (IMM), which, after the
acquisition of SCS Mobilecom, changed its name to Interdigital Corp.

Interestingly, the Ultraphone system was originally developed by
M/A-COM Linkabit under contract to IMM.  The founders of Linkabit
later founded Qualcomm, the company I work for, and we are competing
with IMM/Interdigital in the cellular telephone area.


Bill Walker - [e-mail] - QUALCOMM, Inc., San Diego, CA
All opinions expressed are mine, and do not reflect those of my employer.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Telecom Archives Index of Files - Spring, 1993
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 17:03:49 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Eric Engelmann 38488) writes:

> I think it would be interesting to put all the archives on CD-ROM with

Walnut Creek CDROM sells compilations of various archives, such as
SIMTEL-20 and CICA Windows.  They get $24.95 for those two, and
between $25 and $100 for others.  Most of their stuff is compilations.
I expect they could do one of the digest archives, but the big
questiona is how much volume there would b.


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 #266
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00693;
          22 Apr 93 4:08 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06121
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 22 Apr 1993 01:05:16 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31885
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 22 Apr 1993 01:04:32 -0500
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 01:04:32 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #269

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 22 Apr 93 01:04:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 269

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (James Turner)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Dale Farmer)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Jon Gauthier)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Carl Moore)
    Re: Problems in Austin TX (Fritz Whittington)
    Re: Problems in Austin TX (Syd Weinstein)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Joel Levin)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (James Ebright)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Ron Dippold)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (John Levine)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 11:32:19 EDT
From: [e-mail] (James Turner)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


In comp.dcom.telecom is written:

> David Feldman, author of "Why Do Clocks Run Clockwise?" and other
> Imponderables books, is asking for help with several telephone-related
> mysteries for his next book.  Can anyone offer knowledgable assistance
> with any of the following?

> 1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company buildings?

Because no windows means no bombs thrown through them.  Also probably
makes them less vulnerable to weather-related problems like hurricanes
and tornados.  Since most of an old office was the (fairly massive)
crossbar or step switch, and a lot of the rest was batteries and
incoming cable, you ended up with a big building with no windows.

> 4) Why do marketers sometimes have one 800 number nationally and
> another within their own area?

Because they can get a better rate for their instate calling customers
 from the local Baby Bell, but need a national 800 number for their out
of state customers.  For example, say State Street Bank in Boston
wants to set up 800 service for their customers. New England Telephone
(Nynex) offers them a plan that allows anyone in the 617/413/508 area
code to call them for .19c/minute.  This is lower than what
ATT/MCI/SPRINT can offer under their national 800# plans, but since
New England Telephone is not allowed to offer 800 service outside
their area, State Street must make arrangements for a different 800
number provided by a national carrier.  With 800 number portability,
it might be possibile to have an 800 number go to a regional provider
for in-state calls and a national provider for national calls, but I
don't think they're going to make the switches that smart.

> 5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the phone
> companies money?

There is probably some minor administrative costs associated with it,
since they have to flag them in the company database so that they are
not printed or given out by directory assistance.  But the basic
answer is no, since many BOCs will not list the second number coming
into a home (the data line, for example) as long as the primary number
IS listed.  It's a phone company moneymaker, pure and simple.


James M. Turner  Member, Technical Staff   Interleaf, Inc.
[phone]   [e-mail]     uunet!leafusa!turner

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Date: 21 Apr 1993 12:55:11 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


James Gleick ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company buildings?

    I guess, (I have no basis in fact here tho) that it was a
requirement to withstand enemy bombardment of US cities prior to the
end of WW2 that was not such an unreasonable fear.  Later on for
fallout protection from the nuclear war.  Telco as important
infrastructure for the aftermath and eventual recovory.

> 2) How were area codes assigned? The most populous areas seem to have the
> lowest numbers, but is there any geographic logic?

    Beats me.

> 3) Why were the old crank phones (at least as depicted in movies) placed
> so high on the wall the users stretched to reach them.

    Short actors?  :-)

> 4) Why do marketers sometimes have one 800 number nationally and another
> within their own area?

    Because thats the way mother sold them to use :-)

> 5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the phone
> companies money?

    Any special handling of a number costs extra.  not listed, not
published, multiple names per number, whatever ...

> 6) Why do telephone poles extend far above the highest wire or crosspiece?

    Why bother cutting them off, It's so high up there, and then
it will fall down and knock down the wires and who is it bothering
anyway ...  :_)

> 7) Where do utilities get telephone poles? Are they from special logs? Are
> there particular specifications?

    Out in the forest...
    Wooden ones
    not too short, not too tall, not to thick, not too thin, just right.


Dale Farmer

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Date: 21 Apr 1993 19:16:38 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> 4) Why do marketers sometimes have one 800 number nationally and another
> within their own area?

It's usually one 800 number for out-of-state, and another for
in-state.  Back in the Dark Ages (early 1980's and before), this was a
required configuration for 800 service.  Although the requirement is
no longer in place, some companies still want to maintain both old
numbers so that existing customers using old reference material will
be able to get through.

> 5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the phone
> companies money?

There are at least two reasons here:

First, telephone services in many cases are not priced in relation to
their cost, but rather the perceived value to the consumer.  Take for
example TouchTone dialing, which actually reduces the telco's cost,
but is often surcharged because the customer perceives that they are
getting an extra service.

Second, having an unlisted number works against the telco's desire for
there to be as many telephone calls as possible.  If someone wants to
call you, but can't get your number because it's unpublished, then
they can't place a revenue-generating call.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Gauthier)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 21:47:46 GMT


> 1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company buildings?

One good reason, if not the real one, is for security: it would be
real easy for someone with a .30-06 to partially knock out service in
an exchange.  A few years ago, I investigated the use of underground
telecom environmental vaults/huts for our contract with USWest.  Talk
about no windows ...

> 2) How were area codes assigned? The most populous areas seem to have the
> lowest numbers, but is there any geographic logic?

Notice that the area codes for large metro areas use lower-numbered
digits.  Back in the days of rotary phones (remember those?), since
the vast majority of calls were to these large metro numbers, it made
economic sense to assign those to low numbers.  Since older stepper-
and XY-type switches progressively seized circuits as they recieved
dial pulses, assigning low numbers in high traffic areas enabled
circuits to be held for shorter setup times -- therefore increasing the
overall traffic capacity of the system.  More income for no more
capital outlay.

A little simplistic, but you get the general idea ...


Jon L. Gauthier              Ericsson Network Systems, Inc
EXU/IS/N  Systems Programmer               P.O. Box 833875
[phone]                  Richardson, TX 75083-3875
[e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 10:08:12 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


To (partially?) answer some items:

> 2) How were area codes assigned? The most populous areas seem to have the
> lowest numbers, but is there any geographic logic?

I have shipped a copy of history.of.area.splits.  It does mention the
(long-since-obsolete) practice of putting N0X area codes into states
or provinces with only one area code and N1X area codes into states or
provinces with more than one area code.  I don't know about geographic
logic, but I do have a FORTRAN program called "nclicks" which counts
the number of dial clicks in area codes ("0" means 10 clicks, any
other single digit has its face value); notice that the fewest dial
clicks for the current area codes are found in 212,312,213 (area codes
for New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles).

> 4) Why do marketers sometimes have one 800 number nationally and another
> within their own area?

I don't know about now, but previously there was a distinction between
calling toll-free within a state (commonly used 800-NN2 for this) and
calling toll-free from out of state.

> 5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the phone
> companies money?

I read a while back that it does mean extra time and effort to have to
remove someone's number from the list which otherwise goes to press.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 13:07:33 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Fritz Whittington)
Subject: Re: Problems in Austin TX


In comp.dcom.telecom is written:

> I reached the following recording today trying to reach a business in
> Austin, TX.

> "Due to telephone company facility trouble, your call cannot be
> completed at this time.  Please try your call later.  512 4T"

> [Moderator's Note: After getting your note, I queried 512-555-1212.
> She knew of nothing amiss after asking the supervisor. Maybe it was
> just a fluke, a very temporary failure of some sort.  PAT]

The phones in the TI plant in Austin were reported to be cut off from
the outside world for most of Tuesday, due to a cable cut somewhere.
Fixed now; I don't have any further details.


Fritz Whittington Texas Instruments, P.O. Box 655474, MS 446 Dallas, TX 75265
    Shipping address: 13510 North Central Expressway, MS 446 Dallas, TX 75243
[e-mail]                 Office: [phone]     FAX: [phone]
Since I am not an official TI spokesperson, these opinions contain no spokes.

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

From: [e-mail] (Syd Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Problems in Austin TX
Date: 21 Apr 1993 13:28:58 -0400
Organization: Datacomp Systems, Inc., Huntingdon Valley, PA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Monty Solomon <[e-mail]> writes:

> I reached the following recording today trying to reach a business in
> Austin, TX.

> "Due to telephone company facility trouble, your call cannot be
> completed at this time.  Please try your call later.  512 4T"

A major fiber cut in Austin caused this.  Directory Info probably went
to another city, which was not effected.


Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP          Elm Coordinator - Current 2.4PL21
Datacomp Systems, Inc.                 Projected 3.0 Release: ??? ?,1994
[e-mail] or dsinc!syd      Voice: [phone], FAX: [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 09:24:19 -0400
From: Joel B Levin <[e-mail]>


In a comment on a message by [e-mail] (James
R Ebright), Our Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Many people believe the Clintons will oversee the
> dismantling of the Bill of Rights during their term in office. For
> example, the Second Amendment will most likely be repealed during
> their term. National Identity Cards, to be issued at the time a person
> is born, will begin. The Clipper Chip is just one of several
> distasteful things we'll see during the president's term in office.  PAT]

Let's not be hysterical.  The Second Amendment controversy is a matter
of interpretation, which may undergo changes, but don't bet on its
repeal.  As far as the Clipper Chip, don't forget that it has been
under development for at least FOUR years, and the contracts for its
manufacture were let over a year ago.  And just what great fan of the
Bill of Rights was in charge during that time?


/J

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

From: [e-mail] (James R Ebright)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 15:02:02 GMT


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

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

>> Furthermore, NSA refuses to divulge its
>> top-secret code in the chip, which may allow it to wiretap even if

> Why should they?

You are putting you employer in the position of selling folks condoms
that might very well have holes in them.  :(

One of the basic tenents of cryptography is you MUST assume others will
get access to the code, -- REAL security is available only when, even
knowing the code, eavesdroppers can't decrypt the message.  Open, public
scrutiny of the encryption scheme is necessary for confidence. In other
words, TEST YOUR CONDOMS BEFORE YOU SELL THEM ...

> There is however a strong need for multi-national U.S. companies such
> as AT&T to be able to secure voice/data/fax from foreign agencies and
> competitors.

Agreed ... so do it!  But the clipper chip fails to meet even minimal
cryptography practices.  Build a TSD (telephone security device) that
DOES!

> This is a documented need that DOES NOT impact your rights as an
> individual for privacy from anyone, including the government.

So you admit we do have a right to privacy!  Good.  I agree.

> As a Product Manager who's function in life is to place a TSD (with
> Clipper) in the cellular market-place, I would hope that most would
> realize that many things are said on Usenet that are based upon
> assumptions gleaned from reading more between the lines than really
> exists.

Well, I have NEVER previously seen a White House statement that said
Americans MAY NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS WHICH CAN NOT
BE INTERCEPTED BY THE GOVERNMENT.  And the White House Clipper
statement said just that! It didn't say we didn't.  But it EXPLICITLY
didn't say we did.  Check it out.

BTW ... the public is not going to have a lot of confidence in this
and the tying of this to the issue of Big Brother is going to be a big
headache for your employer.  I hope your compensation is not tied to
actual sales of these units.

> For your edification, I am attaching a post which appeared on
> sci.crypt that will explain a bit more about Clipper.  Hope you find
> it interesting.

>
>                THE CLIPPER CHIP: A TECHNICAL SUMMARY
>                          Dorothy Denning
>                          April 19, 1993

Dorothy Denning is quite notorious in the crypt community as an
apologist for giving the govenment the right to read your mail ... I
notice you didn't post any of the annotated versions of this document
found in sci.crypt.


Information farming at...  For addr&phone: finger
THE Ohio State University  [e-mail]
     Jim Ebright           e-mail: [e-mail]
                           Support Privacy: Support Encryption


[Moderator's Note: As a matter of fact, the condom manufacturers do
perform quality control tests on their products.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 21 Apr 93 16:48:24 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: And it will be almost as hard to get approval from
> both agencies for use of the keys as it is now for a police officer
> standing at your door to get a search warrant on the fly if you insist
> on the officer 'respecting your rights'.   PAT]

Not if the agencies are the ACLU and EFF.  (Note: the proposal did
state that one agency would be a non-governmental agency.)


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] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 19:46:46 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> compromise personal privacy.  If the government wishes to listen in on
> your calls, it is far more efficient to just place a tap at the telco
> (which would pick up all of your calls), rather than park a van in
> front of your house and intercept only your cordless telephone calls.

That, however, requires a valid warrant (tap at telco).  I also
believe they're more concerned about end to end encryption rather than
handset to cradle and/or phone to telco precisely because of that
ability.  Hence the timing of the chip.  Once they get it established
they can start cracking down on and cease approving other encryption
methods.  After all, only drug dealers, child pornographers, civil
libertarians, and other scum could possibly want encryption the
government can't listen to.

Is there anyone who actually thinks they can keep those two keys
secure?  It should perform one significant purpose, however -- make
local police far more dependent on the feds, which fits neatly with
Clinton's National Police Force wishes.

I'm not coming down on AT&T for this, it's just another business
opportunity.  But this, along with the National ID card, increased
espionage budgets, and other items, after only four months, is slightly
scary.


[Moderator's Note: You haven't seen the worst of it from that hot team
which got elected last November. Watch and see.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 21 Apr 93 15:01:10 EDT (Wed)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> [Moderator's Note: Many people believe the Clintons will oversee the
> dismantling of the Bill of Rights during their term in office. ...
> blah blah blah

Can I pleasantly request that we send the political diatribes
somewhere else?  There's plenty to say about Clipper and other
telephone encryption without shooting political flames, and plenty of
other places on the net to talk politics.  (Indeed, the political
comments are the only one of the zillion kvetches about the TELECOM
Digest with which I have any sympathy.)

You might also consider reports that Clipper has been in development
for about four years, which means that the initial idea and most of
the implementation happened under Reagan and Bush.  Granted, Clinton
has gone along with the plan, but it's not his initiative.

And speaking of Clipper wiretaps, did you see the part in Dorothy
Denning's note that says that the escrowed keys are based on the
chip's serial number and two nominally secret scrambling keys, so
anyone who knows they scrambling keys can decode messages sent by any
Clipper chip.  Now THAT's creepy.


Regards,

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


[Moderator's Note: And thanks also to several other writers who
commented on this topic but couldn't be included for space reasons.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #269
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02769;
          22 Apr 93 5:13 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24293
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 22 Apr 1993 02:01:40 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24245
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 22 Apr 1993 02:01:06 -0500
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 02:01:06 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #270

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 22 Apr 93 02:01:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 270

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Korea Goes CDMA (Ron Dippold)
    International Telephone Dialing (Marida Ignacio)
    Intelligent Telephone Boards/Boxes (Monty Solomon)
    Overview of Telephone Network Wanted (Rod Kline)
    Contel Cellular Offer in VT (Garrett Wollman)
    Small, PC-Based PBX? (Carl W. Neihart)
    "From" Data in Orange Card Bill (Carl Moore)
    New Fraud: Outright Thievery! (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Caller-ID Devices (Mike Ikotin)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)
Subject: Korea Goes CDMA
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 22:06:29 GMT


I don't normally pass the Qualcomm press releases onto here, thus
sparing everyone dozens of them regarding companies signing on for
CDMA, etc., but this one seemed of enough general interest.  A brief
CDMA history (public announcements only) follows.

             CDMA CHOSEN AS CELLULAR STANDARD FOR KOREA

-Ministry of Communications Selects CDMA: Commercial Service To Begin 1995-

SAN DIEGO Q April 21, 1993 - The Korean Ministry of Communications
(MOC) announced that it has selected Code Division Multiple Access
(CDMA) for the Korean cellular telephone system.  QUALCOMM
Incorporated, (NASDAQ:QCOM), the developer of CDMA technology,
indicated that the MOC has set a 1995 date for commercial CDMA
service.

According to Director General, Mr. In Hak Lee of the Radio Regulatory
Office of the MOC, CDMA was selected after a careful evaluation of
both TDMA and CDMA technologies.  The basis for the selection was
CDMA's multiple advantages.  "CDMA has larger capacity, six or seven
times that of TDMA, and provides excellent voice quality," he said.
"Also, we can expect to save 30% of the system installation and
operating expenses by using CDMA," Lee continued.

With the selection of CDMA, the schedule for digital service
implementation in Korea, originally planned for 1997, has been
advanced two years.  The schedule outlined by Mr. Lee now calls for
prototype equipment in September 1994, followed by commercial field
trials in early 1995 and commercial service later that year.

CDMA subscriber and infrastructure equipment for the Korean network
will be supplied by Korean manufacturers.  Four major Korean cellular
telephone equipment manufacturers and the Electronics and
Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI) of Korea will participate
in the implementation of digital cellular equipment based on
QUALCOMM's CDMA technology.  "ETRI and the manufacturers will work
closely with QUALCOMM to realize the early commercial deployment of
CDMA network and subscriber equipment in Korea in 1995," said Dr.
Seung Taik Yang, President of ETRI.  "ETRI intends to make the first
implementation of CDMA in Korea a showcase for other Asian countries."

Each of the ETRI designated manufacturers, Goldstar Information &
Communications, Ltd., Hyundai Electronics Industries Co., Ltd., Maxon
Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung Electronics Co., has signed an
agreement with QUALCOMM for the joint development of cellular
telephone subscriber and infrastructure equipment.  Maxon will produce
subscriber equipment only, while the other three companies will
develop both subscriber and infrastructure equipment.  In addition to
providing equipment for the Korean market, these manufacturers will
provide alternate sources of CDMA equipment for networks in the U.S.
and other countries interested in implementing CDMA.

"The Korean MOC's choice of CDMA for its digital network demonstrates
the growing international acceptance of the CDMA technology developed
by QUALCOMM as a next generation mobile technology," said Irwin
Jacobs, QUALCOMM's Chief Executive Officer.  "With their new schedule
for commercialization, Korea will parallel U.S. carriers in the
implementation of CDMA."  Three U.S. carriers, Bell Atlantic Mobile,
PacTel Cellular and U S WEST NewVector Group, have announced purchases
of, or plans to implement, CDMA networks in their U.S. cellular
markets.  U S WEST NewVector's plans include CDMA installation in its
Seattle market beginning in late 1993 with commercial service
available in late 1994.

QUALCOMM Incorporated develops, manufactures, markets, licenses and
operates advanced communications systems and products based on digital
wireless technology.  QUALCOMM's products include the OmniTRACSR
system and digital wireless telephone systems and products based on
Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) technology.  The company also
develops and markets a range of VLSI devices.

                                ###

OmniTRACS is a registered trademark of QUALCOMM Incorporated.

CDMA PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS

March 17, 1993

QUALCOMM Evaluates InterDigital Corporation's CDMA patents and
determines they are either not necessary to build CDMA equipment
compliant with the draft CDMA standard or embody technology first
invented, developed and belonging to QUALCOMM.  The draft CDMA
standard was approved on March 15th by TR45.5 Subcommittee and issued
to members of TIA for ballot.  Ballots are due by April 16, 1993.

March 17, 1993

Four Manufacturers Sign on For Korean CDMA Development.  Goldstar,
Hyundai, Maxon & Samsung Electronics were chosen by ETRI to
participate in the implementation of CDMA in Korea.  Each company has
signed an agreement with QUALCOMM to jointly develop CDMA cellular
subscriber and infrastructure equipment.

March 2, 1993

QUALCOMM Introduces Hand-Held CDMA Portable Phone.  The CD-7000 is the
industry's first CDMA/analog portable telephone and can operate as a
digital CDMA phone wherever CDMA service is available, and otherwise
as a high-quality standard analog phone.  Production quantities will
be available in Fall 1993.

March 2, 1993

QUALCOMM Announces Design for Mobile Station Modem (MSM) ASIC, which
replaces previous CDMA subscriber three-chip set.  The MSM chip
reduces portable phone power requirements by 50%, as well as increases
portable talk time, and is immediately available to licensed CDMA
subscriber equipment manufacturers.

March 2, 1993

FCC Grants QUALCOMM Experimental PCS License to conduct field trials
and studies in the 1850-1990 MHz band.  The company will demonstrate
the feasibility of using its CDMA digital cellular system for personal
communications services (PCS).

February 22, 1993

QUALCOMM Introduces First Dual-Mode CDMA-AMPS Mobile Phone.  The
CD-3000 operates as a digital CDMA phone wherever digital service is
available, and otherwise as a high-quality standard analog phone.
This is the first in a series of CDMA-based cellular telephones
designed by QUALCOMM.

January 18, 1993

QUALCOMM and GTE conduct joint CDMA Trials in Tampa, Florida.  The
30-day trial, funded by GTE Mobile Communications, will validate
previous findings, and confirm benefits of CDMA for cellular
applications in the Tampa market.

December 21, 1992

CDMA Digital Cellular Technology Nears Standardization.  Technical
parameters and baseline text for a CDMA digital cellular standard
adopted by TIA TR45.5 Subcommittee after unanimous vote to begin
validation and verification process.

December 3, 1992

Telecom Australia's Research Laboratories (TRL) signs contract for
CDMA digital cellular telephone equipment for testing in Australia in
the 800MHz band. QUALCOMM will provide several base stations, a
switch, several mobile units and CDMA-specific test equipment, as well
as its proprietary distributed antenna.

November 23, 1992

Telesis Technologies Laboratory (TTL), a subsidiary of Pacific
Telesis, announce joint testing of CDMA PCS system (1850 - 1990 MHz)
in San Diego.  Tests are currently underway and will continue through
first quarter of 1993.

September 30, 1992

CDMA goes to Wall Street.  LOCATE and Bear, Stearns sign contract for
CDMA technology and equipment for PCS applications.  Contract covers
equipment to be used for testing prior to CDMA implementation on Wall
Street at Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc.

September 21, 1992

QUALCOMM successfully completes CDMA cellular demonstration in Geneva
with Swiss PTT.  Trials were conducted in the 800 - 900 MHz band and
allowed the Swiss to compare CDMA with European GSM standard.

August 20, 1992

Ameritech announces first dual digital cellular trial of CDMA and TDMA
technology.  The trials will be based in Chicago metropolitan area
beginning in September and lasting 60 days.

August 18, 1992

QUALCOMM & ETRI announce commencement of Phase II of contract to
jointly design and develop CDMA-based digital cellular system for
metropolitan area in Korea.

July 15, 1992

Mitsubishi Electric Signs CDMA Technology Support Agreement,
positioning themselves to join as licensee.

June 10, 1992

A resolution of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association's
Board of Directors requests expeditions development of a CDMA wideband
spread spectrum digital cellular standard.

June 4, 1992

Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems, Inc. announces plans to conduct field
trials of CDMA digital technology in its Washington, D.C. cellular
system.

May 28, 1992

Demonstrations of a CDMA-based digital cellular system are completed
in the Federal Republic of Germany in cooperation with Deutsche
Budespost Telekom (DBP Telekom).  Data garnered during the trials will
be assessed for possible use in both mobile and fixed location
wireless loop applications.

May 21, 1992

QUALCOMM is awarded U.S. patent number 5,101,501 for its method of
providing a "soft" hand-off in a CDMA digital cellular telephone
system.  To date seven CDMA patents have been issued, with 16 pending.

April 16, 1992

American Personal Communications (APC) announces a multimillion dollar
contract with QUALCOMM for the purchase of CDMA equipment to test
APC's Frequency Agile Sharing Technology (FAST) in the Washington,
D.C./Baltimore area.

April 13, 1992

Nokia Mobile Phones announces they have signed a multimillion dollar
licensing agreement with QUALCOMM for CDMA technology.

March 9, 1992

QUALCOMM'S CDMA Digital Cellular Common Air Interface (CAI)
specification is accepted as a contribution by the Telecommunications
Industry Association's subcommittee TR45.5 as a proposed wideband
spread spectrum standard.

March 2, 1992

QUALCOMM announces that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
has granted the company an experimental license to conduct trials
demonstrating personal communications services (PCS) in the 1850-1990
MHz band.

March 2, 1992

Matsushita Communications Industrial Co., Ltd. signs a support
agreement with the company for CDMA technology.

January 3, 1992

Northern Telecom signs a multimillion dollar licensing agreement with
QUALCOMM for CDMA technology.  It joins previously announced licensees
AT&T, Motorola and OKI telecom.

December 6, 1991

The company announces the successful completion of formal Phase Two
field validation tests of CDMA with the participation of 14 carriers
and manufacturers.  Results of the trials show increases in capacity
in excess of 10 times the current analog system, as well as
improvements in quality.

November 22, 1991

U.S. patent number 5,056,109 is awarded to the company for its     method
of controlling transmission power in CDMA digital cellular systems.

October 7, 1991

QUALCOMM announces availability of its CDMA Application Specific
Integrated Circuit (ASIC) chip set.  The ASIC's are offered to
manufacturers under licensing agreement.

August 29, 1991

U.S. West NewVector Group joins the CDMA field trial evaluation team.

August 7, 1991

OKI telecom, a participant in the CDMA field trials, signs a licensing
agreement with QUALCOMM for CDMA technology.

July 31, 1991

Formal Phase Two field validation trials of CDMA technology begin.

July 25, 1991

Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems, Inc. signs on as a CDMA field trial
evaluation team member.

July 23, 1991

Toronto-based Bell Cellular announces they will participate in     CDMA
field trials.

July 17, 1991

GTE Telecommunications joins as a member of the CDMA field trial
evaluation team.

May 23, 1991

The Korean Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute
(ETRI) and QUALCOMM sign a joint development agreement     valued at $17
million to develop digital cellular network and subscriber equipment
using CDMA technology.

May 10, 1991

Alpine/Alps Electric and QUALCOMM create joint venture to manufacture,
market and distribute CDMA digital cellular telephones and other
wireless products worldwide.

[ lots of early development here... ]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marida Ignacio)
Subject: International Telephone Dialing
Organization: trunking_fixed
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 16:49:56 GMT


Does anyone know of a compilation, a telephony handbook, or any book
that contains _telephone dialing plans_ all over the world (ie. North
America - 1+/0+, 411, 611,911, area code, etc.; Mexico - 91+ for LD,
95+ for US, 98+ for international?; etc.)?

I have to make a design proposal for the telephone interface/product I
handle at work to improvise a control/restriction per subscriber on
top of the different dialing plans all over but it should be flexible
enough to be usable and non-restricting for international market.
Currently, this product is structured mainly for North American
dialing standard and this has been causing restrictions and
prohibitions when configured as so and utilized in other parts of the
world.

Upon grasping the 'jungle' of plans out there, this would help me
establish a very flexible (and maybe simple) design that can be
feasible and can easily be implemented for my product.

Thanks for any help.

Marida ([e-mail])

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 05:38:44 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Intelligent Telephone Boards/Boxes


We are looking for some telephone interfaces (boards/boxes) to hook up
to a computer which will be running one of Unix/DOS/Mac.

We want to be able to communicate with a database on the computer
using DTMF and the telephone interface.  It would be nice if the
telephone interface came with a set of library routines (preferably in
C++) which we could use to write our own programs.

We would also like to be able to record and playback voice using the
computer's hard disk for storage.

Does anyone here have any experience with, or knowledge of, any
products which might meet our needs?


Thanks,

Monty

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

From: infmx![e-mail] (Rod Kline)
Subject: Overview of Telephone Network Wanted
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 22:24:59 GMT


I am attempting to get an overview of the telephone network in the
United States. I am hoping someone out there can point me to a good
source of information. The most ideal overview would describe the
connections necessary for a call to make if from a home in California
to a business in New York or Washington. I am trying to understand how
calls are routed to the different long distance carriers, what things
are different in the prime long distance carriers, and key technology
necessary for our current system.

Please respond to [e-mail]

Thanks for any help.


Rod Kline

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 07:44:38 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Contel Cellular Offer in VT


I was listening to the radio the other day (it was an accident, I
assure you!) and heard an adversisement for Contel Cellular, the `B'
side carrier here in (at least Northern) Vermont.  (I'd love to know
how it is that Contel got the `B' license rather than NETel,
considering their comparative landline service areas.  The `A' side is
a Cell One franchise.)  What they are offering is free airtime on
weekends for six months, to all customers who sign up for full-year
contract before the end of this month.

Now I don't even want a pager, never mind a cell phone, but since I
haven't heard of this particular gimmick before, I thought Digest
readers might be interested in it, even though none of you live
here.  :-)


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl W Neihart)
Subject: Small, PC-Based PBX?
Date: 21 Apr 1993 17:35:29 GMT
Organization: Sunquest Information Systems Inc., Tucson


I am looking for a very small, inexpensive PBX and voice mail system
to be used for a small office of about 20 people.

Something with a max of 24 lines and four trunks or similar would be
ideal.  It would also be nice if it were a card that went into a
dedicated PC, and controlled by software running in Windows.

Does anyone know of a company that makes such a beast?


Regards,

carl neihart 4/21/93    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 11:23:06 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: "From" Data in Orange Card Bill


There was an earlier blurb from me about the bill I got for the Orange
Card.  I have mentioned that sometimes I read the data from the FROM
portion of the call detail, and I only got a three-letter descriptor
for some sort or region in the single Orange Card bill I have received
at this writing.  I previously mentioned making an occasional trip on
unfamiliar roads and making phone calls along the way and then
checking the FROM data, and the Orange Card bill does not seem to
supply this.  But I am using the Orange Card from places whose phone
prefixes I am already familiar with.

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 18:20:42 -0700
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Fraud: Outright Thievery!


We've all heard of toll fraud as a way to steal telecommunications
resources.  Now the crooks have escalated the ante.  I've heard of a
report of a company on the East Coast that was having some minor
troubles with their PBX.  A technician showed up at the door and asked
for directions to the PBX closet.  Since they had been having some
trouble, the company showed this person the way without checking any
credentials.  About five minutes later, the phones went completely
dead.  Of course, they went up to the PBX closet, and found that
several boards from the PBX had been yanked out of the main cabinet,
and that the 'repairman' had taken flight out the back door.  I guess
there must be money to be made in 'aftermarket' system boards for
popular PBX's.  I wonder how many large sites have this risk in their
disaster recovery plans?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Firms would be well advised to keep their telecom
facilities room under lock and key, with only one or two employees
authorized to unlock and remain in the premises while work is going on
anytime a 'different person than the regular guy' comes out from the
vendor to do repairs.  And don't hesitate to ask for ID or call the
vendor to confirm the person's identity who is there.   PAT]

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

From: ikotin@nmelh9 (Mike Ikotin)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID Devices
Organization: NorThern Telecom, Australia
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 22:51:50 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

> Tad Cook asks about Caller-ID devices. Well I have two and both
> connect to my PC for call filtering. The first was purchased about a
> year ago and is aptly named "Whozz Calling" and came from a copmany in
> Atlanta.  It consists of a box with rj-11 in, rj-11 out and a serial
> cable for the PC.

> When a call comes in a database is queried and if accepted a signal is
> sent back to the box to let the call through to the "out" rj-11. If
> not in the db or marked "do not answer", the calling party just hears
> unending rings. This cost about $80.00 US.

> The other is a Supra 14,4 FAX Modem that I paid just under $300 for (I
> understand that they have an internal for $200 now and a 2400 baud for
> less).  $20 US puchased the optional Caller-ID ROM and I wrote a
> PROCOMM + .ASP file to do essentially the same as the above.

> I also have a Gemini box purchased for $35 US at Home Depot that just
> records/displays the time and number.

In Australia, we are just exploring the allowing of CLI to be passed
to households and busineeses. Now the product you described,
specifically the 'box' and 'modem' arrangment is no where to be seen
around here.  But more of interest, is the 'database' product, which
you describe. Can you possibly elaborate on the product, features,
cost and availiability as it sounds like a good concept, which I'd
like to look at for the future down here.

I especially agree with your comments on CO based call screening and
the costs, and my issue with all this is the time we have taken in
Australia to implement such functionality.


Later,

Mike Ikotin    NorTel ( NT ) Australia
DID: 613 206 4655   Internet: [e-mail]
These views are my own, not of my employer at all.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #270
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03145;
          22 Apr 93 5:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02566
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 22 Apr 1993 02:45:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17347
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 22 Apr 1993 02:45:00 -0500
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 02:45:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #271

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 22 Apr 93 02:45:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 271

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Need PD IXO Pager Software For PC - Clarification (James J. Menth)
    Re: Need Computer Interface to a Pager (Brad Houser)
    Re: Radio Transmitter Information Needed (Al Stangenberger)
    Re: Radio Transmitter Information Needed (Yuxing Tian)
    Re: Wireless City (Larry Svec)
    Re: Bell of PA A/C Split - Work Effort (Syd Weinstein)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (james.j.menth)
Subject: Re: Need PD IXO Pager Software For PC - Clarification
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 13:06:43 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Dub Dublin <hwdub@hou281.
chevron.com> writes:

> Thanks for checking, but I had already checked the archives.  The only
> thing there for the IXO/TAP protocol (at least that I could find) is
> the same tpage program I'm already using on UNIX (but without the
> fixes that will let it work reliably -- it kind of sucks as
> distributed), a HyperCard IXO/TAP program, and a description of the
> IXO/TAP protocol.

> I don't really want to roll my own here -- I was searching to see if
> someone on the Net has already written such a program FOR THE _PC_.
> Unless you have another suggestion, please post this note to the net
> and lets see if we can find something out there to do this job!

Pat:

Sorry for the length but feel free to trim as necessary.  Here is a
copy of the README file for a MS-Windows based IXO (TAP) paging
package available free to end users (I got mine by return email) It
works fine and has a cute icon included in the .exe.  Note that
not-for-profit unmodified distribution is allowed.

Jim at Little Rock  [e-mail]

                    --------------------
v0.95

                             swIXO
                 by RTFM UN*X SOLUTIONS and
                         beachSystems

                        copyright 1992
               Robert Swirsky and Steven Warner


Swixo is designed to enable you to easily and quicky send text
messages to alpanumeric pagers.

Some paging systems disallow "manual" mode of page entry, only
permitting IXO messages, presumably to discourage users from not using
expensive messaging services.

Swixo uses IXO protocol, so you should be able to use
it on any system.

IF YOU ARE UPGRADING FROM A PREVIOUS VERSION OF SWIXO, PLEASE
DELETE SWIXO.EXE AND SWIXO.IXO FILES BEFORE RUNNING THE PROGRAM.


0. AS-IS, No Warranty, License to use.

Swixo belongs to RTFM UN*X solutions and beachSystems. You are granted
a license to use the software, provided to do not modify anything, and
you do not sell it.  You may distribute it to others, and are
encouraged to do so.  You may register with us for the enhanced
version.

DO NOT modify the .ZIP file or the 'authenticity flags' will be reset.

Swixo is used entirely at YOUR OWN RISK. There is no warranty of any
kind, either express or implied.  If any law excludes us from
providing software to you in this manner, then the license to use is
VOID, and you must not use swIXO.

1. SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

swIXO will operate on any machine that is running Microsoft
Windows, version 3.1.

swIXO requires a serial port, with a connected modem.  Some
knowledge of your modems setup commands will be helpful.

2. SOFTWARE INSTALLATION

The distribution disk contains a .ZIP file, which when UNZIPPED should
have given an authenticity notice.  If it did not, then do not use
swixo.  See #0 above.

To install swIXO, create a directory for swIXO on your hard disk, and
copy the file swixo.exe, which was created from the .ZIP file.

Start windows, and add swIXO to a program manager group, using NEW ...

Start swXIO by double-clicking on the icon.  swIXO will automatically
create the file SWIXO.IXO, which contains setup information and other
runtime parameters.  You may delete the file SWIXO.IXO, to return
swIXO to default settings later.

3. GETTING GOING

swIXO requires a modem and serial port.  Modem cards should work okay,
but are untested.  The free version of swIXO only supports COM1: and
COM2:

The first time you run swIXO, you must use the SETTINGS ... menu
choice to define your system to swIXO.

The default settings should work okay.  If your modem has any funky
strings that need be sent, then put them here.

When you are done with this screen, click OK.

RS-232 settings:

Baud rate - Select the baud rate that swIXO should use to talk to your
modem.  If your modem uses a fixed DTE, then go ahead and use 9600.
In this case you will need to add commands to the dial string that
tell your modem to dial at 300 or 1200 baud.

Most paging systems use 300 baud.  Some use 1200.  Experiment
here and see what works best for you.

Some paging system modems will get upset if your modem tries to
negotiate an error free connection, and/or compression.  (MNP3,4,5,
LAP-M, V42.bis) etc..  You might have better luck if you initially put
strings to temporairly disable these features into the dial string.

     On a Hayes modem this is commonly &Q0, and on a multi-tech
 modem, use &E0.

 Word Length, Stop Bits, Parity.  Leave these at 7 bits, 1
 stop bit and even parity.  This is what most paging systems
 like to see.  These settings are provided in case your
 situation is unusual.

Modem Control:

 RESET: The sequence of characters that swIXO needs to send
 to get your modem to reset.  If you modem does not need to
 be reset, or if dropping DTR will reset your modem, then
 leave this field BLANK.  This text is automatically terminated
 with a C/R.

 use a tilde  ~  to add a one second delay.

 If your modem becomes busy after sending reset or dropping
 dtr, add tildes ~ to make swIXO wait for the modem to become
 ready again.

 DIAL PREFIX: The characters you want swIXO to send before the
 telephone number in the dial string.  We use ATV1Q0 as a default,
 which uses tone dialing, and verbose word responces.

 USE ATH0 TO HANGUP: Check this box if your modem will not hangup
 upon loss of DTR.

 GIVE UP TIME: Put the amount of time that swixo should wait for
 carrier, and the paging system.  40-60 seconds is about right.

Modem reply strings:

 CONNECT: The string your modem sends when it receives carrier.

 BUSY: The string your modem sends when the line is busy.

 FAIL: The string your modem send if it never gets carrier.


4. SENDING PAGES

To send pages, make sure you did the SETTINGS ... (#3) at least
once since you installed swIXO.

On the swXIO main screen is a picture of an ADVISOR pager.  Click
anyplace on the pager to send a page.

The ENTER PAGE dialog will pop up, and provide you with some options.

The Message to send area is where you type the text that you want to
be transmitted to the pager.  If you are sending to a POCSAG pager,
you may use upper and lower case, along with most punctuation.  If
your pager is GSC, you may use only UPPER case, and limited
punctuation.

See appendix for pager identifications.

You may enter up to 199 characters into the message screen.  Note:
some paging systems may impose limits less than this.

The PAGER ID box is where you put the digital address of tha pager you
wish to transmit to.  Your paging company will provide you with this
number.  Sometimes this number is identical to the telephone number
used to send NUMERIC only pages to this pager.

PAGING SYSTEM PHONE #: This is the dial-in phone number that your
paging service has provided to allow modem entry of alpha pages.  It
is usually the same number for everyone on the system.  Your paging
company will provide this number for you.

PAGER TYPE POCSAG/GSC: Check the radio button indicating the
type of pager you are sending to.  Use GSC if you don't know
(or care).  If you want to use lowercase and punctuation, you
might want to experament.  See the appendix.

CLEAR: Will erase the message text area.

SAVE DEFAULT:  Press this button to save the contents of this
screen as the default.  Very handy if you send pages to the
same person most of the time.

RECALL:  A cool, handy feature that will cause swIXO to fill
out the ENTER PAGE screen in the same way as the last 10 pages.
This will allow you review pages and send one again easily.
try it!

CANCEL: Close this window and return to the main swixo screen.

OK, SEND PAGE: Swixo will send your page when you press this.
You will see dialog messages that describe the process,
and complain when something goes wrong.

When your page is accepted, swIXO will reply with
'PAGE SUCCESSFUL'.


5. PROBLEMS:

 ---MODEM WON'T DIAL---

Be sure you have used the settings screen to set up all RS232
parameters for your modem.  Be sire settings are correct, and that
cables are okay.

Be sure your RESET string has enough delay in it so that your modem is
READY when dialing begins.

 ---CANNOT LOG INTO PAGING SERVICE---

Be sure you are using the correct paging system phone number.

Disable error correction and compression on your modem.

Try using 300 baud.

Your paging system may have a password on it.  Swixo does not support
passwords in this release.


  ---MODEM WON'T HANG UP---

We strongly suggest you set your modem to hang up with DTR.  If you
absolutely cannot do this, check the ATH0 box in the RS232 settings
section of SETTINGS ...

 ---PAGE IS INCOMPLETE---

You may have a GSC pager, and are sending with POCSAG checked.
Check the GSC button.

Your paging system may have the MAX character limit set to less than
199.  Send fewer characters.


A. Appendix A

GSC or POCSAG.

        GSC: Golay Sequential Code.

        POCSAG: Post Office Code Standard Advisory Group.

        (who thought of this stuff??)

It is difficult to tell which is better, GSC or POCSAG, unless you
like reading UPPERCASE LETTERS and no punctuation.  GSC is UPPERCASE
only, and seems to be popular with paging companies because it is
faster to transmit in batch mode..

If you have a MOTOROLA ADVISOR, look on the back for the model number
of your pager. It usually starts with A05 or A03.  (A05 means 5-year
warranty by the way, dunno anout A03).

The 8th character in your model number will tell you POCSAG/GSC.

Example:

        A03KLB5662AA
               ^

If the 8th character is 3 or 9, POCSAG.
                             6, GSC.

The example is a GSC pager.


B. TECH SUPPORT

Swixo comes with NO technical support.  We will however be happy to
assist you by email with your problems or questions.

Since this is a beta release, your comments and input are particularly
welcome.

Please email your technical questions and input to:  [e-mail]


C. REGISTER!

If you would like to register your copy of swIXO, you may send $20 to:

S Warner
RTFM/ BeachSystems
35451 Dumbarton Ct.
Newark, CA 94560

Please email for availability.

Registered users will receive the latest copy when available, and the
enhanced copy when available.

The enhanced copy will have an improved page database, and pager
management features such as ENABLE and DISABLE a pager.


D. MUMBO JUMBO

Motorola and Advisor are trademarks of Motorola.

Microsoft, Microsoft Windows, MS Windows are trademarks of Mircosoft
corporation.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Need Computer Interface to a Pager
Organization: Intel CTD
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 15:09:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Will
Estes) writes:

> Does anyone know of a way to interface a computer to a pager?  I need
> some way that the pager data can be sent to a computer instead of to
> human via a pager.  Maybe there is a board that slips into a computer?

> The actual application for this is that a windmeter is going to send
> wind data every hour to a pager number, which will then get read by an
> Internet-attached host and fed by email to interested parties.

Maybe I am missing something, but:

Why not have the windmeter dial the computer directly?


Brad Houser          Intel Corporation        [e-mail] >>>

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 09:02:51 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Al Stangenberger)
Subject: Re: Radio Transmitter Information Needed


I know of two manufacturers of radio telemetry equipment for wildlife.
Both are quite good according to our researchers, and can build
equipment for anything from mice to elephants.

Telonics
932 E. Impala Drive
Mesa, AZ 85204-6699
[phone]

ABM Instrument Co.
2356 Research Drive
Livermore, CA 94550
[phone]


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

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

Date: Wed, 21 Apr 93 16:18:26 -0500
From: Yuxing Tian <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Radio Transmitter Information Needed


Thank you very much. You guys are really kind.


Yuxing Tian
Computer Science student   DePaul University


[Moderator's Note: That's what the net is about: people helping others
to find the answers they are seeking. Telecom-related questions are
welcome from all here: this Digest is reserved neither for the highly
technical telecom person nor the novice. The telecom mailing list has
readers from both ends of the spectrum. Between myself and the far
more technical readers, almost all telecom questions are answerable
here and welcomed.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Larry Svec)
Subject: Re: Wireless City
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 21:55:20 GMT


How cost effective is such an approach?  Aren't those frequencies in
the IMTS Telephone/Paging band thus limiting the total available
channels, and if so, what does that do to the 500 subscriber limit?
Can it send fax or data?


Larry Svec - KD9OF
home: 708-526-1256   e-mail: uunet!motcid!svecl  VHF: 145.150-
work: 708-632-5259      fax: [phone]        UHF: 443.575+

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

From: [e-mail] (Syd Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Bell of PA A/C Split - Work Effort
Date: 21 Apr 1993 14:45:04 -0400
Organization: Datacomp Systems, Inc., Huntingdon Valley, PA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (David Horvath) writes:

> I got a telephone call today from a contract programming broker in the
> Philadelphia Pennsylvania area. Bell of Pennsylvania (a Bell Atlantic
> company) is looking for seven to thirteen IBM mainframe assembly and
> COBOL programmers.  According to the broker, the additional staff
> needs are due to the area code split in the area.

> From our brief conversation, it seemed like they needed seven people
> yesterday and another six in the very near future.  Any ideas why the
> heavy needs?

Bell of PA does billing for themselves and many of the LD outfits
under contract.  They need to modify those 'dumb' billing apps to
handle the 'free calling across A/C' stuff that will come into play.
I am sure there were lots of 'assumptions' in the original code that
the new split will destroy.


Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP          Elm Coordinator - Current 2.4PL21
Datacomp Systems, Inc.                 Projected 3.0 Release: ??? ?,1994
[e-mail] or dsinc!syd      Voice: [phone], FAX: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #271
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08869;
          22 Apr 93 19:55 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11086
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 22 Apr 1993 16:57:45 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11187
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 22 Apr 1993 16:57:10 -0500
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 16:57:10 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #272

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 22 Apr 93 16:57:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 272

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries ([e-mail])
    Re: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required (Dave Bonney)
    Re: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required ([e-mail])
    Re: Cell Rate Plans (Lynne Gregg)
    Ordering Information for ISDN Application Catalog (Steve Rogers)
    OCPZ1 - Still Another AT&T Plan ([e-mail])
    Information Request: Telecom Benchmarking Consortium (Barry Friedman)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 14:35:01 GMT


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

> David Feldman, author of "Why Do Clocks Run Clockwise?" and other
> Imponderables books, is asking for help with several telephone-related
> mysteries for his next book.  Can anyone offer knowledgable assistance
> with any of the following?

Sure, I'll take a crack.  Some of these I'm sure of (and may, given
sufficient time and energy, be able to document); others are
hypotheses.

However, if anyone wins $10,000 on Jeopardy because they use my
answers, I want a cut ...

> 1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company buildings?

Two reasons, I can think of.  One, security: it's harder to break into
a windowless building.  Two, climate control: windows do not insulate
as well as solid wall; more importantly, windows pass sunlight which
heats inside air, and the last thing you need in a telco CO is more
heat.

(Hypothesis, but I might be able to find something in NEBS to back it
up.)

> 2) How were area codes assigned? The most populous areas seem to have the
> lowest numbers, but is there any geographic logic?

The North American Numbering Plan was introduced in 1947, when a great
deal of the interoffice signaling (as well as all the customer loop
signaling) used dial pulses.  Dial pulse is like "rotary dialing" on a
telephone -- a "1" sends one pulse, a "2" sends two pulses, and so on
up to 10 pulses for a "0".  Therefore, the amount of time taken to
signal an address is directly proportional to the sum of the digits of
the address (with 0 = 10) (as opposed to MF signaling, where the
amount of time taken to signal an address is directly proportional to
the *number* of digits in the address, or common-channel signaling,
where the amount of time taken to signal and address is independent of
the address).  The lower the sum of the digits, the less time taken to
signal the address, and the less usage of network facilities for
signaling.

Therefore, to make the most efficient use of the network, those
Numbering Plan Areas having the most incoming traffic were assigned
the Numbering Plan Area Codes (area codes) with the fewest dial pulses
required: New York = 212 (five pulses), LA = 213, Chicago = 312 (six
pulses), Dallas = 214, Detroit = 313, Pittsburgh = 412 (seven pulses)
(keep in mind we're talking 1947 here...), and so on.  I don't know
for certain how "deep" the Bell System went into this -- whether they
used a strict allocation for all NPAs, or only for the few most
heavily used - but knowing how we used to operate around here, I would
not be surprised to find a strong negative correlation between 1945-46
traffic volumes and sum of area code digits ...

(Some of this can be referenced in EOBS (Engineering and Operations in
the Bell System); other parts would require more digging ...)

> 3) Why were the old crank phones (at least as depicted in movies) placed
> so high on the wall the users stretched to reach them.

No idea.

> 4) Why do marketers sometimes have one 800 number nationally and another
> within their own area?

Welcome to the wonderful world of telecom regulation. Intrastate and
interstate telecommunications are regulated by different agencies --
intrastate by the 50 individual state utility commissions, and
interstate by the FCC.  In some states, long distance companies are
prohibited by law from providing intraLATA (local) services; only the
local telephone company is permitted to provide these services.
However, the local telephone companies are prohibited by the terms of
the AT&T divestiture agreement from providing interLATA (long
distance) services.

Therefore, if a company wants to provide an 800 number for both local
and distant customers, they have to get 800 service from two different
providers -- the local telco and a long distance company.  As of today
(for the next week or so, anyway), these must be different 800
numbers.

The famous "800 Number Portability" regulation, which takes effect May
1, will enable companies to have a single 800 number which is handled
by different companies based on such factors as time of day, calling
location, and so on, so we may see this quirk disappearing over time.

(This would require some digging to get all the correct references,
but I'm sure they're out there.)

> 5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the phone
> companies money?

This will draw the usual run of "no, it's just a telco's way to suck
more money out of people", but there is *some* justification.

Subscribing to telephone service is a highly automated process.  As
with any highly automated processes, doing anything "different" from
the default will add an incremental cost.  For telephone service, the
default is to put the number into the directory listing.  Not putting
the number into the directory listing requires something *different*
to be done in any number of automated systems.  The order entry system
has to have a "non-published" flag which the service rep has to enter.
The non-pub flag has to propagate to the work order system, to the
directory services bureau (directory assistance) system, to the system
that generates the paper directory, and to any number of other
systems.  All of these systems have to be developed by someone, and
the incremental cost of development to support non-published numbers
has to be recovered.

So I would claim the answer is "yes, it does cost the phone companies
money, but whether it costs as much as they charge for is a question
that I'm not going to go near."

As to references, well, I'm sure there are any number of tariff
filings with detailed economic justifications of charges for
non-published numbers, but I'm certainly not going to try to read
them ...

>6) Why do telephone poles extend far above the highest wire or crosspiece?

My hypothesis would be that it is to provide room for adding more
wires or crosspieces, especially in the days before carrier systems
(multiplexing) and fiber.  However, I don't know for certain.

>7) Where do utilities get telephone poles? Are they from special logs? Are
> there particular specifications?

I know the answer to the second and third questions are "yes", but I
don't know the details.  However, a quick check of my Bellcore
document catalog reveals a document entitled "Wood Utility Poles
Generic Requirements", TR-NWT-000060, Issue 2, July 1991: "This
Technical Reference contains Bellcore's view of criteria, technical
background, general information and proposed generic requirements for
wood telephone poles best suited to meet the typical needs of an
Operating Telephone Company."  Cost is $36.00; order by calling
1-800-521-CORE (1-800-521-2673).  In addition to the information,
Bellcore TRs generally have the name of a contact at Bellcore who can
provide more information, so I'm sure that by ordering this you can
track down probably the most knowledgeable person in the United States
on the subject of telephone poles.


David G Lewis         AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation


[Moderator's Note: Originally the idea behind two 800 numbers (on for
in-state and one for out of state) was not that two carriers had to be
involved; it was only AT&T involved -- they were the only 800 suppliers
in the old days. It did have to do with the intra/inter-lata tariff
however. Calls which arrived intra-state had to be billed at one price
and calls from interstate at another price. I believe the equipment in
those days required two separate numbers to do this. Likewise if a
customer wanted 'banded' service (incoming calls only from a certain
WATS band (one through six were interstate with one being closest to
you and six being furthest away; band seven was the very local area
and band eight was intrastate) they had to have different numbers for
each band. That's the way the CO and billing offices could deal with
it.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 10:28:45 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 269 James M. Turner wrote:

>> 5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the phone
>> companies money?

> There is probably some minor administrative costs associated with it,
> since they have to flag them in the company database so that they are
> not printed or given out by directory assistance.  But the basic
> answer is no, since many BOCs will not list the second number coming
> into a home (the data line, for example) as long as the primary number
> IS listed.  It's a phone company moneymaker, pure and simple.

In NYTel land, a primary number can be unlisted or listed.  It makes
no nevermind to them as long as there is a legitimate billing name and
address.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 11:05:33 CST


[e-mail] (James Gleick) wrote:

> 5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the phone
> companies money?

I believe that phone companies will sell their white pages listing on
magnetic media to companies (telemarketers, most likely) ... the more
names in the book, the more money the electronic version is worth ...
so, in a way, an unlisted number does cost them money, because the
white pages are worth less.


Brett    ([e-mail])

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

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 15:27:42 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Bonney)
Subject: Re: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required


In <[e-mail]> was written:

> [a FAX product...] We would like to be able to produce a version for
> the North American market, but I think we are rather spoiled by the
> simple area code system which (in most European countries) years of

Having lived in Europe, I don't think I'd call it 'simple' ! :-)

> state monopoly has produced. Can anyone help me get hold of an 'idiots
> guide' to the US telephone system so we can get our product set up
> properly?

> Questions which spring to mind include:

>      When does one need to dial a '1' before a ten-digit number?

Usually, but not always.

> When does one need to dial a '1' before a seven-digit number?

Sometimes, but in some areas never.

> Is it acceptable to use ten digit numbers exclusively, even
> within one's own area?

No, although there are/were some geographical areas where this is/was
permitted.

> If a phone is connected to a private exchange, what is the
> conventional digit to obtain an outside line?

Usually it's a '9', but like any PBX, it may be almost anything.  e.g.
'8', '99', '7', '80', etc.

> Would a product such as ours be expected to explicitly choose
> a LD carrier by using prefix codes? If so, how does that
> work?

No, but it might be advisable.  I would suggest the ability to prepend
up to possibly 16 digits.  (And with a 'pause' capability.)

> How many of these things need to be configurable because they are
> liable to vary from state to state for example?

All.   See the Moderators Note.

> Well, that's a rough description of my problem. Can anyone help? Is
> there perhaps a few pages in a US phone directory which describe the
> procedures that someone might be able to fax to me?

> [Moderator's Note: Unfortunatly things are not yet totally
> standardized in the USA regards when and when not to use 1+ on long
> distance and/or inter/intra LATA calls. The front pages of any given

And probably never will be totally standardized.  Also:- As long as
you may be working behind a PBX, allow for non-standardization!

> telephone book would give instructions peculiar to that location. The
> general rule -- although as noted, exceptions exist -- is that you
> either dial seven digits or you dial 1 plus ten digits. In the Telecom

It's becoming truer, but not a 'general rule'.

> Archives, some files of interest will be 'areacode.guide', 'history.
> of.area.splits' and others with 'area' or 'npa' as the first word.  PAT]


Regards,

David A. Bonney  <--->    Telephone [phone]  <--- ]
dab    [ A Telecommunications Professional Now Unemployed In Westford MA ]
    [No Employer, No Disclaimer.    Just My Own Thoughts.          ]
    [  Inquiries to MCIMail 422-4552 or Internet <[e-mail]>  ]
    [      With a guest account at <[e-mail]>      ]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 11:06:44 CST


Carl Moore writes:

> As far as I know, you can always insert a 1 before a 10 digit number.
> This would even be true in published instructions which tell you to
> dial area code + 7 digits (i.e. may omit leading 1):

>> Is it acceptable to use ten digit numbers exclusively, even
>> within one's own area?

> I doubt it.  That setup does appear with the Orange Card (noted

You cannot ALWAYS insert a 1 before a ten digit number ... in some
places, the rule "1 means toll and the abscense of 1 means non-toll"
is enforced strictly, and so if you have a number in a different NPA
that is non-toll, you can't dial 1 first.  (I believe Omaha, NE is one
such place. They are in 402, and Council Bluffs, IA is in a different
area code but is a local call ... I'm fairly sure that their switches
reject 1+712+XXXXXXX (I think 712 is the Council Bluffs area code ...
It's been a while since I was in Omaha).

Also, your doubts about ten digits always working are confirmed ... In
both Omaha, NE and St. Louis MO (And countless other places, no
doubt), calls to the same NPA must NOT use ten digits.

There places enforce a 'one and only one way to call a number' dialing
plan :) (Unless, of course, you count 10XXX codes).


Brett   ([e-mail])

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cell Rate Plans
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 08:10:00 PDT


Garrett Wollman wrote:

> I haven't heard of this particular gimmick before, I thought Digest
> readers might be interested in it, even though none of you live
> here.  :-)

Free cell airtime on weekends and other off-peak times is  not uncommon.
Not offered in all areas, though. Check with your carriers and ask for the
most favorable rate packages.


Lynne

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

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 16:20:30 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Rogers)
Subject: Ordering Information for ISDN Application Catalog
Organization: EDS Technology Architecture, Dallas


North American ISDN Users' Forum Catalog of ISDN Applications

       "A Catalog of National ISDN Solutions for Selected NIUF
Applications" was approved by the North American ISDN Users' Forum
(NIUF) Plenary in February 1993.

       The catalog provides a user-friendly description of 34
solutions fully implementable on the National ISDN - 1 platform and 4
PRI based solutions implementable in a proprietary manner in NI-1 or
in a standard manner in NI-2.  It also contains the most complete
compendium to date of available National ISDN-1 terminal equipment.
Fully more than 120 products from 60 suppliers are described in the
document.

       The Catalog takes a "cookbook" approach.  A brief description
of the application is followed by a recipe of what type of equipment
the user needs to purchase along with what type of service the user
needs to order from his or her local service provider.  The solutions
are cross-referenced to suppliers who claim to support them with
equipment.  This allows the user to readily pursue the implementation
of his or her critical applications.  In addition, the Catalog
provides technical notes and hints for implementation of the National
ISDN based solutions.

"A Catalog of National ISDN Solutions for Selected NIUF Applications"
can be ordered from the National Technical Information Services (see
below) or you can download the catalog by anonymous ftp as follows:

ftp isdn.ncsl.nist.gov

User name:  anonymous
passwd:  "you can type any password"
cd niucatalog
dir
get "filename of the file you want"

File niudoc.sit.hqx and niudoc.sit are the same files, but
niudoc.sit.hqx is a bin hex file.  .sit, .cdr, and .niu files must be
downloaded as binary files.  The catalog was produced on a Macintosh
with Microsoft Word 4.0.  The .cdr and .niu files were created with
CorelDraw and WordPerfect 5.1.

Before printing the Macintosh file, you need to "unpack" the file.
This is done by using a Shareware package called, sit or unsit.  This
package can be found on the following machine:

              WUARCHIVE.WUSTL.EDU

ftp wuarchive.wustl.edu

User name:    anonymous
passwd:       "your user@machine"

directory:    mirrors/rascal.ics.utexas.edu/compression
file:         stuffit_1.5.1

If you have questions or problems with the document please contact:

                Dawn Hoffman
                National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
                North American ISDN Users' Forum (NIUF) Secretariat
                Bldg 223, Rm. B364   Gaithersburg, MD  20899
                301-975-2937    FAX:  [phone]
                email:  [e-mail]

To order a paper or fiche copy of the catalog, please contact:

                National Technical Information Services
                5285 Port Royal Road
                Springfield, VA 22161
                General Information:  703-487-4650
                Ordering Information:  1-800-553-6847
                FAX: [phone]

                NTIS Order Number PB93-162881
                Hard Copy:   $44.50
                Microfiche:  $17.50


Steve Rogers  [e-mail]
EDS   Dallas, Texas

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 22 Apr 93 11:41:38 GMT
Subject: OCPZ1 - Still Another AT&T Plan


John C. Fowler <[e-mail]> wrote re: Still Another New
AT&T Plan:

>> There's no code on my original introductory letter, but they did print
>> A similar code on my confirmation letter.  In my case, it's:

>> C16 303 545 xxxx Y  078 VE1B VEW  ATL OCPZ1 ATL  L68 E

The three digit code after the NPA-NXX-LINE # is usually a Customer
Code.

The OCPZ1 stands for Optional Calling Plan (OCP).  Z1 = Simple Savings
Plan

Simple Savings Plan allows you to pick one NPA you call "MOST" often
and gives you a 25% discount.  Plus a 15% discount on all other area
codes in the US.

For a more detailed description, or further information, one should
call the AT&T residence service center at 1-800-222-0300.


Dave

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

From: Barry (B.L.) Friedman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Request: Telecom Benchmarking Consortium
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 15:21:59 GMT


[Moderator's Note: Mr. Friedman passed along this request from
Colin McRae.  PAT]

Does anyone have any contact names for the 'Telecommunications
Benchmarking Consortium'. I am told that it consists of approximately 18
companies -- including AT&T, MCI and Ameritech.


Colin McRae
Manager, Global Product Performance - Support Platform

   PHONE: [phone]  ESN: 395 4006
     FAX: [phone]  ESN: 395 2518
     FAX: [phone]  ESN: 395 4060

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #272
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26334;
          23 Apr 93 4:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29091
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 23 Apr 1993 01:41:34 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32031
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 23 Apr 1993 01:41:01 -0500
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 01:41:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #273

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 23 Apr 93 01:41:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 273

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Another Kevin Poulsen Indictment (Ronald Marks)
    Rochester Tel Discusses Call Return (Don Wegeng)
    Found! Dos -> AlphaNumeric Pager Software [non-Windows] (Anne Mitchell)
    Faxmail Service in Manhattan (NYTel 212 Territory) ([e-mail])
    Looking For Serial/SCSI/SBUS DID Capable FAX Modem (Sam Lipson)
    Did I Get Slammed? (Russell Kroll)
    ATM Information (Sean Stanek)
    ATM, the Ambiguous TLA (Todd Inch)
    ATM vs. FDDI vs. Fast Ethernet (Christina Lee)
    SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Justin Fidler)
    NTT Telephone Cards: How do They Work? (Anand Datragailda)
    Talk Tickets: New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom (TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Tony Waddell)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Tim Schmitt)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Brian T. Vita)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 12:05:36 -0600
From: [e-mail] (RONALD MARKS)
Subject: Another Kevin Poulsen Indictment
Reply-To: [e-mail]


     Computer hacker indicted; two others plead guilty

     A federal indictment was unsealed Wednesday against a computer
hacker accused of rigging radio station promotional contests and
compromising law enforcement investigations.

     The 19-count federal indictment charges Kevin L. Poulsen, 27, of
Los Angeles with computer fraud, interception of wire communications,
mail fraud, money laundering and obstruction of justice.

      Poulsen was featured on the television show "Unsolved
Mysteries" after skipping bail for a separate San Francisco
indictment that charged him with illegally retaining secret Defense
Department documents.

     Ronald M. Austin, 29, and Justin T. Petersen, 32, both of Los
Angeles, pleaded guilty to computer fraud charges for their role in
rigging giveaway contests by radio stations.

     Assistant U.S. Attorney David Schindler said the trio used
computers to seize incoming telephone lines to ensure they would be
the correct callers to the stations.

     During a two-year period, the three defendants fraudulently won
two Porsches, $22,000 in cash, and two trips to Hawaii from three
different radio stations, he said.

    Poulsen also is charged with using his computer skills to attempt
to access sensitive government files and setting up his own wiretaps
to record private conversations.

     He also allegedly compromised law enforcement investigations by
hacking into Pacific Bell computers to obtain information about court-
ordered wiretaps and undercover businesses operated by the FBI.

    If convicted, Poulsen faces a maximum of 100 years in prison and
$4.7 million in fines.

    Austin pleaded guilty to five counts and admitted his role in
removing computer equipment belonging to Poulsen in order to prevent
its seizure by FBI agents.

    He faces a maximum of 25 years in prison and $1 million in fines
when he is sentenced June 14.

     Petersen admitted to using computers to hack into TRW and Telenet
computer systems.

    He also detailed his participation with Poulsen, including how the
two physically broke into buildings containing Pacific Bell computers
to obtain manuals and passwords about computer operating systems.

     Petersen faces a maximum of 40 years in prison and fines of $1.5
million when he is sentenced May 3.

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Wegeng)
Subject: Rochester Tel Discusses Call Return
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Xerox Corp., Henrietta, NY
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 21:37:43 GMT


My latest bill from Rochester Telephone contained the following
message, offered without comment:

        *** Call Return Update ***

    Call Return allows a customer to return the most
    recent incoming call.  If you receive anoyance
    calls due to this service, please use CALL TRACE
    (*64) and call our Annoyance Call Bureau at
    777-5749.


Don Wegeng    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Anne P. Mitchell, JD)
Subject: Found! Dos -> AlphaNumeric Pager Software [non-Windows]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Anne P. Mitchell, J.D.)
Organization: Fathers Rights & Equality Exchange
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 22:48:48 GMT


I found a paging company which has written its own software.  The
company is MetroCall, and the software is called "MetroText".  It
retails for $29.95.

It even has a function so that you can send a page directly from your
DOS prompt.

MetroCall's # is [phone].  Ask for Bob Carpenter.  Tell him
Anne Mitchell sent you from the Internet [I told him I was going to
post about this].

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Faxmail Service in Manhattan (NYTel 212 Territory)
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 20:52:39 GMT


Hi all,

I want to know if there is a Enhanced Faxmail Mailbox service
available from NYTel/NYNex 212 area code folks. Something similar to
the Faxtra/US West Enhanced Fax offering. The Droid in the NYTel Biz
office didn't even know what enhanced fax services were.


Thanks,

Sameer

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

From: dirac![e-mail] (Sam Lipson)
Subject: Looking For Serial/SCSI/SBUS DID Capable FAX Modem
Organization: I-Kinetics, Inc., Cambridge, MA USA
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 01:00:50 GMT


I'm looking either for a "stand-alone" (e.g. serial), SCSI or SBUS
interface DID Fax Modem -- or a box which will decode the DID signals
(put the called number out an RS-232 port?), and present a nomal
telephone line interface (out, say an RJ-11) where I'd hook up my
regular FAX modem.

The specific application is routing incoming FAesX, for which I need
the called number from the trunk.

I have to believe that someone at least makes a box that allows you to
plug a normal telephone type instrument into a DID trunk, and gives
the called number via some digital interface.

DID -- Direct Inward Dial.

There are at least two PC-bus products I know of -- GammaFax CPD and
Brooktrout unfortunately the host computer for this project is a Sun.

I'll post relevant responses.


Thanks,

Sam Lipson    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Did I Get Slammed?
From: [e-mail] (Russell Kroll)
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 20:07:30 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX


Well, it looks as if I've been 'slammed' on one of our lines.  Today,
one of the people at my house attempted to place a long distance call
from 713-270 to Colorado Springs.  The result was an error message
with something like 'operator 8.  Your phone is not signed up with
American Telephone' ... and right then, there was a loud be-boop on the
line ... which repeated over and over.

We are AT&T customers on all three of our lines, and use them as the
default carrier.  No one authorized any change of long distance
provider.  Is this considered 'slamming'?  Is this legal?  And who do
I complain to?


Thanks,

[e-mail] (Russell Kroll)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, [phone]
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis


[Moderator's Note: One problem ... if the call would NOT complete
because you were NOT a customer of Company X, then it would seem you
were NOT slammed. AT&T does not refer to itself over the phone lines
as American Telephone and Telegraph -- at least not to my knowledge.
They always play the tone then say 'AT&T'. Did the person attempting
to place the call use 10-something in front of the number, producing
the mentioned result from "American Telephone" about your not being
a customer?  Had you been slammed, your call(s) would have gone
through without question ... any questions that is until you saw your
bill the following month. Had you been slammed, *some* company would
have picked up that call and processed it. Is it possible the announce-
ment came from the other end; that the person being called had call-
forwarded his line somewhere on a carrier code *he* couldn't use?  It
would be helpful to know at what point the intercept occurred (in the
midst of his dialing; after it dummy-rang once or twice in the local
switch; or after the call had set up and was processing somewhere in
Colorado City.) It would also be helpful to know if other long distance
call attempts (to other numbers) produce the same results; calls to
the same number at different times, etc. If for some reason that line
(did you try your other lines to check the results, and try the orig-
inal line a second or third time?) was 'defaulted' in error by the
local telco to 'no carrier', then generally the intercept is not from
any particular carrier, but simply 'your call cannot be completed as
dialed'.  Can you provide more specifics and further test results?  PAT]

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 17:54:53 EDT
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: ATM Information


  A friend and I are doing a research paper on ATM (Asynchronous
Transfer Mode), the new telecommunications transmission method that is
supposed to be the hot test item in development.  Through many
journels we have found lots of useful things but are still looking
for some critical information.

  We would like to know:

     When and where it was developed/first introduced (general history);
     Who developed it; and
     What future does it have in communications?

  also,

  If anyone could provide us with ANY OTHER useful information, PLEASE
post it dirrectly to the newsgroup.


Thanks A LOT (in advance),

Sean Stanek

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: ATM, the Ambiguous TLA
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 21:54:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rob
Boudrie) writes:

> If you want to find a PLUS system ATM which is near you, call
> 1-800-THE-PLUS.  You will be asked to touch tone in the area code and
> first three digits of the phone number you are calling from.  If any
> machines are near you, the recording will tell you about them.

Presumably by ATM, you mean "Automated Teller Machine".  Now that
there is some new fancy networking something (that I obviously haven't
gotten around to reading about) called "ATM", can someone (PAT?)
specify a standard/definition for us (TD/c.d.t readers), or should I
just become a more "context-sensitive" reader?

I can't wait 'til ATM's communicate via ATM's.

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

From: [e-mail] (Christina Lee)
Subject: ATM vs. FDDI vs. Fast Ethernet
Organization: NEC America, Inc. Irving, Texas
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 21:15:22 GMT


Anyone have info comparing these three besides price?  I've read bits
and pieces but nothing real informative.

I'd appreciate any info.


clee


[Moderator's Note: Automatic Teller Machines, I suppose?  I guess not
in the context of FDDI and Ethernet.  I just couldn't resist using
my Moderator privileges to toss all three of these in one issue, one
after another!  :)  Todd Inch, you think *you're* confused!  :)   PAT]

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

From: Fidler, Justin <[e-mail]>
Subject: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 17:00:00 EDT


Recently, in the Washington, D.C. area, I've noticed that a lot of
retail stores now have a device that will read the numbers from the
bottom of a check.  They all seem to have a sticker on them saying
"SCAN: Shared Check Authorization Network" When I was paying by check
the other day at a local store, when it scanned my check, all the
numbers on the bottom appeared on the display of the cash register,
then there was a pause of about four seconds, during which the registed
said "Processing ... Please Wait."

My question to Telecom readers is this: How exactly does this work?
I'm not asking about OCR, I want to know if this device is connected
to some type of network that dials up a nationwide clearinghouse with
information on each person's account, or exactly how it works?  Does
it only check that the account is valid, or does it also check the
account to see if funds are available?


Justin Fidler   [e-mail]   Opinion of author only.


[Moderator's Note: Both; all three actually. And before long, the
money will be debited right out of your account on the spot. Instant
debit is the direction things are going.   PAT]

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

From: Ops Mgr <[e-mail]>
Subject: NTT Telephone Cards - How do They Work?
Sender: [e-mail] (Anand Datragailda)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: JVNC
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 20:29:21 GMT


I recently returned from a trip to Hawaii and something that struck me
as odd was the fact that NTT Telephone cards with a Hawaiian motif
were being sold there at $15.00 a pop for 500 "credits".

What are these cards and how are they used?  Do they have a mag stripe
embedded in them?  The one I bought was real flimsy and doesn't seem
to be thick enough to harbour such a stripe.  The salesman at the
souvenir shop mentioned that when its used, the payphone will stamp
out a tiny bit of the card.

Wonder how long before this gets popular in the US.


Lee


[Moderator's Note: Hawaii *is* part of the USA, but I'm sure you meant
to say 'the mainland'. Actually, they are starting to catch on here.
AT&T's largest reseller/aggregator, US Fibercom is ironing out the
details now.  See the details in the next message.  PAT]

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

From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 00:15:00 CDT


When the largest aggregator/reseller of AT&T decides to get involved,
then you can assume a trend is probably underway.  The program, to be
known as 'Talk Tickets' will not use mag stripes. Instead, there will
be little carboard tickets, almost like bus or train tickets.  Tickets
will be available in several denominations including $5, $10 and $20
sizes. Each ticket will have a unique serial number on it. All calls
will go to an 800 number where voice prompting will tell the person to
enter their ticket number and the number they wish to call.

Furthermore, all calls with ride with Mother (of course!), and at the
800 number there will be such nice extras as your own personal speed
dialing directory, voicemail, news, and a couple other features.  The
tickets will be composed of 'units', each unit costing fifty cents.
Call anywhere in the USA at fifty cents (or one unit) for three
minutes.  If you talk six minutes, you use two units, etc.
International calls are permitted; I am not sure how many units (or
fifty cent decrements) will be required. You pay for voicemail, news
and the other features in the same way, by unit (or fifty cent)
decrements. As the cards expire in value, you can call an operator on
line who will accept your VISA/MC to load them up again ...  or you
can just buy a new card, as you wish.  Each time you call the 800
number, the computer will tell you how many units remain unused.

Now the nice part: AT&T/US Fibercom said to me they thought telecom
readers would make a nice beta-test group for this new product, so if
I would just give them my mailing lists they'd see to it that everyone
got a chance to particpate.  Nooo ... can't do that, but maybe if I'm
feeling in a good mood *I'll* talk about your tickets, I told the man,
and if I had some *sample tickets* to send readers, they'd probably be
willing to try them out before anyone else got a chance to use them,
and report back. So he is going to talk to his bosses and see if a
special-issue of $2 tickets (good for four units, or twelve minutes of
talk time or some voicemail/talk combination) could be arranged for
y'all ... at 16.7 cents per minute, that's not a bad price for
domestic calls from payphones, hotels, etc.  Plus if I understood
correctly, there will be additional discounts on volume purchases.  I
should have more details in a few days, and probably some sample cards
worth a couple dollars each. I can't say or commit to anything firm
until that time. One good thing about a program like this: fraud is
limited to the value of the ticket.  More news when I have it.  Anyone
interested in trying it out let me know; there won't be any obligations
except to write back to the Digest with your honest opinion of how well
they work, etc. Your reponses will be seen by concerned persons.


Patrick

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Waddell)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 21:13:24 GMT


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

>> 5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the phone
>> companies money?

> There is probably some minor administrative costs associated with it,
> since they have to flag them in the company database so that they are
> not printed or given out by directory assistance.  But the basic
> answer is no, since many BOCs will not list the second number coming
> into a home (the data line, for example) as long as the primary number
> IS listed.  It's a phone company moneymaker, pure and simple.

The administractive costs to keep a person's number out of the phone
book and out of directory assistance records is indeed minor.  But I
doubt that it's much of a money maker.

I used to work in the business office quite a number of years ago
(1974-1983).  At Pacific Telephone, the monthly fee for an unlisted
number was fifteen cents.  I think it's about 50 cents now.

I don't know if any studies were ever made about the true cost of an
unlisted number (to the TELEPHONE COMPANY), but I would suspect that
it exceeds the revenue brought it.  As a former service rep, I can
tell you that we spent a great deal of time explaining to callers who
wanted someone's unlisted number that we couldn't give it out, etc.
etc.  And I'm sure that operators had a much harder time with it than
service reps ever did.  Then there's always the customer who insists
it's an emergency, so the operator has to call the unlisted party and
relay a message to call the other party back.

So while the cost of an unlisted number may be negligible, I'll bet
the cost of what it causes is quite high.  Again, I'm speaking of when
it was a mere 15 cents.  Now that the fee has gone up, maybe it
creates a little profit.

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

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 18:52 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


On Thu, 22 Apr 1993 14:35:01 GMT, [e-mail]
(david.g.lewis) said:

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

>> 1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company buildings?

> Two reasons, I can think of.  One, security: it's harder to break into
> a windowless building.  Two, climate control: windows do not insulate
> as well as solid wall; more importantly, windows pass sunlight which
> heats inside air, and the last thing you need in a telco CO is more
> heat.

I rather wonder that this doesn't stem from the old AT&T attitude that
the customer doesn't need to know what's going on in the CO, or with
anything to do with telephony.

> (Hypothesis, but I might be able to find something in NEBS to back it
> up.)

Please do.  This would be interesting.


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

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

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 13:28:50 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Tim Schmitt)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


> 7) Where do utilities get telephone poles? Are they from special
> logs? Are there particular specifications?

  One of my summer jobs during college was working for J.H. Baxter, a
company which manufactures poles for utilities and telephones.
Telephone poles are typically ceder or fir, and of course, must be
pretty straight.  Telephone poles are usually 35 - 40 feet long.  10%
of the pole's height plus two feet go into the ground.  If a pole has
been treated with preservatives, some of them have a 30 year lifetime.

  At the yard, one of the favorite tricks was to send a rookie to go
fetch the "pole strecther" to "strech short poles."  Some one would
tell the rookie to go look in one corner of the yard for it, and when
he would get there, any person would tell him to go look in another
corner of the yard.  If the rookie was really stupid, it would be all
day before he would catch on.


Tim
UUCP: uunet!sgihbtn!tims
ARPA: sgihbtn!tims    @uunet.uu.net

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

Date: 22 Apr 93 23:16:43 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


> 4) Why do marketers sometimes have one 800 number nationally and another
> within their own area?

I can't believe that everyone is missing the boat on the answer to
this one.  Although the original reason may have been a predivestature
tariff, the present reason is pure economics.

AT&T charges me $10./hr for intrastate calls on my "Readyline" line
(before term discounts, etc.).  New England Telephone charges $6./hr
for intrastate 800 calls on my "Valueflex" line.  Although my AT&T
line works in all 50 states, I encourage my Massachusetts customers to
use my NET line.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #273
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27888;
          23 Apr 93 5:12 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04067
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 23 Apr 1993 02:38:36 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04509
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 23 Apr 1993 02:38:01 -0500
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 02:38:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #274

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 23 Apr 93 02:38:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 274

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Kevin Kadow)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (R. McMillin)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Tom Perrine)
    Re: Problems in Austin TX (Mark Armitage)
    Re: Wireless City (Jim Kresse)
    Re: Bell of PA A/C Split - Work Effort (Carl Moore)
    Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!? (Todd Inch)
    Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded? (Todd Inch)
    Re: Latest Prodigy News: New Charge For Users (Arthur R. McGee)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Todd Inch)
    Re: Contel Cellular Offer in VT (Kenny Crudup)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Jeff Stieglitz)
    Two New VSAT Networks For Hungary (Darren Ingram)
    Odds 'n Ends in the News (Les Reeves)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin Kadow)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Organization: Technology News, IIT, Chicago, IL
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 22:39:45 GMT


Clipper is a good compromise for BUSINESS communication which needs to
be sent encrypted to a nation which is prohibited from having other US
encryption schemes exported to them. For my impression of how Clipper
CAN be used to improve personal privacy, read on ...

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron
"Asbestos" Dippold) writes:

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

>> compromise personal privacy.  If the government wishes to listen in on
>> your calls, it is far more efficient to just place a tap at the telco
>> (which would pick up all of your calls), rather than park a van in
>> front of your house and intercept only your cordless telephone calls.

> That, however, requires a valid warrant (tap at telco).  I also
> believe they're more concerned about end to end encryption rather than
> handset to cradle and/or phone to telco precisely because of that
> ability.  Hence the timing of the chip.  Once they get it established
> they can start cracking down on and cease approving other encryption
> methods.  After all, only drug dealers, child pornographers, civil
> libertarians, and other scum could possibly want encryption the
> government can't listen to.

> Is there anyone who actually thinks they can keep those two keys
> secure?  It should perform one significant purpose, however -- make
> local police far more dependent on the feds, which fits neatly with
> Clinton's National Police Force wishes.

[anti-Clinton stuff (which I mostly agreed with) deleted]

    However, one BENEFIT of the Clipper Chip is that unless the
wiretapper gets both codes for the Clipper then he won't be able to
detect whether you're using additional encryption BEFORE the data is
passed through the Clipper!

    So if they do attempt "warrantless searches" by tapping your
Clipper based conversations, they'll just get you pre-encrypted
traffic, and without a warrant they can't prosecute you for using
illegal encryption as there's no legitimate way for them to have
detected your additional encryption!


         Another brilliant mind ruined by higher education.
[e-mail]   [e-mail]   My Employer Disagrees.

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

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 19:07 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System


On Wed, 21 Apr 1993 15:02:02 GMT, [e-mail]
(James R Ebright) said:

> Dorothy Denning is quite notorious in the crypt community as an
> apologist for giving the govenment the right to read your mail ...

I don't know how many people read her articles in the {Communications
of the ACM} about crypto stuff, but it seemed just a tiny bit (okay,
*very*) biased inasmuch as they gave her final say.  In formal debate,
the proponent of a proposition usually has to defend it, with
gainsayers rebutting after each defense.

In a similar vein, here's another plug for {Wired} (no, I'm not
selling my way through gradual school on subscriptions). It's got an
interesting sidebar about the Bivens Legal Action Movement (BLAM!),
headed by one Scott McMillan (no *immediate* relation); his father
sued several federal agents who accosted one Mr. Bivens, and won
({Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents}).  At newsstands near you ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Perrine)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Date: 22 Apr 1993 20:36:39 GMT
Organization: /users/sy/tep/.organization


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

<some text deleted>

> You might also consider reports that Clipper has been in development
> for about four years, which means that the initial idea and most of
> the implementation happened under Reagan and Bush.  Granted, Clinton
> has gone along with the plan, but it's not his initiative.

Also, please note that "Clipper" is a trademark for a CPU chip that
was developed six(?) years ago by Fairchild, and the trademark is now
held by Integraph.  I can't waith until they sue the government for
trademark infringement and damages.

> And speaking of Clipper wiretaps, did you see the part in Dorothy
> Denning's note that says that the escrowed keys are based on the
> chip's serial number and two nominally secret scrambling keys, so
> anyone who knows the scrambling keys can decode messages sent by any
> Clipper chip.  Now THAT's creepy.

Also note that once the keys have been handed out, that you can then
decrypt any previously (illegally or otherwise) recorded communica-
tions. e.g. once the keys are given out, all communications from that
device PAST or FUTURE are available.


Tom E. Perrine (tep)            | [e-mail]
San Diego Supercomputer Center  | Voice: [phone]
P. O. Box 85608                 |   FAX: [phone]
San Diego CA 92186-9784         | Every child is a gifted child  !

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Armitage)
Subject: Re: Problems in Austin TX
Date: 22 Apr 1993 18:36:40 GMT
Organization: Tadpole Technology, Inc., Austin, TX
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> Monty Solomon <[e-mail]> writes:

>> I reached the following recording today trying to reach a business in
>> Austin, TX.

>> "Due to telephone company facility trouble, your call cannot be
>> completed at this time.  Please try your call later.  512 4T"

> A major fiber cut in Austin caused this.  Directory Info probably went
> to another city, which was not effected.

The story I heard, was that the cut (which lasted from sometime around
midday until into the evening) affected the 512 219 area. It was
caused by someone digging up a fibre (OK, "fiber" then if you must!).
I am very surprised that cutting one bundle could cut off such a large
area -- isn't there normally redundancy built in, ie multiple fibers
taking different routes?


Mark Armitage   Tadpole Technology
Yes, you guessed it, [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Kresse)
Subject: Re: Wireless City
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Panasonic ATVL
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 18:47:23 GMT


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

> How cost effective is such an approach?

It can be very cost effective in situations where the cost of running
wire (e.g., low population density) or establishing service (e.g.,
emergency service, temporary service) is relatively high.

> Aren't those frequencies in the IMTS Telephone/Paging band thus
> limiting the total available channels, and if so, what does that do to
> the 500 subscriber limit?

It is a co-primary usage of the band which it uses (I'm not sure it's
IMTS Telephone/Paging), so that the number of available channels can
be limited, but in most cases isn't.  This can affect the subscriber
limit.

> Can it send fax or data?

It can handle at least 2400 bps data and fax.

For more information, you might wish to check George Calhoun's two
books, published by Artech House.


Jim Kresse   [e-mail]   Standard disclaimers apply

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

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 16:25:07 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bell of PA A/C Split - Work Effort


[e-mail] writes:

> They need to modify those 'dumb' billing apps to handle the 'free
> calling across A/C' stuff that will come into play.

What does 'free calling across A/C' mean here?  This is referring to
215 area (to split to form 610).  215 area (other than Denver and
Adamstown) went to the scheme of:

7D for long distance within it (would become 1+NPA+7D later if crossing
  the 215/610 border);

1+NPA+7D for local calls to other area codes (and I guess later for local
  calls across the 215/610 border?)

(Denver and Adamstown, which I guess will switch to 610, would later
have to change dialing instructions in two stages):

Local calls to other area code (Denver-Ephrata?) change from 7D to
  1+NPA+7D;

Once the dust settles from that, change from 1+7D to 7D for
  long distance within area code.

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: Using LD Carrier to Call Next Door Illegal?!?
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 21:18:22 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.

Around here (Everett/Seattle WA) the ROC's usually handle the 1+
dialed intra-lata long distance calls (all toll calls are 1+ except
976, etc), but a LD salesperson told me, when I asked, that the LD
companies are allowed to handle these calls via 10xxx, but are not
allowed to advertise this ability.

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: Sears Catalog 800 Number - Down or Overloaded?
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 21:26:42 GMT


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

> Overloaded ... their call volume is extensive.

Makes me wonder if they're selling so well that they may reconsider
discontinuing catalog sales.  Didn't they promise no more "sales" ever
about fifty sales ago?  No new taxes ...

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

From: [e-mail] (Arthur R. McGee)
Subject: Re: Latest Prodigy News: New Charge For Users
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 21:32:11 GMT


Don't forget to let them know that America Online is now CHEAPER than
Prodigy! American Online is ONLY $9.95 month for five hours of service
and $3.50 per hour thereafter. Prodigy is $14.95 per month and I
forget what the price is per hour.


[Moderator's Note: Mr. McGee's message was truncated at this point;
sorry, I cannot reconstruct the remainder of it.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 21:10:16 GMT


Regarding the ROC allowing outgoing 911 calls only rather than entire
disconnects to former customers:

What does this really cost the telco (or the paying customers) to have
this service *available*?

I say "*available*" because we all probably agree that the actual use
of this service (e.g. handling a 911 call) is paid for in other ways
by (generally speaking) taxpayers or others who would pay regardless
of who made the call from what phone (e.g. out-of-towner from payphone.)

So my question is: Is there any real cost difference between
disconnecting a line vs monitoring it for an outgoing call?  Seems
like the hardware is already in place and there would be few if any
cases where a connected line would actually prevent another (paying)
customer from being connected due to lack of hardware. The percent-
ages should be so small that they aren't even considerations for the
sizing of the hardware.

If there is no actual extra expenditure to do this, the "give a car to
people who can't afford it for emergency use" analogy is a poor one.

I agree that I shouldn't be forced to pay for others who can't/won't
pay for service, but WOULD I really pay more?

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

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 19:32:24 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Contel Cellular Offer in VT
Organization: AT&T


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

> I was listening to the radio the other day (it was an accident, I
> assure you!) and heard an adversisement for Contel Cellular....

> What they are offering is free airtime on weekends for six months,
> to all customers who sign up for full-year contract before the end of
> this month.

Unless I mis-read something, I can get that now from Cell (N)one
Boston with no contract minimum for as little as $30/month.


Kenny Crudup, ATT BL, MV20-3-T-5-B, X3219.    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Stieglitz)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 06:52:58 GMT


> Why don't COs have windows?

In an old issue of "Notes on the Network," a Bell Bible, it states
that the buildings are windowless to help survive a nuclear blast.

It also describes a CO that was built at a nuclear test site.  A nuke
was detonated nearby, and all of the switching equipment survived the
electromagnetic pulse.

The book said the equipment survived because of the grounding system
now standard in all COs.

It also mentioned that all calls in progress were disconnected.

"Notes on The Network" is a must-read for the telecom enthusiast.  It
also has quite a few details on the numbering plan ...


Jeff Stieglitz     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Darren P. Ingram)
Subject: Two New VSAT Networks For Hungary
Organization: Darren Ingram Media Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 02:47:14 GMT


A large VSAT network for MTI -- the Hungarian state news agency -- has
been installed by Satnet, the VSAT operating subsidiary of the
Hungarian Telecommunications Company.

The one-way distribution network will be used to provide multi-channel
distribution of English and Hungarian news, financial information and
company data.  Comstream satellite modems and 2.4 metre antennas are
being used within the 40-terminal network, set to be increased up to
250 sites in time.

Six data channels are being relayed over Eutelsat SMS capacity on the
Eutelsat II-F4 satellite, located at 7 degrees east providing enhanced
coverage to the former Eastern European and USSR countries.  The
picture wire service will be relayed at 4.8kbit/s, with 2 x 1.2kbit/s,
2 x 600bit/s and a 300bit/s channel relaying the news services.

The network will be installed and fully operational by the end of May,
according to Miklos Papp, managing director of Satnet.

Satnet is presently seeking joint investment opportunities with
overseas companies who are keen to break into the lucrative VSAT and
datacomms markets.  A number of operating relationships have already
been formed between Satnet and companies such as Telespazio, Teleport
Europe, Unisource and Comsat.

A further network is being provided by Banknet for the Generale
Budapest Insurance Company. Details are scarce on this network, but it
is understood that a two-way network providing links to regional
offices linked into a shared hub in Vienna is being used.


Darren P. Ingram / DIMS ([e-mail])   - Views expressed do  -
184 Brookside Avenue, Whoberley, Coventry CV5 8AD UK - not automatically   -
Tel:[phone]/Fax:[phone]/Tlx 94026650 - represent those of  -
24-HOUR response number:[phone]              - DIMS or its clients -

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 22 Apr 93 16:59:03 GMT
Subject: Odds 'n Ends in the News


* The Clipper Chip device introduced yesterday by AT&T may not be
suitable for government use, says House Telecom Subcommittee Chairman
Markey.  In a letter to Commerce Secretary Brown, Markey asked whether
the use of the technology could lead to "inadvertently increased costs
to those U.S. companies hoping to serve both" the government and
private markets.  Markey has ordered Brown to answer several questions
about security and cost concerns by April 28.  (Communications Daily,
4/20/93)

* AT&T has launched a multi-million dollar advertising campaign to
introduce its new 800 service called "Never Miss A Call Guarantee."
For between $520-$550 per month and no installation fee through
November, AT&T is offering three options to the plan.  For multiple
site customers, the service routes incoming 800 calls to a secondary
customer location if the phone is not answered or if the line is busy.
Calls may also be routed to AT&T Voice Mail, AT&T InfoWorx, a
network-based voice-response system, or AT&T Transtech, with operators
handling the calls.  The second option is for single-site customers.
The service provides alternative routes that may be used to get calls
to the location.  The final option, geared to customers who have a
need for automatic rerouting, prevents too many calls from being
routed to a single number.  (Communications Daily, 4/20/93)

* Sprint has introduced a new calling card that provides international
travelers with U.S. and worldwide dialing instructions, including
numbers for reaching an English-speaking operator from more than 60
countries.  WorldTraveler FONCARD, similar to AT&T's USADirect card,
allows callers to dial an in-country local access number that is
routed to a U.S. operator, who completes the call in the U.S.  The
service allows travelers to customize the card for each trip to match
their personal itinerary and to fulfill all their calling needs.  In
addition to eliminating the language barrier, WorldTraveler bypasses
often excessively-high foreign PTT charges.  (Communications Daily,
4/15/93)


* Send-a-Song Corp. will send a song to someone you love, over the
phone lines, at a specific time and date.  The service is accessible
by an 800 number and costs $9.95 a song; the sender can include a 20
second message at the end of the tune.  (Business Week, "Honey --
Sinatra's on the phone," 4/19/93, p. 110B)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #274
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01382;
          23 Apr 93 20:02 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19976
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 23 Apr 1993 16:41:40 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12931
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 23 Apr 1993 16:41:01 -0500
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 16:41:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #275

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 23 Apr 93 16:41:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 275

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Bip-Bop in Paris [France] - Luxuous Mobile Telephone (Jean-Bernard Condat)
    Warning! CENTREX Scam! (Tad Cook)
    Autodialer Recommendations, Please (Bob Izenberg)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Toby Nixon)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Bob Hofkin)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Greg Andrews)
    Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom (Chris Turkstra)
    Re: Did I Get Slammed? (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Small, PC-Based PBX? (Robert B. Thompson)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 23 Apr 93 13:59:59 GMT
Subject: Bip-Bop in Paris [France] - Luxuous Mobile Telephone


PRESS RELEASE    PRODUCT AVAILABLE APRIL 26TH, 1993

From: France Telecom
      International Press Office
      Mr. Stephane Barbe
      Phone: [phone]
      Fax: [phone]

Bip-Bop in Paris: France Telecom launches the first mobile pocket telephone

     Bi-Bop, the new digital cordless pocket phone, will begin reaming
the streets of Paris on April 26th, France Telecom has extended
commercial service to the French capital following successful pilot
service in the city of Strasbourg.

     Bi-Bop is the first-generation pocket phone.  The lightweight
terminals (about 180 grams) are the size of a calculator.  They are
used to call from anywhere within 50 to 200 meters of radio base
stations installed in public places throughout Paris and Strasbourg.
Some 3,000 base stations are already in place in Paris proper and
nearly suburban areas.  The network now covers most of the capital and
all major thoroughfares and business districts.

     Beginning this fall, the French system will mark an important
advance since Bi-Bop subscribers will also be used to receive calls in
public places on any model terminal, thanks to the "Bi-Bop Reponse"
option telephone type.

     Bi-Bop offers three phones in one, since in addition to its
public roaming possibilities, it can also be used as a cordless phone
at home, or for people on the move at the workplace.  At a business
site, the phones are linked to a private base station or to the
company's own PBX.

     Bi-Bop is conform to the CT2 international standard, meaning that
subscribers can also use it during foreigh travel.  The telephones
integrate a number of advanced features, such as last number redial
and a 15 number memory for abbreviated dialing.

     Bi-Bop telephones will be sold at France Telecom ageneles for FRF
1,890 (including VAT).  The Bi-Bop subscription rate is FRF 54,50 per
month (FRF 45,95 excl. VAT).  Calls made from public areas anywhere in
the Bi-Bop coverage zone are billed FRF 0,88 (FRF 0,70 excl. VAT) per
minute, in addition to the normal telephone rate.  For example, a one
minute call using a Bi-Bop phone from Paris to Marseille would cost
FRF 3,40 including VAT.  There is no surcharge for Bi-Bop calls from
the home or workplace.

     Development and installation of the pilot network has been
contracted to Dassault A.T., which leads a consortium with three other
firms: Cap Sesa, Electronique Mecelec et Monetel SA.  Bi-Bop terminals
made by four manufac- turers have been approved for use: Sagem, Matra
Communication, Dassault A.T.  and Motorola.

     With the new Bi-Bop service in Paris, France Telecom further
broadens its range of mobile services, ushoring in a new area of
personal communications.


Jean-Bernard Condat
[Editor of _Chaos Digest_, the first computer security e-journal]
Chaos Computer Club France   B.P. 8005, 69351 Lyon Cedex 08, France
Bi-Bop' Phone: [phone]    Fax: [phone]
InterNet: [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]

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

Subject: Warning! CENTREX Scam!
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 23:36:09 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)


My girlfriend works at the University of Washington, and was probably
the victim of a telephone scam today.

She got a phone call at work from an AT&T operator, who asked if
she would accept a collect call from "John."  She declined.

A few minutes later she got another collect call, this time from
someone asking for someone she had never heard of.  When she said she
didn't know who the person was, the caller broke in and inisisted that
the person was a "student helper" in the department.  She decided to
go down the call and ask someone who might know who this person was.
When she got back to the phone to tell them that the person was
unknown to them, the caller was there and the operator was gone,
leading us to believe that somehow the charges had been accepted.

When she told the guy that they still didn't know who the person was,
he got flustered and said, "Oh, could you please just transfer me to
Nine-Zero-Zero??"

Without thinking about it, and trying to be helpful, she did a
hookflash and punched 900 and hung up.

Later she asked me if she had been the victim of a scam.

I told her that since she is on Centrex, when she transferred the guy
to 900, she was in fact transferring him back to an AT&T operator,
allowing him to call anywhere he wished at the university's expense!
Dialing 9 gets you an outside line, dialing a single zero would get
you a local operator, but dialing zero-zero gets you a toll operator
for your default long distance carrier.

So the guy called her at her employer's expense, and then made another
call also at their expense.  I suspect that the fellow was randomly
calling numbers in the university, hoping to get some helpful person
like Julie to unwittingly assist him in his scam.


[e-mail]  (if it bounces, use [e-mail])
Tad Cook     |  Packet Amateur Radio:  |  Home Phone:
Seattle, WA  |  KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA |  206-527-4089

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Izenberg)
Subject: Autodialer Recommendations, Please
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 08:41:06 -0600 (CDT)


    I'm looking for an autodialer to hang off of an
uninterruptible power supply.  The UPS will close a contact upon loss
of commercial power, at which time we'd like to autodial four pagers.
Perhaps :-) the Digest readership has some preferences or war stories
that can be shared by electronic mail.

Thanks!


Bob Izenberg         voice phone: [phone]
Motorola RISC Software   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Toby Nixon)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Date: 23 Apr 93 16:22:33 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA


In article <[e-mail]> a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.
com wrote:

>> [Moderator's Note: And it will be almost as hard to get approval from
>> both agencies for use of the keys as it is now for a police officer
>> standing at your door to get a search warrant on the fly if you insist
>> on the officer 'respecting your rights'.   PAT]

> Not if the agencies are the ACLU and EFF.  (Note: the proposal did
> state that one agency would be a non-governmental agency.)

It won't matter if it's the ACLU or EFF. The folks wanting the keys
will show up with a court order from a federal judge requiring (not
just authorizing!) release of the keys.  There will be no opportunity
for those holding the keys to review the probable cause for issuing
the warrant, and no right to refuse unless they believe the warrant
itself is fraudulent. All having the keys in the hands of a
non-governmental agency does is help to insure that the police/FBI/
whoever actually get a warrant signed by a judge; it does nothing to
keep the judges from issuing warrants for flimsy reasons.

Sorry -- Pat's right on this one.


Toby

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

From: Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Date: 23 Apr 93 04:08:08 EDT
Organization: St. Peter's College, US


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

> 1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company buildings?

Guess: First, switching equipment doesn't care if there's a view or
not. Also, original operator stations had wiring behind them which
reached to the ceiling.  Additionally, the switching equipment was
frequently located behind this wall, so it wasn't an outside wall
anyway.

If you want an exact answer, I'll go pull some of the old documents
that specify the architectural requirements, but I'm not sure there
will be any reason given.

> 2) How were area codes assigned? The most populous areas seem to have the
> lowest numbers, but is there any geographic logic?

  There were a number of goals. The original proposal (Shipley, 1945*)
proposed 86 area codes in a semi-regular pattern (for example, Canada
would have been 915, 914, 913, 916, 917, 918, 919, 910 from east to
west by province). This plan was modified* to eliminate the confusion
caused by "similar" area codes adjacent to each other. A state
initially assigned a single area code would have a middle digit of 0,
a state with more than one area code would have a 1 as a middle digit.
Areas where more inward calls were expected (major metro- politan
areas like New York City) received "short pull" area codes like 212.
(In those days, the length of time for dialing was related to the
digits used, since the dial took longer for higher digits). "Status"
numbers were things like xxx-2111 or xxx-1234. Things like xxx-6000
were not "status" back then. Of course, now that tone dialing is
commonplace, this has changed. Trivia: New Jersey got area code 201
(the first code, but not the "shortest pull" because Bell Labs was
here.

* notes: Shipley, F. F. "Nation-Wide Dialing", Bell Laboratories Record 23,
     October 1945, p. 368
     Nunn, W. H. "Nationwide Numbering Plan", Bell System Technical
     Journal 31, September 1952, P. 851

> 4) Why do marketers sometimes have one 800 number nationally and another
> within their own area?

  This is a combination of (long-solved) technical issues and tariff
issues.  Long distance 800 service covered an area *outside* your home
area and could be expanded in "bands" to get greater and greater areas
of coverage (for example, many 800 numbers aren't valid from Alaska
and Hawaii).

  Due to the way interstate vs. intrastate rates were tariffed, it was
often easier/cheaper to get a different number for just the home area.

  A lot of this dates back to "Enterprise" numbers which were
manually-handled toll-free numbers before 800 service.

> 5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the phone
> companies money?

  Because the phone company perceives that it is desired by some
customers, and therefore those customers will pay for it. No, it
doesn't cost them money (on a per-number basis, anyway -- the fact that
there are *any* of them means that Directory Assistance needs a "not
available" recording, that the package that generates phone books
needs to understand this, as well).

  Note that there is a class of number ("non-published" as opposed to
"non- listed") which is not in the phone book but is available from
Directory Assistance. Since DA charges for requests in most of the
country, the telephone company may actually make some small sum on
these.

> 6) Why do telephone poles extend far above the highest wire or
> crosspiece?

  Three reasons. First, to meet the requirements of guy wires to
support the poles (a taller pole can use a guy wire with the anchor
side closer to the pole, which is advantageous in urban or
restricted-space areas). Second, the top of the pole is usually
grounded, so a strike will usually harmlessly hit the ground wire
rather than striking a working circuit lower down. Third, if you
really mean "far" as in more than three or four feet, in some areas
the phone company shares poles with power, cable TV, etc. and they may
be placing the pole with space reserved.

> 7) Where do utilities get telephone poles? Are they from special logs? Are
> there particular specifications?

  There are vendors who handle specialty lumber. They are generally
the sup- pliers of poles. Some types of wood are better than others,
and the trees selected to be poles must be straight and not have any
"Y" forks in them.  The poles are then treated with preservative (in
the past, creosote/tar, but now synthetic preservatives). Trees of the
appropriate type but with defects such as splits, bends, etc.
generally wind up as railroad ties. Some older installations by
independent telephone companies used local evergreen trees for poles,
but this practice has declined since most independents have been taken
over by larger operations with centralized purchasing for poles.

  I can locate the procurement spec for you if you like.

> Thank you in advance. Comments may be posted here or e-mailed to Dave in
> care of:

  If any of these are used in the book, I'd like to see a copy ...


Terry Kennedy        Operations Manager, Academic Computing
[e-mail]    St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
[e-mail]    [phone]

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

From: Bob Hofkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Software Productivity Consortium
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 15:10:46 GMT


Dave Niebuhr ([e-mail]) wrote:

> In NYTel land, a primary number can be unlisted or listed.  It makes
> no nevermind to them as long as there is a legitimate billing name and
> address.

Here in C&P territory, a secondary number can be listed or unlisted
for no charge but unlisting the primary number always costs extra. At
least that's what one rep told me this week.

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Andrews)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 16:46:20 GMT


[e-mail] (James Gleick) writes:

> 3) Why were the old crank phones (at least as depicted in movies) placed
> so high on the wall the users stretched to reach them.

Perhaps to keep them out of the reach of children?


Greg Andrews  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Screwtape)
Subject: Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Hope College
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 14:21:44 GMT


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

> When the largest aggregator/reseller of AT&T decides to get
> involved, then you can assume a trend is probably underway.  The
> program, to be known as 'Talk Tickets' will not use mag stripes.
> Instead, there will be little carboard tickets, almost like bus or
> train tickets.  Tickets will be available in several denominations
> including $5, $10 and $20 sizes. Each ticket will have a unique serial
> number on it. All calls will go to an 800 number where voice prompting
> will tell the person to enter their ticket number and the number they
> wish to call.

I remember in Japan, we bought (or often found) credit card sized
phone cards.  All of the public phones accepted this card, and even
displayed the units remaining on the front of the phone.  To make a
call, you would put the card in the slot and dial.  You can buy them
in certain denominations which are always printed on the same side of
the card.  After a call was completed, the phone punches a little hole
on the denomination scale so that you know how many units were left.

I wish we could get regular public phones that worked the same way
with these "Talk Ticket" things.  They were very convenient, and the
cards made nice souveniers because you could by them at tourist spots
with the picture of the shrine or whatever on the card.  The only bad
thing was the tendency of the Japanese to leave the cards in the
slots, I don't know if we Americans would be as forgetfull (under
stress?), but I liked and took advantage of this idiosyncrasy.

Maybe just more Public Phone 2000's -- they take a card swipe, don't
they?  I encountered one in Battle Creek, MI whose data functions were
still disabled.


Chris Turkstra    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I think the reasoning here is that in the USA we
have a dispropportionate number of 'regular' pay phones as opposed to
the card reader type. Maybe one out of a thousand here is a card
reader; the rest are not capable of handling cards that are swiped.
Speaking of shrines, maybe I could get them to print up a series with
my picture on it.  :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Did I Get Slammed?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 13:10:06 GMT


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

> Well, it looks as if I've been 'slammed' on one of our lines.  Today,

In addition to Pat's suggestions, try calling 1-700-555-4141.

This will give you a recording identifing the default carrier on your
line.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....

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

From: Robert B. Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Small, PC-Based PBX?
Date: 23 Apr 93 08:46:58 EST
Organization: Forsyth County, Winston-Salem  NC


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Carl
W Neihart) writes:

> I am looking for a very small, inexpensive PBX and voice mail system
> to be used for a small office of about 20 people.

> Something with a max of 24 lines and four trunks or similar would be
> ideal.  It would also be nice if it were a card that went into a
> dedicated PC, and controlled by software running in Windows.

> Does anyone know of a company that makes such a beast?

PCBX makes such boards, but the boards themselves are expensive (I
think I remember about $1800 each) and you'd need 2 or 3 to get your
24 stations, plus of course the cost of the PC. I'd recommend that you
consider the line of small Panasonic systems. They make them in 3 co
line by 8 station (KX-T308), 6X16 and 12X32 versions. I have one
installed in my home, and they work very well. One of the best
features is that the ports are all hybrid -- they can be used with
either a system phone or with a plain old telephone. I paid $400 for
my 308 from Target Distributing (they're listed in the 800 directory),
plus $130 for the system phone needed for programming.  The 1232 comes
equipped 4X16 for about $1,100 and can be expanded to its full
complement of ports for about $600 additional.

At home, I have ring on a single port that's attached to a Talking
Technologies VMS card in an old XT. If you need multiple VMS ports,
TT makes the PowerLine 2 board that provides two ports. It costs about
$600, and you can put several in one PC.  Alternatively, Panasonic
makes the KX-TVP150 voicemail system which integrates easily with the
KX-T switches. It costs $2805 from Target in a two port five hour
version. Ports can be added in groups of two for $660 per two ports.
They also have an incredibly expensive hard disk upgrade ($1100 for
40MB) that takes the voice storage up to 10.5 hours.  Be aware that
integrating VMS by whatever means takes station ports. That is, I have
a 1232 on order right now fully ported and a TVP150 with eight ports.
By attaching the eight-port VMS box to the switch, I occupy eight
ports, leaving me with only 24 ports available for stations. Good
luck.


Robert Bruce Thompson                [e-mail]
Forsyth County MIS Department        [phone] x3012
Winston-Salem, North Carolina USA    [phone] (FAX)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #275
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26819;
          24 Apr 93 7:28 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26458
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 24 Apr 1993 05:09:57 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15274
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 24 Apr 1993 05:09:17 -0500
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 05:09:17 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #276

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 24 Apr 93 05:08:45 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 276

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Warning! CENTREX Scam! (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Warning! CENTREX Scam! (Carl Moore)
    Re: Warning! CENTREX Scam! (Gary Breuckman)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Trey Valenta)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Carl Moore)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Steven Thornton)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Andy Behrens)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (David E. Sheafer)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Looking For Serial/SCSI/SBUS DID Capable FAX Modem (Steve Forrette)
    Re: ATM vs. FDDI vs. Fast Ethernet (Aaron Good)
    Re: Free Airtime on Contel of VT (Douglas Scott Reuben)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Warning! CENTREX Scam!
Date: 23 Apr 1993 23:32:44 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tad Cook)
writes:

> My girlfriend works at the University of Washington, and was probably
> the victim of a telephone scam today.

> She got a phone call at work from an AT&T operator, who asked if
> she would accept a collect call from "John."  She declined.

> When she told the guy that they still didn't know who the person was,
> he got flustered and said, "Oh, could you please just transfer me to
> Nine-Zero-Zero??"

> Without thinking about it, and trying to be helpful, she did a
> hookflash and punched 900 and hung up.

> Later she asked me if she had been the victim of a scam.

A friend of mine told me of a similar scam that happened to his
father.  He got a collect call at work, and the person asked for a
non-existant name.  When told that the person was not known, the
caller asked to be transferred to the operator.  At this point, the
company operator would think the call was coming from an internal
extension, and would likely honor a request for assistance in making a
long distance call, billed of course to the company's bill.

Well, the story doesn't end there.  My friend's father's employer is
none other than US West, and the father is a senior engineer there.
Naturally, he had the feeling that something was up.  He contacted
network security, who went through the operator service logs and
located the collect call to his extension.  It originated from a local
jail.  Apparently the operators here don't announce that the caller is
calling from jail (as they do in some juristictions); at least they
didn't about a year ago when this happened.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: If the call came in person-to-person collect, then
if the report was that no such person was there, what was telco oper-
ator doing all this time? Why wasn't *she* (or the PBX/Centrex
operator) still in control of the call?  Situations like you and the
original correspondent describe can *only* occur when the telco and/or
PBX/Centrex operator are not in control of the call as they should be
until it is properly connected or abandoned.  In the case of a
Centrex, all lines should have billed number screening in place,
forcing such calls to be handled only through the main listed number
so the Centrex/PBX operator can control them. And the telco operator
is supposed to tell *the first person who answers* that the call is
collect and ask for permission to charge it -- even if the call is
person to person and 'Mr. Z' has to be called to the telephone from
elsewhere. 'Mr. Z' does not find out the call is collect without the
person who answered the call knowing about it first. 'Mr. Z' cannot,
under the tariff consent to pay for the call unless the *first person
to answer the line* says 'you will have to ask Mr. Z'.  The assumption
is to be that the person who answers the phone is the party responsible
for the phone unless they state otherwise ("I'll have to ask the
boss/owner, etc"). Telecom managers: teach your PBX/Centrex operators
that *they* are to control calls through the switchboard if you are
expected to pay the bill; not the callers, not the people who receive
the calls.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 23 Apr 93 19:36:00 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Warning! CENTREX Scam!


OK, so now the University of Washington is on alert to look for
accepted collect calls on its next phone bill?

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Breuckman)
Subject: Re: Warning! CENTREX Scam!
Date: 23 Apr 1993 19:58:47 -0700


This wouldn't work on our Centrex, you can't transfer a call outside
of our system.  You CAN add on a third party who's outside, but if you
disconnect yourself, the call path is broken for the other two
parties.  This is Ameritech, 414-288-xxxx

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Date: 23 Apr 1993 18:15:40 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(david.g.lewis) writes:

>> 4) Why do marketers sometimes have one 800 number nationally and another
>> within their own area?

> Welcome to the wonderful world of telecom regulation. Intrastate and
> interstate telecommunications are regulated by different agencies --
> intrastate by the 50 individual state utility commissions, and
> interstate by the FCC.

> Therefore, if a company wants to provide an 800 number for both local
> and distant customers, they have to get 800 service from two different
> providers -- the local telco and a long distance company.

As the Moderator previously mentioned, this is not strictly the case.
For example, I have an 800 ReadyLine number provided by your employer,
and it can be called from any location in the 50 United States, as
well as Canada.  It matters not whether the call is interstate or
intrastate; even intralata calls work just fine.  The "two number" 800
requirement for inter versus intra state service has not been around
since the early 80's; any customers that still have this setup in
service today are a result of their own choice to maintain their
number assignments.

>> 5) Why does an unlisted number cost extra? Does it really cost the
>> phone companies money?

> This will draw the usual run of "no, it's just a telco's way to suck
> more money out of people", but there is *some* justification.

> Subscribing to telephone service is a highly automated process.  As
> with any highly automated processes, doing anything "different" from
> the default will add an incremental cost.  For telephone service, the
> default is to put the number into the directory listing.  Not putting
> the number into the directory listing requires something *different*
> to be done in any number of automated systems.

I think it's mostly just a way to extract more money from customers.
Just last week, I added two Distinctive Ringing (or Custom Ringing as
US West likes to call them) numbers to my second line.  For these
numbers, the default is that they are unlisted, and you have to pay
extra for a directory listing!


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (trey valenta -3-)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 93 22:00:16 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Terry Kennedy,
Operations Mgr) writes:

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

>> 1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company buildings?

> Guess: First, switching equipment doesn't care if there's a view or
> not. Also, original operator stations had wiring behind them which
> reached to the ceiling.  Additionally, the switching equipment was
> frequently located behind this wall, so it wasn't an outside wall
> anyway.

I was told a while back (i.e. don't quote me on this) that the
buildings were often unoccupied, and by leaving out windows, it was
made harder for others to break into the places.


trey valenta    [e-mail]   [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Bell/AT&T switch buildings are very often left
unattended at night and over the weekends ... just ask the idiots at
Illinois Bell who let Hinsdale burn down back in 1988 rather than pay
one person to sit there all night and/or weekends doing some kind of
trivial paperwork to keep them busy and earning their pay.  I really
doubt the public is aware that telcos leave multi-million dollar
switches sitting alone and unguarded for hours/days at a time. They
could have paid a clerk to babysit the switch on weekends and at night
for *several years* for what it cost them to replace it after the fire
plus the revenue lost for the month it was out, etc.    PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 23 Apr 93 19:48:31 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


I hadn't heard of the Shipley reference before.  There are a few cases
where area codes off by one dial click have touched.  307 Wyoming
touches 308 Nebraska, I believe (and would/still do) 302 Delaware, 301
Maryland (this went away when area code 410 was fully cut over) 501
Arkansas, 601 Mississippi.

This next one would have been gone long before I can remember: 704
North Carolina, 703 Virginia.  This is keeping with the old convention
that N0X was only used in states/provinces with one area code; 919 in
NC would then have come along later.  Present 704 does not touch VA.

But in the second week of this past January, I saw the notes about new
area codes 610 in Pa. and 910 in NC.  My reaction was "huh?", because
910 will be next door to the shrunken 919.  Two exchanges in the
future 610 (in southern Chester County) border on 410 in Maryland, but
calls across that part of the border are long distance.

I also recall reading that LONG ago 305 covered all of Florida?  (813
would then have been the second area code, followed by 904 and 407.)
But even with 813 around, 305 did touch 205 in Alabama until the
formation of area code 904 in 1965.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven Thornton)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: Eskimo North [phone] {eskimo.com}
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 21:18:55 GMT


>> 1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company
buildings?

Perhaps, since these buildings don't NEED windows (switches don't care
about views), and since windows cost more than walls, they're just
saving a buck. Then again, maybe they just enjoy presenting blank-wall
ugliness to the public.


Steve Thornton    [e-mail]    Seattle, Washington

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Behrens)
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 16:26:36 -0400
Organization: Burlington Coat Factory
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)


> Recently, in the Washington, D.C. area, I've noticed that a lot of
> retail stores now have a device that will read the numbers from the
> bottom of a check.  They all seem to have a sticker on them saying
> "SCAN: Shared Check Authorization Network" ....

> Does it only check that the account is valid, or does it also check the
> account to see if funds are available?

> [Moderator's Note: Both; all three actually. And before long, the
> money will be debited right out of your account on the spot. Instant
> debit is the direction things are going.   PAT]

Sorry, Pat, but that's the wrong answer.  Banks don't give this sort
of information out to anyone who happens to know an account number.

SCAN is a clearinghouse for bad-check information.  If you write a bad
check to any merchant that's a member of the clearinghouse, your
account number gets written into the database, and stays there until
you make the check good.  SCAN doesn't verify your account balance --
it just sees if you have any outstanding bad checks.

Some stores add additional precautions: for example, how many checks
has this person written in the last 24 hours (large numbers might
indicate a stolen checkbook).


Andy Behrens, Burlington Coat Factory
     [ Burlington Coat Factory is a member of the SCAN clearing-  ]
     [ house, but I'm not speaking for either SCAN or BCF....     ]

P.O. Box 116, South Strafford, Vt.                            [phone]
Burlington Coat Factory, Schoolhouse Lane, Etna, N.H. 03750   [phone]


[Moderator's Note: You say 'banks don't give this sort of information
to anyone who happens to know an account number ...'  ha ha ha ...
banks talk about anything and everything. What you say about the other
functions are true, but more and more electronic transactions are
going on. The float seldom will buy you more than a day or two now; it
used to be I could go to the store on Tuesday and write a check for
which funds would be deposited Friday and get by with it; now the
banks are processing inter-bank things electronically; the debits are
processed and the paperwork follows.

Now-a-days I don't *dare* go to the grocery store until Wednesday
night after the courtesy counter was flushed or balanced out by the
corporate roving cashiers (they go from one branch of the chain to the
next all day and evening in an armored car) for the night, around 8
PM. I know then my check will sit there all night.  And at that, I
have to get to the bank by Friday noon to cover it. The banks' largest
customers, you know, operate their own 'banks' as it were, encoding
the checks and issuing their own debits and credits. Amoco Credit Card
encodes their checks and sends them right to the Fed, advising the
interim bank electronically what should be done.  When the paperwork
actually gets to its final home these days is a moot point. It has
long been a goal of banks to eliminate the float as much as possible,
even when paper transactions still exist, and they are getting closer
to this all the time.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Date: 23 Apr 93 21:51:16 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon


Justin Fidler writes of a point-of-sale check scanning device which
phones for authorization, and asks:

> I want to know if this device is connected to some type of network
> that dials up a nationwide clearinghouse with information on each
> person's account, or exactly how it works?  Does it only check that
> the account is valid, or does it also check the account to see if
> funds are available?"

To which our Beleaguered Moderator responds:

> Both; all three actually.

In fact, it most likely does none of the above.  Check verification
services are decades old, and they work by comparing the account
number against a list of hot numbers -- accounts that have had
problems.  These services do not (yet) have a way of interrogating the
account balance, or even its existence.

> Instant debit is the direction things are going.

Yes, but it looks like they're getting there via debit cards and ATM
technology.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: So how does Compuserve accept your 'check' over the
computer and make automatic debits each month thereafter? They send a
tape to their bank which sends a tape to your bank.  How do some of
the telephone information providers -- working on 800's in lieu of 900
numbers -- manage to 'take your check over the phone'?  I guess the
'next best thing' to instant debit would be electronic transfers
between banks which cut the float down to a single day or less.
That's what I get now from the Illinois Bell pay-your-phone-bill-
by-phone service I have used to pay them. IBT accepts your 'check'
over the phone. They just send the bank a tape to charge me and credit
IBT at the same time. I tell IBT to get the money Tuesday, they get it
Tuesday it is gone from my account on Tuesday.  Furthermore, I have
heard from at least a few people that if you have an American Express
card you authorize Amex to 'look into' your checking account at any
time they wish to see if you have the money to pay them or not.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David E. Sheafer)
Subject: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Date: 23 Apr 93 19:47:23 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA, USA


Fidler, Justin <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Recently, in the Washington, D.C. area, I've noticed that a lot of
> retail stores now have a device that will read the numbers from the
> bottom of a check

> My question to Telecom readers is this: How exactly does this work?

SCAN is a joint venture between many retailers including Sears (I'm an
employee of Sears).

SCAN is what is called a negative file system, what happens when a
merchant enters your account number (or license number) in the SCAN
network for approval, it checks its national database to see if the
account number or license number is currently in their database. The
only way (other then computer error) for either of these items to get
into their database is if you have bounced a check and either your
bank or the place where you bounced the check uses the SCAN network.

When I enter a returned check into our proprietary system at Sears,
within 24-48 hours that customers information is in the SCAN network,
and any checks they write to SCAN merchants will be denied.  (If the
check is paid off it is then deleted from the system. I don't know if
"repeat offenders" will remain in the system or not.)

SCAN nor does any check "authorization" network check your balance,
etc. (Point of Sale ATM networks do, though)>

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Date: 23 Apr 1993 19:10:24 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


> [Moderator's Note: Both; all three actually. And before long, the
> money will be debited right out of your account on the spot. Instant
> debit is the direction things are going.   PAT]

This is generally NOT correct.  All these check authorization networks
do is check your account number (and/or sometimes your driver's
license number) against a list of known deadbeats.  It has no way of
knowing whether or not funds are actually in the bank to cover the
check.  Once you write a bad check to a merchant that subscribes to a
check verification network, you may be placed on the deadbeat list.

In many cases, if you make an effort to clear up the bad check right
away, they won't place you on the list.  But once you are on the list,
you can't write a check at participating networks, even if the check
is good.  Many of the check verification networks share their deadbeat
lists with each other, much in the same way as multiple credit bureaus
will have the same information.

Also, the agreement between the merchant and the check verification
network can vary.  Some agreements call for a set fee per verification
being charged, with the understanding that the merchant still has to
deal with any bad checks that slip through.  Others have the merchant
pay a percentage fee and have the verification network guarantee
payment (this setup makes accepting checks very much like accepting
credit cards from the merchant's perspective).

The only systems that can actually verify funds availability are those
that are true Electronic Funds Transfer systems, where you enter a PIN
and there's no check.  But, these usually have a limited number of
banks that belong to the network.  The check verification systems work
with any bank's checks, since there's no real data connection to the
bank.  At least that's the way this has always worked on every system
I've used on the West Coast.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Looking For Serial/SCSI/SBUS DID Capable FAX Modem
Date: 23 Apr 1993 18:59:56 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> dirac![e-mail] (Sam
Lipson) writes:

> I have to believe that someone at least makes a box that allows you to
> plug a normal telephone type instrument into a DID trunk, and gives
> the called number via some digital interface.

There are a few products out there that do this.  Some are advertised
in the back of Voice Processing Magazine.  They have single line
units, as well as multi-line units that handle, say, 6 lines.  These
devices usually collect the DID digits, then generate ringing on the
line side of the device.  When your loop-start device answers, they
dump the DID digits via DTMF.  So, as long as your fax modem can send
and decode DTMF, then you're all set.  A company called Nicollet
Technology used to make a multi-line device that could do it either
the DTMF way, or provide a serial port to dump the data.  I don't know
if they still make it, though.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Aaron Good)
Subject: Re: ATM vs. FDDI vs. Fast Ethernet
Organization: Santa Monica College, Santa Monica, CA
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 16:21:36 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: Automatic Teller Machines, I suppose?  I guess not
> in the context of FDDI and Ethernet.  I just couldn't resist using
> my Moderator privileges to toss all three of these in one issue, one
> after another!  :)  Todd Inch, you think *you're* confused!  :)   PAT]


Moderator: do you think we could start a trend, maybe put in a request
to the "industry council on acronyms and funny names" to change ATM to
ASTM - for ASynchron Trans Mode ... :-) well, that's my big
contribution to the conference for the month ... :-)

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

Date: 23-APR-1993 23:14:59.49
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Free Airtime on Contel of VT


[e-mail] wrote:

> I was listening to the radio the other day (it was an accident, I
> assure you!) and heard an adversisement for Contel Cellular, the `B'
> side carrier here in (at least Northern) Vermont.
> ...What they are offering is free airtime on
> weekends for six months, to all customers who sign up for full-year
> contract before the end of this month.

And just where do you get to use this free airtime? Thier system is SO
pethetic you can BARELY get a signal past Montpelier. They are SLOWLY
putting up new towers, but when compared to Cell One/VT (which
generally gives you 30 minutes free per month anyhow), their coverage
area is laughable.  I frankly don't see why ANYONE, regardless of your
cellular needs, would use the "B" side in VT at this time, unless you
MUST have Follow Roaming, which still won't help you when you get to
Southern VT/NH, as US Cell down there is an equally poor carrier, with
no FMR or call delivery to Northern VT.  (They MAY be getting FMR
soon, though ...)

Basically, you get service on I-89 to Wilmington, and then down a bit
on US-7.  Cell One/VT has much more extensive "through" coverage,
especially on US-7, I-91, NH-101 (continuous to the Manchester 00445
system and Boston, but no handoffs yet.) And you get Nationlink, which
in general is slower than FMR and less reliable (not that FMR is all
too great), but you can get reasonably fast setup so calls will follow
you from the Canadian border all the way to Boston, Eastern NH, and
Southern Maine, as well as other areas with Nationlink. Moreover, you
can go to most systems in the Northeast, and callers will receive the
roam port number to reach you at. Not too convenient, but better than
nothing.

> (I'd love to know how it is that Contel got the `B' license rather
> than NETel, considering their comparative landline service areas.  The
> `A' side is a Cell One franchise.)

I guess they won the lottery, so to speak. And now, of course, NETel
will *eventually* have to work out some deal, ranging from buying them
out (which will be soon if they continue to charge "big city" rates
for their ten tower system!), to some sort of operating agreement (like
Mid-Hudson cellular and NYNEX in NY), or to just "plain old" auto call
delivery. This will undoubtedly involve some not-too-insignificant
expense by NYNEX, higher costs to roamers, and a nice fat windfall to
Contel. Isn't it nice to see how the FCC administers these things SO
well?? ;(


Doug    [e-mail]  //  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #276
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27309;
          24 Apr 93 7:49 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14232
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 24 Apr 1993 05:28:53 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11511
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 24 Apr 1993 05:28:18 -0500
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 05:28:18 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #277

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 24 Apr 93 05:28:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 277

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Broadband Symposium Reminder (Steve Agard)
    Phil Zimmerman on the "Clipper Initiative" (Alan T. Furman)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (L Broadfield)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (R Silvernail)
    Re: Clipper Chip and Divulsion of Codes (Christopher Wolfe)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Agard)
Subject: Broadband Symposium Reminder
Organization: DSC Communications, Plano Tx.
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 14:54:22 GMT


                    IEEE Symposium Announcement:

                    ----------------------------
                   |                            |
                   |   SYMPOSIUM ON BROADBAND   |
                   |                            |
                    --------------------------

                            Presented By
        IEEE Communications and Vehicular Technology Society
                          Dallas Chapter

Broadband - Network services of the future, or just another technology
for backbone Public, Private, and Local/Wide Area networks?  Broadband
networks are expected to provide the foundation of emerging services,
synergistic with the Advanced Intelligent Network and the Personal
Communications Services network.  Aspects of broadband are enjoying
the broadest international spectrum of interest and activity yet seen
by the Telecommunications and Computer industries.

This one-day multi-track symposium with panel discussion will present
the latest developments in broadband and wideband markets and
technologies. The symposium will address such questions as: How do
ATM, SMDS and Frame Relay services inter-relate? What are the most
recent technical issues and developments? How do we get to Broadband
from here?  What are the benefits of Bandwidth-on- Demand services? Is
there synergy between telephone and cable TV companies?


                            April 27, 1993
                      The Richardson Civic Center
            411 West Arapaho Rd (@ I 75), Richardson, Texas
                    Registration: 7:45 AM - 8:15 AM

                  Keynote Speaker:   Dr. Dave McDysan
         Boardmember, The ATM Forum;  Executive Staff Member,
   Virtual Data Services Strategic Planning, MCI Telecommunications


                   Tentative Agenda Topics/Speakers

Three sessions are presented: Overview and Applications; Technology;
Services. The Services and Technologies sessions run in parallel.


                       OVERVIEW and APPLICATIONS
                       -------------------------

                         The Evolving Network
                         Richard W. Stephenson
                Director, Customer Applications Analysis
                 Southwestern Bell, Technology Resources

                   CCITT & Trends in ATM Deployment
                            Michael R. Zeug
                          Vice-Chair, T1S1.5;
                       Member of Technical Staff
                          Ameritech Services

                ATM Technology As it Applies to Services
                           Dr. Krish Prabhu
                    V.P., Research And Development
                       Alcatel Network Systems

          Information Service Network Architectures (INA / TINA)
                              Dave Brown
                  Principle Member of Technical Staff
                              NEC America

                    Broadband Network Infrastructure
                              Al Pereira
          Manager, Applications Marketing & Advanced Technology
                        GTE Telephone Operations

                   PANEL DISCUSSION, FOLLOWED BY LUNCH

                              TECHNOLOGY
                              ----------

                    ATM LANs & Application Requirements
                               Chase Bailey
                         Chief Technical Officer
                       Efficient Network Technology

         An Introduction to Multimedia, and Its Impact On The Network
                               Jim Pollock
                                President
                              BusinessWorks

                Issues Between Private & Public ATM Networks
                                Sam Shuler
                     Senior Member of Technical Staff
                            Texas Instruments

                    Multipoint Signaling:  A Case Study
                              Michael Gaddis
                        Senior Research Associate;
            Associate Director of the Applied Research Laboratory
                          Washington University

             Introduction to Network Management for ATM Networks
                             Gunnar Nilsson
                       Systems Architecture Manager
                                ELLEMTEL

                  Scalable Coherent Interface for ATM
                            Peter R. Fenner
                               President
                          Lightbus Technology


                               SERVICES
                               ---------

                               Irfan Ali
                           V.P., The ATM Forum;
               Manager, Competitive Analysis & Technology
                           Northern Telecom

             Benefits of a Common Broadband Services Platform
                              Athar S. Mian
                         Member of Technical Staff
                        NYNEX Science and Technology

             Internetworking Frame Realy, ATM, SMDS and ISDN
                               Larry Lang
                             Product Manager
                              Cisco Systems

                   Applications and Relationships of
               Narrowband, Wideband, and Broadband Services
                             Mike McLoughlin
                        Systems Product Manager
                            General DataComm

                 Video Dial Tone Network Architecture
                            Richard Barale
                   Director, Video Systems Marketing
                    DSC Communications Corporation

              Meeting End-User Demand For Flexible Bandwidth
                             Gary Sanders
              Product Manager, Transport Network Applications
                        Ericsson Network Systems


              PANEL DISCUSSIONS,  FOLLOWED BY RECEPTION


                           SESSION CHAIRS:

                       Overview and Applications
                       -------------------------
                             Steven Agard
                      Vice-Chair, The ATM Forum;
                  Chairman, T1S1.5 ATM Subworking Group;
                            Senior Manager
                     DSC Communications Corporation

                              Technology
                              ----------
                             Demos Kostas
                Manager, Complex Technologies Standards
                   GTE Telephone Operations Services

                               Services
                               --------
                             Ron Maginley
             Senior Manager, Carrier Service Development
                           Northern Telecom


Although I am willing to answer Symposium questions e-mailed to me,
registration must be provided in writing, with the following form:

                          REGISTRATION FORM:

                        Symposium On Broadband

Send your tax-deductible funds, payable to "IEEE" to: IEEE, 2116 E.
Arapaho, Suite 474, Richardson, TX 75081.  Registrations postmarked
before April 7, 1993 are eligible for the Pre-registered rates below.
Seating is limited.

Check all that apply:
Attendee:
                                 Pre-registered:
                             (Before April 7, 1993)     At the Door:
                             ----------------------    -------------
Student/ Lifetime/ Retired Members     [  ] $20          [  ] $30
   IEEE Student ID#____________
Group (of 2 or more, price each)       [  ] $50          [  ] N/A
IEEE Member                            [  ] $60          [  ] $75
Non-Member                             [  ] $70          [  ] $95

[  ] Master Card/Visa         [  ] PO#____________ Amount $____________
     (Sorry, no Amex)         [  ] Check#_________ Amount $____________
     #_________________________
     Exp. date:________________


Planning to Attend:
          [  ] Overview and Applications  +  Technology sessions
   or:    [  ] Overview and Applications  +  Services sessions

Name________________________________________________
Company_____________________________________________
Address_____________________________________________
       _____________________________________________
       _____________________________________________


   Chapter Chairperson:     Dhawal Moghe,  BNR Inc.,
                                           [phone]
   Symposium Chairperson:   Steve Bootman, DSC Communications Corp.,
                                           [phone]
   Program Chairperson:     Steven Agard,  DSC Communications Corp.,
                                           [phone]
   Symposium Treasurer:     Stanton Zeff,  Alcatel Network Systems
                                           [phone]


[Moderator's Note: I am sorry this 'reminder note' only reached me
three days before the conference, with a weekend in the middle at
that.  Maybe some people will see it in time who want to go.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Phil Zimmerman on the "Clipper initiative"
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 93 01:03:53 PDT


The following was posted on the Usenet newsgroup alt.security.pgp
by Philip Zimmermann, author of PGP (a public-key crypto program):

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

Here are some ideas for those of you who want to oppose the White
House Clipper chip crypto initiative.  I think this is going to be a
tough measure to fight, since the Government has invested a lot of
resources in developing this high-profile initiative.  They are
serious about it now.  It won't be as easy as it was defeating Senate
Bill 266 in 1991.

Possible actions to take in response:

1) Mobilize your friends to to all the things on this list, and more.

2) Work the Press.  Talk with your local newspaper's science and
technology reporter.  Write to your favorite trade rags.  Better yet,
write some articles yourself for your favorite magazines or
newspapers.  Explain why the Clipper chip initiative is a bad idea.
Remember to tailor it to your audience.  The general public may be
slow to grasp why it's a bad idea, since it seems so technical and
arcane and innocent sounding.  Try not to come across as a flaming
libertarian paranoid extremist [*Moi?* -- ATF], even if you are one.

3) Lobby Congress.  Write letters and make phone calls to your Member
of Congress in your own district, as well as your two US Senators.
Many Members of Congress have aides that advise them of technology
issues.  Talk to those aides.

4) Involve your local political parties.  The Libertarian party would
certainly be interested.  There are also libertarian wings of the
Democrat and Republican parties.  The right to privacy has a
surprisingly broad appeal, spanning all parts of the political
spectrum.  We have many natural allies.  The ACLU.  The NRA.  Other
activist groups that may someday find themselves facing a government
that can suppress them much more efficiently if these trends play
themselves out.  But you must articulate our arguments well if you
want to draw in people who are not familiar with these issues.

4) Contribute money to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), assuming
these groups will fight this initiative.  They need money for legal
expenses and lobbying.

5) Mobilize opposition in industry.  Companies that will presumably
develop products that will incorporate the Clipper chip should be
lobbied against it, from within and from without.  If you work for a
telecommunications equipment vendor, first enlist the aid of your
coworkers and fellow engineers against this initiative, and then
present your company's management with a united front of engineering
talent against this initiative.  Write persuasive memos to your
management, with your name and your colleagues' names on it.  Hold
meetings on it.

6) Publicize, deploy and entrench as much guerrilla
techno-monkeywrenching apparatus as you can.  That means PGP,
anonymous mail forwarding systems based on PGP, PGP key servers, etc.
The widespread availability of this kind of technology might also be
used as an argument that it can't be effectively suppressed by
Government action.  I will also be working to develop new useful tools
for these purposes.

7) Be prepared to engage in an impending public policy debate on this
topic.  We don't know yet how tough this fight will be, so we may have
to compromise to get most of what we want.  If we can't outright
defeat it, we may have to live with a modified version of this Clipper
chip plan in the end.  So we'd better be prepared to analyze the
Government's plan, and articulate how we want it modified.


Philip Zimmermann

Forwarded to the Internet TELECOM Digest by Alan T. Furman,
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Date: 23 Apr 93 21:36:25 GMT


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

> Please take two anti-paranoia pills and call your doctor in the morning!
> Sorry, but the misinformation in this article forces me to respond.

And I (for one) am glad you did so; your response (particularly the
attachment from Dorothy Denning) was informative.

> This is just not true.  The current offering is in stand-alone devices
> which YOU can buy at YOUR discretion.  There is no purposefully
> crippled telephone system.  No one is forcing you to attach these
> devices to your telephone or buy a telephone which has the Clipper
> chip in it.  Even if you attach one of the Telephone Security Devices
> to your phone, it does nothing unless you push the little red button,
> i.e. you have the choice of enabling/disabling the security feature
> completely on each call.

(Note: I'm writing all of this as an attempt to present the "sane
paranoid" view, if you will.  Or at least the "polite paranoid" view.)

So far so good; I agree with every little thing you say in the above
paragraph.  What you need to understand, though, is that government
measures taken in the past which can be compared to Clipper have
rarely _remained_ voluntary.

For as long as the use of the Clipper chips remains entirely
voluntary, I believe there will be products on the market that will
intentionally *not* implement it.  Indeed, I believe (and fervently
hope) that the non-Clipper products will kick the Clipper products's
collective butt in the marketplace, on that issue alone.  However, if
it turns out that Clipper is made mandatory, or that it is somehow
pressured into a de facto standard, then the entire Clipper concept
deserves all the villification it has gotten so far, and more.

It's even possible that this is all a confusion issue; your post
suggests that Clipper is intended as principally for use in export-
market devices, to be an automatically-approved encryption method so
as to avoid the ITARS restrictions.  If this is indeed the case, then
all I can say is that whoever put together the "official"
announcements is an imbecile: they failed to clearly explain this, and
between the recent FBI proposals for "tap access" to electronic
telephone equipment and the current administration's increasing
disregard for individual rights could have anticipated this outcry
with even a moment's thought.

> There is however a strong need for multi-national U.S. companies such
> as AT&T to be able to secure voice/data/fax from foreign agencies and
> competitors.  This is a documented need that DOES NOT impact your
> rights as an individual for privacy from anyone, including the
> government.  As far as that is concerned, you can be no worse off than
> you are currently with no voice protection.  To put it bluntly, the
> only reason you may consider your telephone conversation private is
> because any number of foreign agencies, companies and individuals have
> made a conscientious decision that your phone conversations are not
> worth listening to!

Again, if you are talking about use of U.S.-exported devices, then I
will provisionally agree (whether or not ITARS is sensible is a
different debate.)  If you are speaking of intra-U.S. use, then you
are flat wrong; the reason I may consider my conversation private has
nothing at all to do with anyone else's conscious decision about the
value of my conversation, it has to do with my conscious decision
whether or not to use an STU III (or similar device.)

> I do take issue with the current thread in some Usenet groups that
> implicates AT&T (and therefore I presume those working on the TSD and
> other secure products) as subverting a person's individual right to
> privacy by offering a product line with the Clipper chip installed.

I will agree that your offering such a product does not subvert
individual rights.  I would hope that you would choose to also offer
better products; perhaps a version with Clipper, and a non-export
version with Clipper for calling your overseas friends and FooBar (or
whatever) for normal use.

> The facts are that there is no government mandate to prevent people
> from choosing the encryption scheme of their choice.  There are others
> available.  You can purchase them now.  What the government has said
> you can not do all along is export them, UNLESS you get their prior
> approval which is not often granted.  Clipper is a compromise.  In my
> mind, it is the best compromise (actually the only viable one I've
> seed to date) obtainable now.

So long as those products remain available, and so long as the
government does not prevent their production or free commerce in them,
all will be as you say.  The American public, however, has a long and
well- justified history of mistrusting it's government -- actions
which appear to increase the government's power, particularly those
which could be construed as leading toward a totalitarian state, tend
to elicit a somewhat heated response.

> Despite the whining on other newsgroups, I have never seen a
> solution suggested that satisfies the needs of law enforcement and
> U.S. business in an equitable manner.

The question of whether law enforcement *has* "needs" is also
innapropriate here (although it is terrifically interesting.)

Again, if Clipper is truly intended only for the export market, or to
ease that situation, *that's* a different issue.  (And the idiot who
didn't make it clear in the press releases should be hung.  Slowly.)
However, if it is the administration's intent to have Clipper used in
domestic products, then this is no different from the FBI's "digital
wiretap" attempt.


Yours for a free marketplace,

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

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

Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
From: [e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 22:57:23 CST
Organization: The Villa's most exclusive annex


In comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] writes:

> Is there anyone who actually thinks they can keep those two keys
> secure?

The Family Key is the killer.  A single key for all the chips that
decrypts the session key, encrypted by the user key.  This system
looks far too easy to hack when that Family Key gets compromised.

Anyone else think a single, hard-wired key is a Bad Idea?


Roy M. Silvernail |+|  [e-mail]

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

From: CHRISTOPHER WOLF <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Clipper Chip and Divulsion of Codes
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 13:01:44 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


About this divulsion of codes required to un-encrypt the Clipper
Chip's output: Are these codes actually released, or does the
information from the conversation get taken to the two agencies who
decode it and give it back?

If the codes are actually given out, wouldn't the agency just write
them down and use them at any point in the future that they wanted to,
even if it was a while after when they asked for them.  As in: they
may not be able to prove anything right now, but if they listen long
enough, they can get almost anything, if twisted in the correct
manner.


Christopher Wolf   Electrical Engineer   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #277
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28784;
          24 Apr 93 8:46 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00227
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 24 Apr 1993 06:24:05 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28117
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 24 Apr 1993 06:23:19 -0500
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 06:23:19 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #278

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 24 Apr 93 06:23:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 278

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Germany to Offer Custom Calling Features (Juergen Ziegler)
    CLASS Features Now Work With My Personal 800 Number (Kevin Paul Herbert)
    War On Payphones, er, I Mean Drugs (Steve Forrette)
    Another Data Access Arrangement (Martin McCormick)
    Caller ID Question (Justin Leavens)
    Re: Autodialer Recommendations, Please (Brian T. Vita)
    Re: Bell Canada Restricts International Calls From Pay Phones (Mark Brader)
    Re: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required (Carl Moore)
    Re: Problems in Austin TX (Seth B. Rothenberg)
    Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives (Joe Markovic)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Peter Capek)
    Re: NTT Telephone Cards - How do They Work? (Anand Datragailda)
    Phone/Debit Cards and Rock Music? ([e-mail])
    Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom (Rudolph Maceyko)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 02:14:52 +0200
Subject: Germany to Offer Custom Calling Features


Germany, a major G7 nation still has a monopoly in major portions of
telecommuncations. As a result German telephone customer were offered
really VPOTS (Very Plain Old Telephone Service). Services and features
that are commonplace in the USA and other countries around the world
for years or even decades will be offered partially this fall.

TELEKOM, the German telecommunications operator, will offer starting
this fall such *exciting* :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) features like:

- itemised billig (pending government approval);
- call waiting;
- call forwarding;
- conference (three-way) calls;
- call barring (outgoing calls);
- user controlled identification (of POTS lines on ISDN phones).

These will be available to all customers that are hooked up to a
modern digital switch. According to preliminary information around 40%
of the lines will be capable to offer this services by the end of
1993. Nationwide availability will be offered in 1995. But it should
be noted that most customers that are hooked up to electromechanical
switching gear will get a new phone number if they *wish* to get those
services, since these lines will be served by a remote switch.

I am anxious to find out, if TELEKOM will assign the same codes for
these various features as they are used in other countries. Since
these features are available virtually anywhere within the USA,
interested readers could send me a list of all feature codes, so that
I may compare those with the correspondig TELEKOM codes. Is there
somewhere a list/file (FTP) of these various feature codes available?


Juergen Ziegler.........  Internet: [e-mail]
Obervogt-Haefelinstr. 48
W7580 Buehl (Baden).....  Secondary Mail address:
Germany.................  [e-mail]

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

Subject: CLASS Features Now Work With My Personal 800 Number
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 93 17:13:43 MST
From: Kevin Paul Herbert <[e-mail]>


I have a personal 800 number provided by PacBell and Sprint. Last
week, I called it from the airport while travelling, and the call
didn't go through. I got the "Unable to complete..." recording. I
reported this to repair service.  They told me that there were switch
table errors introduced when preparing for 800 number portability, and
that the problem has been fixed.

Since I got home, I called my personal 800 number from one line to the
other.  Distinctive ringing worked, and so did call return.

So at least from within the LATA, CLASS features now work in PacBell
via their 800 numbers. I'll have to arrange an experiment to see what
happens when I get an 800 call from out of the LATA. When I do this,
I'll report back here.


Kevin

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

Date: Fri, 23 Apr 93 16:18:29 -0700
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: War On Payphones, er, I mean Drugs


Here's a new piece in the War On Drugs being waged at a payphone near
you.  I saw a bank of US West payphones at a gas station here in
Seattle.  They are located in a high drug/high prostitution area.
There is a sign posted above them which reads "These phones may be out
of order after 6 PM.  Please ask the gas station attendant inside if
you need to call 911 for an emergency."  Note that these are genuine
Bell payphones, not COCOTs.  This seems like a really stupid thing to
do, IMHO.  It seems like the concept of payphones being used as the
only available phones by neighborhood residents who don't have private
service has completely disappeared.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Please note that telco *never* implements these
changes on their own -- nor the one where the phones work but coins
cannot be used during overnight hours, forcing the use of calling
cards, collect or third number billing. They make these changes after
community pressure, either by citizen's neighborhood groups or in some
cases the city authorities.  Telco wants their phones to be used and
could care less what people talk about; it is the above mentioned
people who get on telco's case; so telco goes along to placate the
complainers or to accomodate new laws in the community, etc.   PAT]

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

Subject: Another Data Access Arrangement
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 15:08:22 -0500
From: Martin McCormick <[e-mail]>


There have been several recent postings by people looking for
computer- telephone interfaces similar to the old data access
arrangement.  We are looking for a device which can detect incoming
calls, take a line off-hook, and provide a two-way audio channel
between the telephone line and the computer which, in this case is a
Sun sparc.  The Sun Sparc can use its audio channel to generate DTMF
tones, play messages over the line, and "listen" to the feedback from
the telephone line in order to monitor call progress.  We want to be
able to send network trouble reports to a mixture of alphanumeric and
voice pagers and possibly individual telephones.  The audio coupler
must be FCC-approved and must prevent any ringing current from
appearing in the audio system for obvious reasons.  I have thought
that an ordinary Hayse-type modem instructed to answer, but not send
carrier in parallel with the audio device seems like the cheapest
method for line control plus it could function as a modem when dialing
the alphanumeric pagers.

    The ideal audio device would be capacitively coupled to the
line and would simply transfer audio when the modem supplied the
resistance to pickup the line.  If anybody knows of such a device, I
would like to hear about it.  Thank you.


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

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

Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 13:50:11 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Caller ID Question


   Is there any way to get Caller-ID information from a SS-7 equipped
switch with CLASS service capabilities that is *not* programmed to offer
Caller-ID?

   I only ask this because I got in a discussion with someone who
insisted that such equipped switches actually sent this information,
and COs that didn't offer caller ID used filters to remove the
information.


Justin Leavens         Microcomputer Specialist
[e-mail]    University of Southern California

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

Date: 23 Apr 93 23:55:11 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Autodialer Recommendations, Please


> I'm looking for an autodialer to hang off of an uninterruptible
> power supply.

There is a simple two step way of solving your problem:

1. Have your paging company arrange a group page for the four pagers.
   Usually they give you a special number that will hit all four pagers
   at once.

2. Pick up a cheap autodialer for a burglar alarm system.  Many
   companies make these including (ugh) Radio Shack.

UPS closes contact -> dialer calls group page number -> all four
pagers go off.


Brian Vita      CSS, Inc.       70702,2233

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Restricts International Calls From Pay Phones
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 93 15:31:18 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: We did have mention of this a month or two ago. But
> if the card reader phones won't accept cash to those points, and telco
> refuses to allow credit, then *what can* the card reader phones be
> used for where international calls are concerned?   PAT]

Well, there ARE still collect calls and third-number billings!


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


[Moderator's Note: No third number billings unless someone is
available at the third number to verify the charges. Regards collect,
there are manyt countries were collect calls from the USA are not
accepted automatically by the telecom administration; I do not know if
this is the case in Canada or not.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 23 Apr 93 10:02:49 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re: USA - Intro to Telecom Area Codes Required


[e-mail] writes:

> You cannot ALWAYS insert a 1 before a ten digit number ... in some
> places, the rule "1 means toll and the absence of 1 means non-toll"
> is enforced strictly, and so if you have a number in a different NPA
> that is non-toll, you can't dial 1 first. [mentions local calls between
> Omaha in 402 and Council Bluffs in 712]

This too can vary.  In the Washington DC area, the published
instructions are:

7D for local in your own area code;
NPA + 7D for local to a different area code;
1 + NPA + 7D for long distance (this includes within 301 and within
703) and I think 1+NPA+7D can be used for any of these, with NPA+7D
being useable for any local call.

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

From: [e-mail] (Seth B Rothenberg)
Subject: Re: Problems in Austin TX
Date: 23 Apr 93 18:16:50 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


A number of years ago, AT&T suffered an outage when workers
accidentally cut a fiber from NYC to NJ.  I don't know if the workers
were AT&T.  As I recall, it cut off all of Manhattan from the rest of
the world.

I was surprised they did not have any copper to fall back to -- or
even an alternate route -- eg, to the North through Albany.  Companies
that could reach other carriers were better off than those that were
stuck with AT&T (due to PBX programming).  This is almost as bad as
the incident with AT&T shutting down the FAA's network due to a bad
power supply when they were on 'house power'.  Is there ever going to
be an FCC ruling that will require carriers to meet certain redundancy
capabilities?

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

From: Joe Markovic <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 20:00:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Phone Service Expected to Save Lives


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 ...

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

> This was discussed on alt.folklore.urban a while ago, and the
> conclusion was that this is an urban legend.

What's so difficult about beleiving that people could be stupid enough
to not teach their children how to dial 911.

I was in one of AT&T's phone centers and listened to a customer asking
about the AT&T videophone.  The salesclerk told her that two units
would be needed so that each person could see the other.  The customer
replied that she thought anybody calling from any other phone would
see her.  Then commenting that it concerned her since she sometimes
answered the phone after coming out of the shower.


ciao,

Joe   Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario   416-629-7000/629-7044

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

Date: Fri, 23 Apr 93 14:13:02 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


James Gleick asks:

> 2) How were area codes assigned? The most populous areas seem to have the
> lowest numbers, but is there any geographic logic?

 ... and various people have explained about the relationship between
dial pulses and the length of time to dial a number and population of
area covered.  But there's another "rule" which was used which is
little known.  That is that area codes which contain a middle "0" were
originally assigned to those areas (i.e., states) which were assigned
only a single area code.  Area codes which contain a middle "1" were
assigned to pieces of states which were assigned more than one area
code.  Thus, originally, all of New Jersey was 609, but New York was
212, 516, 914, 716, and (I think) 315.  This "rule" had only a very
temporary effect, since the original assignments were modified by area
code splits very soon after direct dialing went into operation.  I
think the first one was adding 201 to New Jersey.


Peter Capek

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

From: Ops Mgr <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NTT Telephone Cards - How do They Work?
Sender: [e-mail] (Anand Datragailda)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: JVNC
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 21:12:30 GMT


Ops Mgr <[e-mail]> writes:

> I recently returned from a trip to Hawaii and something that struck me
> as odd was the fact that NTT Telephone cards with a Hawaiian motif
> were being sold there at $15.00 a pop for 500 "credits".

> Wonder how long before this gets popular in the US.

> [Moderator's Note: Hawaii *is* part of the USA, but I'm sure you meant
> to say 'the mainland'. Actually, they are starting to catch on here.
> AT&T's largest reseller/aggregator, US Fibercom is ironing out the
> details now.  See the details in the next message.  PAT]

When I said "Wonder how long before this gets popular in the US."  I
meant exactly that.  The cards are completely useless (except for
aesthetics) anywhere outside of Japan.  They were being sold in
souvenir shops in and around Oahu, Maui, and the Big Island.


Lee

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

From: [e-mail] (Shag)
Subject: Phone/Debit Cards and Rock Music?
Date: 24 Apr 93 01:09:45 GMT
Organization: Screaming in Digital, the Queensryche Digest


I thought some telecom folks might find this interesting ... came
across it in another newsgroup.

[e-mail] wrote (in rec.music.info):

> Split Enz Phone Cards
> ---------------------
> A couple of months ago it was reported in Rip It Up that Festival were
> planning to have a set of Enz phone cards made up for media and record
> retail personnel. And also, that other NZ bands may be honoured.
> But I haven't heard anything else about it.
> I shall ask around - BOUND to be a collectors item.

It would, admittedly, be pretty interesting to have my IQ card feature
the emblem of my favorite metal group (and actually, I could probably
ink a small representation of it below the IQ symbol)... has anyone
(outside the US, since I'm fairly sure we can't get such nifty cards
here) seen such cards?  I'm not sure whether they'd be permanent
plastic cards, or the debit cards that've been discussed recently.

Perhaps in the near future these debit cards will be the hot "promo"
items of choice at conventions -- instead of handing out pens or
rulers, give out debit cards with your company's symbol?  Heck, you
could even go so far as to have your *business* cards be phone debit
cards.  Might encourage prospective clients to give you a call, if it
was "on you." :)


Shag (what?  time for my medication?)

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

[e-mail]  [e-mail]  [e-mail]
ShagNet - Rutgers/NJIN / Editor of "Screaming in Digital" | PPI 14.4 FaxModem
Dialup access serving / The Queensryche Net-Digest.  Mail | PC/GEOS GeoSadist
Burlington County NJ / [e-mail] | Cannondale SR-500

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom
Date: 23 Apr 1993 19:17:20 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> When the largest aggregator/reseller of AT&T decides to get involved,
> then you can assume a trend is probably underway.  The program, to be
> known as 'Talk Tickets' will not use mag stripes. Instead, there will
> be little carboard tickets, almost like bus or train tickets.  Tickets
> will be available in several denominations including $5, $10 and $20
> sizes. Each ticket will have a unique serial number on it. All calls
> will go to an 800 number where voice prompting will tell the person to
> enter their ticket number and the number they wish to call.

I wonder how much this will solve the problems that have traditionally
existed in the United States because of the lack of such a system.
For example, will these tickets be generally available at newsstands,
vending machines, post offices, etc?  If not, then it really doesn't
solve the problem of non-US residents needing temporary telecom
services.  Also, they will have a central record of all calls placed
with a particular ticket.  If you buy it mail-order, or 'recharge' it
with a credit card, they also know who you are.  Even without this
knowledge, by correlating the calls placed with a single card that was
purchased anonymously, they may be able to figure out who you are.
One of the advantages of a token card system where the value is
actually stored on the card and is subtracted by the phone itself is
that it provides for complete anonymity, without having to carry a lot
of change.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I hope to have at least a few of these answers for
the group when I publish my next report, hopefully during the week
ahead.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rudolph T Maceyko)
Subject: Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom
Date: 23 Apr 93 23:29:36 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


 From McDonald's/AT&T's latest promotion: AT&T TeleTickets come with
super value meals.

The ones you get from McDonald's are expendible; you use the three units
and they're done.  You can use more than one TeleTicket for one
call -- you just feed more numbers in when the first one is used up.

You can buy the 'real' tickets from AT&T for a 'suggested retail
price' of $0.60/unit, where one unit equals one minute for domestic US
calls.

 From the back of one of the "McDonald's" tickets:

AT&T TeleTicket(sm) Service

1. Press 1 800 331 0888 from a puch-button telephone.  (pause)

2. Press AT&T TeleTicket Number ->  XXXXXXXXXX

3. Select an option:

   - To call an information service, press * and then press:
     1=Sports Update  2=World News  3=US Weather

   - To call within the US, to Canada or to the Caribbean, press 1; press
     area code and phone number.

   - To make an international call, press country code, city code and
     local phone number.

Any Questions?  Please call our Customer Service free at 1 800 462 1818
in the US.  Outside the US, call Customer Service collect 408 428 2734.

DO NOT INSERT CARD IN TELEPHONE.
Made in USA.  No refund.  Offer expires 6/30/93.

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


Rudy Maceyko <[e-mail]>     University of Pittsburgh/CIS

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #278
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01344;
          26 Apr 93 7:06 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05774
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:31:47 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15149
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:31:03 -0500
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:31:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #280

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Apr 93 04:31:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 280

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Graham Toal)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (P. Peterson)
    Re: ATM vs. FDDI vs. Fast Ethernet (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: Another Kevin Poulsen Indictment (David G. Cantor)
    Re: Latest Prodigy News: New Charge For Users (Kevin W. Reed)
    Re: Phil Zimmerman on the "Clipper Initiative" (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Still Another New AT&T Plan (Andy Brager)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) ([e-mail])
    NYTel Billing Problem Solved (After 19 Months) (Dave Niebuhr)
    Who I Am (Dan Gillmor)
    New Disclosures in 2600 Case (David Sobel, CPSR via Dave Banisar)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Sun, 25 Apr 93 21:37:34 GMT
From: Graham Toal <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System


[e-mail] (Kevin Kadow) wrote:

> Clipper is a good compromise for BUSINESS communication which needs to
> be sent encrypted to a nation which is prohibited from having other US
> encryption schemes exported to them.

Why compromise.  Over the last couple of days I've been experimenting
with sending voice over a v32bis modem.  A sample rate of 3300 samples
per second, each sample being 8 bits; and compression of 2.5:1 from
the PD utility 'shorten', squeezes understandable speech into
14400bps, with enough CPU left over for encryption.  And the nice
thing is you can do it over the internet at local call rates :-)

Now, my question for the Digest readership: are there any regulations
anywhere forbidding speech over the internet.  I'm really only
thinking about commercial providers like the CIX -- I take it for
granted that the NSF backbone prohibits anything useful :-)

[e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin) wrote:

> In a similar vein, here's another plug for {Wired} (no, I'm not
> selling my way through gradual school on subscriptions). It's got an
> interesting sidebar about the Bivens Legal Action Movement (BLAM!),
> headed by one Scott McMillan (no *immediate* relation); his father
> sued several federal agents who accosted one Mr. Bivens, and won
> ({Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents}).  At newsstands near you ...

At newsstands near me indeed!  I was astounded to see issue #1 of
Wired on sale at a *tiny* news agents in a London (UK) backstreet this
week.  [Tavistock Place, if anyone's looking.  Two blocks west of Judd
Street].

Anyone know who's backing these guys?  It must take some up front cash
to produce a glossy like that *and* get it on the streets in Britain ...


G

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 93 21:14:38 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. PADGETT PETERSON)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System


Re: Baltimore Clipper: a fast sailing vessel of the mid-1800s designed
    to be able to avoid unfriendly government interdiction 8*)

I have seen just about all of the technical information published so
far on Clipper (most via the White House and Dorothy Denning), and
IMHO we still have not seen enough to have an opinion, and at least
part of what we have seen is wrong. This is based on several
considerations, some of which is related to "the strange thing the dog
did in the night".

1) The government is not stupid. Ignorant in a number of area perhaps
   but not stupid. In particular the mathematicians and engineers
   who design KG equipment are *very* good, they just do not
   advertise.

2) If Clipper were easily broken then it would not be our government
   that would be the concern, it would be outsiders.

3) If Clipper were easily broken and after industry (don't kid yourselves,
   it is not the general middle-class public that Clipper is the response
   to) invested a few billions in Clipper it were revealed, heads would
   roll inside the beltway. Elected heads.

Therefore I will make some predictions:

1) There will not be one family key, there will be many. There may be
   one or a set of family keys purchasable by corporations for their
   use, but these will each be unique.

2) Messages will not be encrypted E(M;K) with a 30 bit key for K, K will
   be considerably more complex. Once an algorithm is known (and we cannot
   expect a single algorithm (keyword being "single") to remain secret
   for very long. A thirty bit key will yield to a massive search in
   about a minute if plaintext (header) is known. The government knows
   this (see above).

3) An identifier of the receiver will be broadcast in plaintext as part
   of the header. (shakey but I believe this will be true).

Second generation predictions:

1) Corporate security organizations will be able to monitor any Clipper
   in their organization (note: this is owner's rights and is different
   from a wiretap - see 2 & 3 below).

2) When a law enforcement agaency makes a reguest to tap, they will
   receive a duplicate of the monitored Clipper (hardware). They will
   not, except in special and not easily granted circumstances, receive the
   keys. This physical device will be strictly accounted for and certified
   as destroyed when a tap expires.

3) There will be at least four classes of Clipper chips, some with fixed
   keys and some programmable.

To sum up, I believe in Clipper. I believe it will do what it is
supposed to. I believe that it is something I have been waiting for
for several years: low cost, reliable general encryption. It is not
going to replace STU-IIIs or KG equipment when needed but it will make
telecommuting possible.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: ATM vs. FDDI vs. Fast Ethernet
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 16:23:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Aaron
Good) writes:

> [...] change ATM to ASTM - for ASynchron Trans Mode

Sorry, that's already taken by the American Society for the Testing of
Materials, a professional society which promulgates standards for
safety testing, among other things.  For example, I have a whiteboard
marker labeled ``NON-TOXIC: Conforms to ASTM D4236''.

Disclaimer:  I might have the name slightly wrong.


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

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

Subject: Re: Another Kevin Poulsen Indictment
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 93 17:32:00 -0700
From: David G. Cantor <[e-mail]>


In TELECOM Digest Volume 13, Issue 273, Ronald Marks writes:

> Computer hacker indicted; two others plead guilty . . .
> The 19-count federal indictment charges Kevin L. Poulsen, 27 . . .
> Ronald M. Austin, 29, and Justin T. Petersen, 32, both of Los
> Angeles, pleaded guilty to computer fraud charges  . . .

It was almost ten years ago when District Attorney Philibosian of Los
Angeles County brought felony charges against Ronald Mark Austin, a
just-graduated Santa Monica High School Student about to begin his
freshman year at UCLA.  In a highly publicized press conference,
bringing reporters from all over the world, Philibosian accused Austin
and Poulsen of illegally accessing classified material through the
(then) Arpanet.  Charges were not filed against Poulson because he was
a minor.  These two accessed the net through varous UCLA Computer
Science Department computers, initially by accessing an acount with
both login name and password of ucb.

Austin was convicted of a felony and spent an actual 60 days in
prison, undergoing psychiatric observation, and much more time on
probation doing community service.

Sadly, it appears that some hackers never learn.


David G. Cantor    Department of Mathematics
University of California   Los Angeles, CA 90024-1555
Internet:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin W. Reed)
Subject: Re: Latest Prodigy News: New Charge For Users
Organization: Posted via TeleSys Development Systems (Mesa, AZ U.S.A.)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 03:26:35 GMT


[e-mail] (Arthur R. McGee) writes:

> Don't forget to let them know that America Online is now CHEAPER than
> Prodigy! American Online is ONLY $9.95 month for five hours of service
> and $3.50 per hour thereafter. Prodigy is $14.95 per month and I
> forget what the price is per hour.

Close ... Prodigy is now $14.95 per month and 0.00 per hour for a vast
majority of their services offered.  They do have some premium areas,
but most people that I know that use the service don't use them.

The change in fee structure occured when Prodigy opened up higher
speed access numbers to their system.  They now support 9600 baud in
most areas and I believe 14.4kbps in some ares.

If you only use America On-line for less than six hours a month, I guess
they would be cheaper ...


================== TELESYS DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS ==================
Kevin W. Reed                Public *NIX Site and Newsfeed Source
[e-mail]           UUCP: ...!ncar!noao!enuucp!telesys!kreed
SCO Xenix/Unix Support              Data/UUCP/BBS [phone]

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 93 07:04 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Phil Zimmerman on the "Clipper initiative"


On Sat, 24 Apr 93 01:03:53 PDT, [e-mail] posted a bunch
of stuff concerning the "Clipper Initiative".  For some interesting
background, pick up a copy of {Wired}, whose lead story this month by
Steven Levy concerns "cypherpunks" -- crypto activists.

I understand that a number of people have had a hard time getting
{Wired} in some parts of the country.  If you can't find it where you
are, e-mail the {Wired} at [e-mail].


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

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

Date: 25 Apr 1993 14:36:05 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Andy Brager)
Subject: Re: Still Another New AT&T Plan


In comp.dcom.telecom is written:

> A letter in the mail today from AT&T tells of still another plan for
> long distance calling, called "Simple Savings", and later it is said
> to be part of "The 'i' Plan. There are so many of these things
> anymore, it is even starting to get confusing to me!

I haven't received any notice, but I happened to call about this exact
plan a few hours ago before I read this.  The "Simple Savings" plan,
the nice lady working in Pheonix, Arizona (where the weather is really
nice this time of year) was kind enough to volunteer, was designed by
the customer reps themselves, based on customer comments and
suggestions.

> This deal is based on your making $30 per month or more in long
> distance calls. If you do, then you get a 25 percent discount on calls
> to any one area code of your choice, and 15 percent discount on your
> calls to all other area codes. These discounts will be automatically
> deducted from your bill each month. This sounds a lot like the old
> 'Pick a Point' plan that Illinois Bell used to offer (maybe still
> does) on calls within their LATA in Illinois.

> I guess this turns out to be a better deal than Reach Out America,
> depending on your application; the time of day you make your calls,
> etc.

Exactly.  For use during the day, it's a bigger savings for me at
least.  In fact, the reason I called was because the service I wish to
call *requires* you to use AT&T.  Something about digital access
facilities or something :) Otherwise I'd do it more cheaply with Pat's
service.

> To sign up, you call AT&T at 1-800-358-8231, extension 3269, tell them
> which area code you want, then continue calling as always.

I dialed 1-800-222-0300 to get information, presumably she would have
signed me up if I was ready.  But I thought we were boycotting AT&T
over their irresponsibility regarding privacy issues and Uncle Sam,
not to mention their heavy-handed approach to a low cost Unix (BSDI).

> The two things I am curious about are a caveat emptor at the bottom of
> the letter which says 'subject to billing availability' and some code
> numbers.

I live in GTE territory and she said it would not be available here
until June.

> At the very bottom of my letter, in small print is this legend:
> It includes one of my phone numbers, which I replaced with xxx.

>           C31 312 xxx xxxx Y 074 VEI IWS SS01 9627  $

> I think the 074 refers to the billing office at Illinois Bell here in
> Chicago. Does anyone know what the other letters and numbers mean?
> Most important, note the dollar sign on the right side ... does this
> mean I'd get money for leaving them then being lured back by the
> promise of some filthy money?  :) I wonder how much?  :) Or does the
> lack of figures after the dollar sign mean I get nothing?  :(

Pure guess here, but the lady told me that if I gave her my phone
number, she could run it through the computer which would take my last
three bills and figure out which plan was best for me based on my
calling patterns.  (The 'I' plan - as opposed to the "YOU" plan - is a
superset of the other "Reach Out America" plans I understood her to
say.)

Perhaps, if you were to read the above code backwards, it would
indicate the amount you would save (or the total amount of the bill
perhaps) if you were to switch to one of their plans, which are
encoded in the numbers and letters.  ie. $72.69 and that SS01 would be
"simple saver plan 1" or some such.  Again, this is a guess, I really
haven't a clue.


Andy    cerritos.edu!swc!wndrsvr!andyb

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 93 19:41:46 CST


>> Does it only check that the account is valid, or does it also check the
>> account to see if funds are available?

>> [Moderator's Note: Both; all three actually. And before long, the
>> money will be debited right out of your account on the spot. Instant
>> debit is the direction things are going.   PAT]

> Sorry, Pat, but that's the wrong answer.  Banks don't give this sort
> of information out to anyone who happens to know an account number.

> Andy Behrens, Burlington Coat Factory

> [Moderator's Note: You say 'banks don't give this sort of information
> to anyone who happens to know an account number ...'  ha ha ha ...

You would be surprised what I can find out about you given a few
selected numbers ...

If you would like to know my bank account balance, and you have my
account number, you can find out for a dollar.  Go to my bank
(actually a credit union), and say you would like to deposit $1 in
Account # <insert my account number here>.  They will give you a
deposit slip to fill out.  Do so.  No signature or info other than the
accountt number required.  Give it to them.  They will process the
transaction and give you a receipt which will have my account balance
on it.  As an added bonus, it will also have my address.

I could give you many more examples like this, but its much more fun
to let you discover them :) (And I don't even spend a lot of time
thinking these up ... I just like to know what loopholes exist in
systems I'm involved with.)


Brett    ([e-mail])

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

Date: Sun, 25 Apr 93 07:26:36 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: NYTel Billing Problem Solved (After 19 Months)


I have had an ongoing problem with NYTel concerning rate charges for
calls made to the Suffolk County, NY, offices throughout the county
since Sept. 1991.  Back then, three exchanges were assigned to these
offices, one to serve the residents of the East Suffolk Calling Region
(ESCR) and the latter two to serve the Western Suffolk one (WSCR).
Note that these are inside the NY LATA (Area Codes 203 (a samll
portion of CT), 212, 516, 718, part of 914 and 917.

It turned out in the initial stages that calls made intra-ESCR were
charged as if they were inter-region.

I first went to my local legislator who referred me to the telecom
official for the county who didn't know what the hell was going on and
couldn't understand a blasted thing (typical politician); then I went
to the telco and got a royal runaround.  Next stop was the NY Public
Utility (oops Service) Commission who took the complaint and followed
up on it to a small degree.

After a month I received a letter from them (PU/SC) that the matter
was resolved even though I had a bill in front of me which showed that
to be a falsehood.  Calmly blowing my stack, I forced the PU/SC to
re-open the case and make some more half-hearted attempts to resolve
the problem.

Action started in January, 1992, when I was called by a higher-up
person in NYTel who got to work on the problem (a Ms. Evans and I
mention her here since she deserves credit for the outstanding work
that she did for me until she was transferred to another problem).
After a month or so, Mrs. Coluantoni (same reason for her mention)
took over and she worked diligently with the attorneys, rate people,
PU/SC to get this problem fixed once and for all.

January, 1993, saw a resolution to this case with the correct charges
being made.  February saw a fall-back which no one could understand.
My guess is that in building the new rate tables, there were other
problems and when the fall-back occurred, guess what rates were
applied.

Two more bills have been received and I can now say that the problem
is finally resolved.

What really galls me is that other exchanges were added and the
correct routing was applied to them, but not for this one.

I even suggested to them that when new exchanges were being opened for
business, that I would be willing to test the correctness of their
calling patterns and see if there were any errors as long as I wasn't
charged for the calls.  They could be shown on the bill but the amount
would be $0.00 US.


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: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 10:03:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dan Gillmor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Who I Am


A poster to your list wants to know who's listening here. I'm sure
some people prefer to remain anonymous, which is their right. But I
have no problem saying publicly that I'm a regular reader.

I do computer-assisted reporting (working with databases etc.) and
write on computer/communications technologies and how they affect our
lives.  Naturally I read Telecom.

I invite others here to email me ideas for articles and columns.


Dan Gillmor                           Internet: [e-mail]
Detroit Free Press                    CompuServe: 73240,334
3001 W. Big Beaver Rd. -- Suite 602   Voice: 313-649-9770
Troy, MI 48084                        Fax: [phone]

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

Organization: CPSR Civil Liberties and Computing Project
From: Dave Banisar <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 9:43:32 EST
Subject: New Disclosures in 2600 Case


        As you may recall, last November at a shopping mall outside of
Washington, DC, a group of people affiliated with the computer
magazine "2600" was confronted by mall security personnel, local
police officers and several unidentified individuals.  The group
members were ordered to identify themselves and to submit to searches
of their personal property.  Their names were recorded by mall
security personnel and some of their property was confiscated.
However, no charges were ever brought against any of the individuals
at the meeting.

        Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility ("CPSR")
filed suit under the Freedom of Information Act and today received the
Secret Service's response to the FOIA lawsuit, in which we are seeking
agency records concerning the break-up of the meeting.  I think it's
safe to say that our suspicions have now been confirmed -- the Secret
Service *did* obtain a list of names from mall security identifying
the people in attendance at the meeting.

        There are three main points contained in the Secret Service's
court papers that are significant:

        1) The agency states that the information it possesses
concerning the incident was obtained "in the course of a criminal
investigation that is being conducted pursuant to the Secret Service's
authority to investigate access device and computer fraud."

        2) The agency possesses two relevant documents and the
information in those documents "consists solely of information
identifying individuals."

        3) The information was obtained from a "confidential source,"
and the agency emphasizes that the FOIA's definition of such a source
includes "any private institution which provided information on a
confidential basis."

        Taken together, these facts seem to prove that the Secret
Service wanted names, they had the mall security people collect them,
and they came away from the incident with the list they wanted.

        The agency asserts that "[t]he premature release of the
identities of the individual(s) at issue could easily result in
interference to the Secret Service's investigation by alerting these
individual(s) that they are under investigation and thus allowing the
individual(s) to alter their behavior and/or evidence."

        CPSR, in conjunction with EFF and the ACLU, is planning to
challenge the actions of the mall security personnel, the local police
and the Secret Service on the ground that the incident amounted to a
warrantless search and seizure conducted at the behest of the Secret
Service.


David Sobel   CPSR Legal Counsel  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #280
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01384;
          26 Apr 93 7:07 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12623
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:03:49 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15699
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:03:04 -0500
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:03:04 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #279

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Apr 93 04:03:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 279

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Did I Get Slammed? (Russell Kroll)
    Re: Did I Get Slammed? (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Mike Stump)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (John Pettitt)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (John Rice)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Tim Gorman)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Jason Hunsaker)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (John Nagle)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Subject: Re: Did I Get Slammed?
From: [e-mail] (Russell Kroll)
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 93 02:16:56 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> [Moderator's Note: One problem ... if the call would NOT complete
> because you were NOT a customer of Company X, then it would seem you
> were NOT slammed. AT&T does not refer to itself over the phone lines
> as American Telephone and Telegraph -- at least not to my knowledge.
> They always play the tone then say 'AT&T'. Did the person attempting
> to place the call use 10-something in front of the number, producing
> the mentioned result from "American Telephone" about your not being
> a customer?  Had you been slammed, your call(s) would have gone

The person trying to use the phone did get her calls through.  I'd
shown her 10288, and that's what she used.

It turns out that SWBT was changing out the 'laterals' (something like
that) behind the houses here.  The originals were supposedly older than
the houses, and the houses are approaching 30 years!  When they put our
lines back, on the new wires, they hooked us up to the phone line of the
church up the street.

When I came home, after being told about this, I tried the 17005554141
and it gave that company's message.  I went out to the demarc to make
sure nothing had happened out there, and plugged in a phone.  Dialing
1073214049889664 revealed that line one had changed phone numbers(!)

Anyway, we got them to come out (they had been working up the street),
and one climbed the pole, clipped onto something up there, and popped
us over to another pair and assigned the number to it.  At least, that
what's it sounded like from ten feet below.

> forwarded his line somewhere on a carrier code *he* couldn't use?  It
> would be helpful to know at what point the intercept occurred (in the
> midst of his dialing; after it dummy-rang once or twice in the local
> switch; or after the call had set up and was processing somewhere in
> Colorado City.) It would also be helpful to know if other long distance
> call attempts (to other numbers) produce the same results; calls to
> the same number at different times, etc. If for some reason that line
> (did you try your other lines to check the results, and try the orig-
> inal line a second or third time?) was 'defaulted' in error by the
> local telco to 'no carrier', then generally the intercept is not from
> any particular carrier, but simply 'your call cannot be completed as
> dialed'.  Can you provide more specifics and further test results?  PAT]

It would basically go like this.  Dial a number that's long distance,
and you immediately land on their message.  No rings, just that
message.  I guess the church up the street (who we got connected to)
didn't have their long distance services straightened out.

I did check line two and three with the 1073214049889664 number, and
they were fine.  It was just a bit odd hearing that 'other' number on
line one.

Needless to say, everything is working fine now.  Problem fixed.

[e-mail] (Rich Greenberg) writes:

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

>> Well, it looks as if I've been 'slammed' on one of our lines.  Today,

> In addition to Pat's suggestions, try calling 1-700-555-4141.

> This will give you a recording identifing the default carrier on your
> line.

That yielded the same results.  It was a recording advising me to call
their local business office at 713 (something).


[e-mail] (Russell Kroll)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, [phone]
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Did I Get Slammed?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 06:19:17 GMT


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

> [Moderator's Note: One problem ... if the call would NOT complete
> because you were NOT a customer of Company X, then it would seem you
> were NOT slammed. AT&T does not refer to itself over the phone lines

Yes, but ... It's possible to be assigned a PIC of a company that does
not recognize YOU as a customer, and does not accept casual billing.
Here is how it happened to me:

In July of last year, I had AT&T on both lines (call them Line 1 and
Line 2).  Line 2 is billed as part of Line 1.

Longer term Digest readers may remember that I took a five week
motorcycle trip last summer.  I signed up for Cable and Wireless FOCUS
service ONLY.  This service is kind of like Orange Card.  It allows LD
calling by calling an 800 number.  C&W slammed my home phones.

We discovered that Slammage, when my spouse could no longer call my
Easy Reach 700 service without dialing 10288.  We immediately called
Pacific Bell, told them that Line 1 had been slammed.  They switched it
back.

When I returned from my trip, I cancelled C&W's FOCUS service.

About two months later, I tried to make a LD call on Line 2 (my modem
line.)  I got a message from C&W that said that I did not have an
account with them, and they would not carry my call.  I checked my two
lines and discovered that while my PIC was AT&T on Line 1, it was
still C&W on Line 2, even though C&W rejected my ANI when it was
received.

So, it's possible for you to have a PIC for a LD company that will not
carry your traffic, but it's kinda hard to get that way on purpose.


Edward W. Greenberg  | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
1600 Stokes St. #24  | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95126  | Fax:  [phone] | Ham Radio: KM6CG

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 06:23:31 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: Both; all three actually. And before long, the
> money will be debited right out of your account on the spot. Instant
> debit is the direction things are going.   PAT]

These days, most of these things check your drivers license and the
checking account number looking to see if you have a record of
bouncing checks.

The company authorizing is actually insuring your check to the
merchant, for a percentage of the amount.  If it bounces, they are
obligated to buy the bad paper and then sweat it out of your hide
(oops, I mean collect it from you.)

Instant debit is just a bit harder to do, since the system would have
to be careful to invalidate the paper check so you don't get charged
twice.  Anybody who has ever had a credit card autorization stay on
the account after the charge was also debited knows what I mean.


Edward W. Greenberg  | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
1600 Stokes St. #24  | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95126  | Fax:  [phone] | Ham Radio: KM6CG

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

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1993 16:19:46 GMT


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

> The only systems that can actually verify funds availability are
> those that are true Electronic Funds Transfer systems, where you
> enter a PIN and there's no check.  But, these usually have a limited
> number of banks that belong to the network.  [...]  At least that's
> the way this has always worked on every system I've used on the West
> Coast.

Over here on the West Coast of New England, this is becoming more and
more common.  There are some reasons why this might be more popular
here than elsewhere:

- Most banks, including /all/ major Vermont banks, belong to Yankee
24, an ATM network which offers POS services to several local
merchants and grocery store chains (e.g., Martin's/Shop & Save/SunFoods).

- Many banks, including all of the BankNorth Group's banks (the
largest bank holding company) also belong to NYCE, the New York Cash
Exchange, which offers similar services to the New York-based grocery
store chains (e.g., Price Chopper).

So, most people who have an ATM card at all (i.e., everyone with a
bank account) have access to one or both of these networks.  The
grocery stores in particular, sensing this potential to reduce check
float and offer an added convenience feature for their customers, have
latched onto this idea, and so all the local high-volume grocery
stores now offer this feature.  Most of the POS terminals also accept
major credit cards, although the stores would obviously rather that
the customer pay the network fee rather than themselves have to eat
the credit card's 2-3% cut, since margins in grocery stores are very
thin.

I imagine that our readers in Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia can
confirm a similar situation in that region, since MOST also has
near-100% penetration (or at least it did when I was there).

Dislaimer: I have no relationship whatever with Yankee 24, NYCE,
BankNorth Group, or Price Chopper, except as a customer.  Long ago I
worked as a service clerk at Martin's.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mike Stump)
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 03:24:25 GMT


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

[ Talk about banks giving out checking account balances to random people. ]

> Sorry, Pat, but that's the wrong answer.  Banks don't give this sort
> of information out to anyone who happens to know an account number.

How truly ignorant you are!  You should not make such blatantly false
statements, as this one.

Well, I am in the US, so let's talk about USA.  Lets pick the largest
bank in the USA as an example, that would be Bank of America, if
memory serves.  (If it doesn't, that's not important.)

I claim that some banks do give out checking account balances to Joe
Random person.  To prove this point, provide me with a Bank of America
account number (or a Security Pacific account number), and I shall
track account balance down to the penny, every day, for a month, and
post the results here.  You can privately mail me the account number,
or you can give it to me live by voice, at [phone].

I promise to only use the account number for the purpose stated here,
and to destroy the information afterwards.  When I post results, I
will not post the account number, just daily account balances.

If people are interested in the method, please e-mail me.  The method
is available to anyone in the US, and does not violate any laws that I
know of.  It does however violate to some degree my idea of what the
bank should give out to random people.

The offer is open anyone, although I won't track hundreds of balances. :-)

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

From: [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Organization: The Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 06:14:32 GMT


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

>> [Moderator's Note: Both; all three actually. And before long, the
>> money will be debited right out of your account on the spot. Instant
>> debit is the direction things are going.   PAT]

> Sorry, Pat, but that's the wrong answer.  Banks don't give this sort
> of information out to anyone who happens to know an account number.

BZZZZT.  Wrong -- while as you point out SCAN will not give you a
balance if you call 408 983 0588 (Bank of America) you can tone in an
account number and check amount and be told if it will clear.  It does
not take a CS grad to binary search the amount in the account.  They
also have a service where they will tell you the average balance over
the last three months.

When I complained I was told that all banks do this, and indeed in
looking for another bank I have not found one that will promise not to
disclose this type of information.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Date: 25 Apr 1993 09:06:13 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> [Moderator's Note: So how does Compuserve accept your 'check' over the
> computer and make automatic debits each month thereafter? They send a
> tape to their bank which sends a tape to your bank.

To be specific, CompuServe uses the services of Checkfree Corporation,
also of Columbus, OH.  In addition to their consumer services,
Checkfree provides merchants with the clearinghouse access services
necessary for direct checking account debits.  Although the
transactions from merchants such as CompuServe occur completely
electronically, they still operate in much the same way as paper
checks do.  For example, when CompuServe submits a debit to your
checking account, Checkfree doesn't know at that time if the funds are
there.  They just send the transaction into the ACH (Automated
Clearing House) system that's overseen by the Federal Reserve, and
hope for the best, just like for a paper check.

If the transaction does not go through (due to NSF or any other
reason), they get the transaction back (electronically) in one to
three days (and your bank will charge you the NSF service charge, and
it gets counted against you as a returned check in your account
profile).  Compare this with a true EFT-POS system, where you swipe
your debit card and enter a PIN: in these systems, there is a live
check for funds availability, and they are deducted from your
available balance immediately, even though the transaction may not
actually "post" for a day or so.  Also, if you don't have enough money
in your account, the EFT-POS system will simply deny your transaction,
and there is no NSF or overdraft charge from your bank nor a negative
indication in your file.  These systems are indeed the wave of the
future, but are not universally available either in terms of merchants
that have them or in banks that are members.  The ACH electronic
transactions with work with *any* US bank.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 25 Apr 93 08:52:49 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


In TELECOM Digest V13 #278 [e-mail] writes:

> James Gleick asks:

>> 2) How were area codes assigned? The most populous areas seem to have the
>> lowest numbers, but is there any geographic logic?

> Thus, originally, all of New Jersey was 609, but New York was
                                          ^^^
> 212, 516, 914, 716, and (I think) 315.  This "rule" had only a very
> temporary effect, since the original assignments were modified by area
> code splits very soon after direct dialing went into operation.  I
> think the first one was adding 201 to New Jersey.
                                 ^^^

Its the other way around.  I can remember when New Jersey was all 201.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 93 02:25:47 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Robert L. McMillin) writes:

> On Thu, 22 Apr 1993 14:35:01 GMT, [e-mail]
> (david.g.lewis) said:

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

>>> 1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company buildings?

In the 60/70s, ANI equipment (Automatic Number Identification -- used
for Toll Ticketing) used Light Sensitive hardware to identify lines
for Toll Billing. I don't remember exactly how it worked, but it was
prone to falsing if the light levels were elevated but things like
Photographic Flash guns and Bright sunlight. (One of the reasons that
flash cameras were prohibited in Central Offices).

One result of this, was the Central Offices were built with no
windows, to ensure that sunlight, at certain times of day, didn't
increase the problems with false ticketing.

As I recall, the ANI equipment wasn't the only equipment with this
sensitivity to light levels but It was a long time ago and memory
fades :-).


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

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

Date: 25 Apr 93 10:14:25 EDT
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


> Why don't COs have windows?

An old architect told me once that the reasons for no windows were:

 a. so people wouldn't take potshots at telephone people and eqpt when they
    were mad at the phone company.

 b. Windows are holes that allow dust and humidity into the environmental
    envelope. Dust and humidity are the prime enemies of telephone
    equipment.

 c. So the people working inside wouldn't be distracted by what was going on
    outside. Good for efficiency. I think he meant this humorously but based
    on some of the old chief operators I have met over the years, it may not
    be far from the truth :-)

 d. It's cheaper!


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

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

From: Jason Hunsaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Date: 25 Apr 93 11:00:18 MDT
Organization: Utah State University


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

> 6) Why do telephone poles extend far above the highest wire
>    or crosspiece?

A couple of reasons come to mind:

1. I've seen some poles that have a small copper wire that runs the
length of the pole.  This acts as a lighting rodd of sorts.  One
prefers that the lightinging will travel down the copper wire instead
of the telephone lines.

2. To try and keep large birds from using the crosspiece as a perch.
Phone lines are probably harmless, but birds usually don't take the
time to differentiate between phone lines and electrical lines.  Many
large birds have been killed by electric lines when they spread their
wings and arc across the power lines resulting in electrocution.

3. It could be that they have left room to add more crosspieces or
have removed a few.  Or it could be just part of the telephone
company's specs or some government regulation, or any combination of
these.

> 7) Where do utilities get telephone poles? Are they from
>    special logs? Are there particular specifications?

They are from special trees.  I can't remeber the specific fur tree
they come from, But I have seen them here in Logan Canyon on the
Crimson Trail (that goes between Spring Hollow campground and Gueneva
campground).  I've just heard them called telephone pole trees.  On
most of the trees there is an area where the bark has fallen off,
revealing the inner wood.  They look like regular telephone poles with
branches and wrapping of bark.

I once heard that these poles were soaked in croesote (sp?) for two
years before they were ever put to use.


Internet: [e-mail] (Jason Hunsaker),  Logan, Utah

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 17:43:52 GMT


[e-mail] (James Gleick) writes:

> 1) Why are there (so often) no windows in telephone company buildings?

Basically because there are few, and sometimes no, people inside.

> 2) How were area codes assigned? The most populous areas seem to
> have the lowest numbers, but is there any geographic logic?

       As someone else mentioned, the original North American
Numbering Plan referenced in the Shipley (1945) and Nunn (1952)
articles describe the orignal plan.  Also see "A history of science
and engineering in the Bell System -- Switching Technology 1925-1975",
(A.E. Joel et. al, G.E. Schindler, Jr. ed., Bell Telephone
Laboratories, 1982, ISBN 0-932764-02-9), p. 125-127.  The original
plan provided that area codes would be three digits, with 0 or 1 as
the second digit.  No area was to cross a state boundary, but a state
might contain more than one area.  Initially, states with only one
area code used area codes with "0" as the second digit and others used
"1".  The original numbering plan included Canada, but not Mexico.  As
area codes filled up, they were split into two areas with different
area codes, which is how we got to where we are now.

       There is a numbering plan "czar", who works for Bellcore, and I
suggest you interview him for the book.  Call Bellcore (in NJ) and ask
for North American Numbering Plan administration.  He's been
interviewed in the press before.

> 7) Where do utilities get telephone poles? Are they from special
> logs? Are there particular specifications?

       The Bellcore spec for telephone poles is TR-TSY-000060, "Wood
Telephone Poles", $21.75.  Call 1-800-521-CORE to order your copy now.
Happy reading.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #279
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04939;
          26 Apr 93 8:54 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18955
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 05:42:51 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19962
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 05:42:08 -0500
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 05:42:08 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #282

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Apr 93 05:42:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 282

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910) (Mark Brader)
    800 Portability ... NOT (Dave Levenson)
    1550nm Single-Mode Optics For FDDI Equipment? (Al Broscius)
    INTRA-LATA 10xxx Calls Within Monopolized Market (Aaron Woolfson)
    Information Sought on PBX vs Centrex (Jorge Batista)
    Ignorance, Clipper and the FBI (Tom Gray)
    Area Code Listing Needed For USA (Ted Dodd)
    Question About Email/FTP of Telecom Archives (Les Reeves)
    Cellular Phone Compatibility (Yuan Jiang)
    Various Items of Interest (or Not) From New England Telephone (Mark Eklof)
    Caller ID Question (Sean Oliver)
    Problems in Austin TX (William Degnan)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 01:31:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910)
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada


Here's one more old {Toronto Star} article.  This one was run
originally on August 17, 1910, and again, reprinted last year.


  THE WAR ON THE WORD "HELLO"

  A Good Many of the Business Places of Toronto Have Cut It
  Out Entirely,

  WHILE OTHERS USE IT YET

Toronto business houses apparently are rather slow in adopting the
suggestion of the Bell Telephone Company that their switchboard
operators should answer a call with the name of the firm, and not with
the old time-honored "Hello!"

In the new telephone directory appears the following advice:

"'Hello" means little, and provokes the question 'Who is it?'

"How few telephone users make a practice of announcing their firm name
answering telephone calls?

"It's good advertising.

"It saves time for all.  Why not adopt it?

"If a trainman called 'hello' for every station on the road, a stranger
might reasonably ask:

"Where do I get off?"

To see if Toronto was adopting this plan, which is gaining favor in
most of the American cities, a {Star} man called up twenty-five
business establishments as a test.  From these only five answered with
the name of the firm.  That is, only 20 per cent.  The other 80 per
cent said "Hello" in the same old way.

The experiment showed that the latter way certainly wastes quite a bit
of time.

  A Test of Toronto.

Some of the conversations are given below:

The reporter called up Main 343.

"Hello," came back the answer.
"Hello," repeated the reporter.
"Well, what is it?"
"I want to know to whom I am speaking."
"Why, this is the S. H. Knox Co."
"Why didn't you tell me that at first?"

The {Star} man next called up a Yonge street dry goods establishment.

"Hello!" came back the answer.
"Hello!" replied the Star man.
"Hello!" repeated the girl.
"Who is speaking, please?"

The reporter was startled at the next question.

"Is that you, Jim?" in a much softer, more seductive voice.
"No, I am sorry it isn't.  Will you please tell me who is speaking?"
"Don't you know?" came back the reply, adorned with all the wiles
of the coquette.
"No, I do not.  I really want to know who is speaking."
"Why, this is -- --'s store!"
"That is what I wanted you to say at first."

"Main 7520."
"Hello!"
"Hello!"
"Yes."
"Yes."
"Whom are you calling?"
"Who is that please, please?"
"This is W. A. Murray's."
"Don't you think it would be quicker to answer that at first?"

"No, I do not.  I have been watching this subject rather closely and I
have been experimenting myself.  I did answer 'Murray's' for a time,
but almost invariably the women would immediately ask: 'Is that
Murray's?' just as if I hadn't told them."

"That is a bad one on the ladies, isn't it?" suggested {The Star}.
"Yes, it is," agreed the switchboard girl with a laugh.

The reporter's pride in his own sex, however, was shattered at the
next call.

"Main 5997."
"Hello!"
"Hello!"
"Well?"
"Who is that, please?"
"Hobberlin's."
"I was just trying to see if you were still using the old 'Hello' system."

"Yes, we are.  We tried the new method, but dropped it for nearly
everyone persisted in asking again: 'Is that Hobberlin's?'"

Since this is a men's tailoring establishment it looked bad now for
the men, until the explanation dawned upon the reporter.

"There is nothing funny about that," he thought to himself.  "It is
probably the men's wives who are looking after the buying of their
husbands' suits."

The reason why so many are silly enough to ask a question which
already has been answered for them is probably simply a case of force
of habit.

For years they have been accustomed to answer the "Hello" with "Is
that so-and-so?" and now they cannot break themselves of the custom.
They probably, however, would soon become used to the new way.

  At the Banks.

"Main 6780."
"Hello!"
"Hello!"
"Yes."
"Yes."
"What do you want?"
"Who is speaking, please?"
"Who are you?"
"It is I who want to know whom I am calling."
"I won't talk any more," and the operator banged up the receiver.

"Hello!"
"Hello!"
"Who is it?"
"Who is speaking, please?"
"This is the Bank of -- --"

"Well, how did I know that Central had given me the right number?  I
was just experimenting to see what answer you used.  You don't mind my
troubling you, do you?"

"Oh, no, not at all," the young lady replied with a rippling laugh.
"I didn't know what you were driving at."

The reporter called up Main 441, the Union Station enquiry phone, and
for the first time in his life the line was not reported busy.

"Hello!" came back the answer.

{The Star} man was surprised that this should be used on one of the
busiest lines in the city.

"Hello!" he answered.
"Well, what is it?"
"What please is that, please?"
"Union Station."
"Don't you think it would be better to say 'Union Station'?"
"All right; let it go at that."

The Aikenhead Hardware Company and the King Edward Hotel answered with
the firm's name.

Among the others who retained the old "Hello" are Barber, Ellis Co.,
Arnoldi, Gierson, and McMurrich, McKendry's, Massey-Harris, and
Aylesworth, Wright, and Moss.

The local manager of the Bell Telephone Company is anxious that
the new system be introduced widely.

"It is certainly quicker," he said to {The Star}.

"Not a very large percentage of the business houses seem to use it,"
suggested the reporter.

"Too soon yet," the manager replied.  "The note did not appear until
this last directory.  The custom is sure to spread."


Forwarded to comp.dcom.telecom by
Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Again, my thanks for your delightful old stories.
I note that as of 1910, 'the Union Station Information Line was
always reported busy ...'; at least some things never change. Getting
through to Amtrack Information is still very hard at times.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: 800 Portability ... NOT
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:49:41 GMT


A customer wanted an 800 'vanity' number, and asked AT&T for the
number.  Service installation is to be late May, after 'portability'
is supposed to have taken effect.

AT&T checked the availability of the number and was informed by MCI
that the number is reserved for a customer.  My customer then called
MCI and asked about the number, and was told that it was available.
She then told MCI that she wanted the number, but wanted it from AT&T.
The MCI representative told my customer that the number would remain
'reserved for a customer' forever, until some customer got it
assigned, after which that customer could take the number to another
carrier.

The customer decided to get the 800 service from MCI -- 48 trunks on
two T-1 circuits.  I suggested that if she really wanted the service
from AT&T, she should get a minimal amount of service from MCI
(perhaps an 800 personal line, or whatever is the least-cost service
that will occupy the number) and after a couple of weeks, move the
number to AT&T and then commit to the the big bucks for bypass T-1
(AT&T Megacom(tm) service).

I think the MCI service is already ordered.


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


[Moderator's Note: My understanding on this from my contacts at my 800
number supplier are that starting May 3 (May 1 is Saturday), ALL 800
numbers will be in a single database maintained by Bellcore. Each number
will be marked as taken by someone, or free to be taken. There will not
be 'numbers reserved for customers'.  First come, first served. I've
been proceeding on that assumption in the process of taking orders for
my 800 service. On the same topic: (listen up!) if you presently have
800 service and spend $50-100 per month or so on it and can live with
rates of 17-18 cents per minute and no monthly surcharge, *please*
give me the account!  It'll make it that much easier to keep the
Digest coming out 3-4 times per day and me eating once a day. Thanks. PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Al Broscius)
Subject: 1550nm Single-Mode Optics For FDDI Equipment?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Al Broscius)
Organization: Bellcore MRE
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 93 16:18:05 GMT


Hi,

    Does anyone know of any current/planned products that support
an FDDI SAS or DAS link using 1550nm single-mode optics (preferably
wavelength-selectable at time of order to manufacturer).  Yes, I know
the PMD spec calls for 1300nm but our EDFA-based WDM system only groks
1550nm ;-)


Thanks in advance,

al

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

From: [e-mail] (Aaron Woolfson)
Subject: INTRA-LATA 10xxx Calls Within Monopolized Market
Date: 25 Apr 1993 11:47:46 -0700
Organization: University of the Pacific


This is in response to a previous message regarding if it was possible
to call the town next to yours with a long distance carrier in an
INTRA-LATA market.  I hope this is a good enough explaination of what
I have discovered.

* Posted for informational purposes only; I do not condone using this
meathod of dialing.

Out of curiousity about a year ago, I decided to do a little network
exploration.  Something I wanted to do was call the next town, about
13 miles away, without paying the outrageous Pacific Bell telephone
rates.

So, I discovered something ... 1-700-xxx-xxxx where xxx-xxxx was the
local (long distance) number you were trying to reach, you could get
to it via the long distance carrier.  EXTREMILY interesting, since
1-700-555-4141 was the long distance service verification number.  So,
I dialed my own number which has call waiting using 1-700-xxx-xxxx
(where xxx-xxxx was my own number) and sure enough, I got myself on
call waiting.  So suprised that I was, in fact, that I decided to try
a few different carriers.  Here is what I found:

10700 (ExpressTel) --- 10700-1-700-xxx-xxxx will get you the
intra-lata number, provided that the area code is the same as yours ...
some latas are divided up to cover MANY area codes, and unfortionately
it doesn't work.

10511 (Execuline of Sacramento, Inc.) --- 10511-1-700-xxx-xxxx will
provide you with the same results.

I hope that this information has been helpful.


Aaron Woolfson        [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: As long as you go via 700 that will usually work if
the carrier offers 700 as a substitute for your own area code. I know
the old Telecom*USA service did that. But merely dialing 10xxx will
NOT get you the xxx carrier unless your local telco wants to hand it
off to them and they *do not have to* if it is an intra-LATA call they
have the right to carry.  Telcos examine the entire dialing string
first, *then* deal with the 10xxx in the context of what was dialed.
For example, a year ago we found a prefix in Green Bay, Wisconsin
which Illinois Bell had not updated in its tables. Trying to reach
that exchange, 1+ failed; 10<anything> failed; 800-carrier gateway
always succeeded as did '00'. IBT claimed it was AT&T's fault ... but
they quit making those allegations once they were shown it the call
would complete if IBT kept their hands out of it! But they, like all
other telcos, filter everything you dial and hand off what they must,
or what you legitimatly bypass them on via 800, etc.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (VLSI CAD Tools)
Subject: Information Sought on PBX vs Centrex
Organization: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 05:46:45 GMT


I am looking for an article published in a trade journal that details
the advantages of Centrex over PBXs.  Any information would be greatly
appreciated.


jorge batista

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Gray)
Subject: Ignorance, Clipper and the FBI
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 16:06:58 -0400
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In case anyone missed it in Denning's account of the Clipper system,
one essential aspect of it is:

The service provider will make the encrypted transmission avaiable to
the FBI black box. In short the service provider must have the
capability of isolating an individual's transmissions from all others.

This is just the FBI Digital Network proposal in another form.  Aside
from the fact that this proposal shows a complete ignorance of the
functioning of even today's network, it will severely hamper (even
cripple) current efforts to create a broadband network. The
possibility of the US functioning in the BISDN multimedia market will
become exceedingly remote.

I can hear the guffaws coming from Japan and Europe now, Goodbye to
North America's lead in telecommunications.

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

Subject: Area Code Listing Needed For USA
From: [e-mail] (Ted Dodd)
Date: 26 Apr 93 00:22:00 GMT
Organization: Ed Hopper's BBS - Berkeley Lake, GA - 404-446-9462
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ted Dodd)


I need a list of all area codes and exchanges in the USA.  I need it
to be an ASCII file with area code, exchange and exchange name, city
and state.


Thank you for any help.

Ted B
Ed Hopper's BBS - ehbbs.com - Berkeley Lake (Atlanta), Georgia
USR/HST:404-446-9462 V.32bis:404-446-9465-Home of uuPCB Usenet for PC Board

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 26 Apr 93 01:44:05 GMT
Subject: Email/FTP of Telecom Archives


Patrick, in the introduction to TELECOM Digest you mention Email/FTP
of the Telecom Archives is available.  I would like to know more about
this.


Thanks,

Les Reeves


[Moderator's Note: Perhaps someone will kinly send Les the help files
for a couple of the existing ftp <=> email services. Thanks.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Yuan Jiang)
Subject: Cellular Phone Compatibility
Organization: Columbia University Center for Telecommunications Research
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 16:02:40 GMT


I want to buy a cellular phone in the US or Europe, which can be used
in Hong Kong.  A cellular phone in Hong Kong costs twice as much as in
the US.  But a regular cellular phone from the US market does not work
in Hong Kong.  Here are my questions.

1) Are there any venders who sell cellular phones that is compatible
with those in Hong Kong?

2) Are cellular phones in Europe compatible with those in Hong Kong?
Is it just the frequency difference between phones in the US and HK?

3) Can I modify a cellular phone bought in the US to be used in Hong
Kong?

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

Date: Sun, 25 Apr 93 13:02:14 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark Eklof)
Subject: Various Items of Interest (or Not) From New England Telephone


    With regards to the discussion of `disconnected' phones being
able to place calls to 911, the following appeared in the "Calling All
Customers" insert in this month's phone bill.

"We've now made it easier and faster for you to set up phone service.
Improvements to our internal databases in many areas allow you to walk
into your new apartment or home, plug a telephone into a jack, and
automatically receive dial tone.

You will then be able to access emergency services and your New
England Telephone Residence Service Center, where a representative
will assist you with ordering your complete phone service -- you don't
even need to leave the comfort of your new home."

    Also, the new phone books came this week.  They have (for the
first time) the separation of business and residence listings, as well
as the last name only appearing once in a column format.  The Nashua
area book (combined yellow and white pages) breaks down (thickness
wise) as follows: residence, just under 1/4"; business white pages,
1/16"; yellow pages, 11/16"; "Community Pages", seven pages; and
"coupon section", 3/16".  The coupon section is also new, and very
annoying.  The page edges are green, and they stick farther out from
the binding (by about 1/16") than the other pages.  This is a bunch
(ten per page) of coupons from local businesses, that seem to offer
minor savings.  They don't appear to be arranged in any order.

    Also, beginning on 17 July, we start seven digit dialing of
all numbers within the 603 area code (i.e. we drop the '1' before
in-state long distance calls).


Mark D. Eklof   Brookline, New Hampshire, USA
[e-mail]    Sometimes, I wonder if it's me.

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

From: [e-mail] (Sean Oliver)
Subject: Caller ID Question
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:04:49 GMT


Is there a simple way of blocking your number? So when you call your
destination it will come up with a number different from your number?


Sean Oliver  Internet Address: [e-mail]
Mindlink! BBS [phone]


[Moderator's Note: The simplest way is to prepend *67 to your dialing
string in most communities. This produces a response of 'blocked' or
'private' om the receiving display, not a false number though.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (William Degnan)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 15:44:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Problems in Austin TX


20 Apr 93, Monty Solomon writes to all:

> I reached the following recording today trying to reach a business in
> Austin, TX.

> "Due to telephone company facility trouble, your call cannot be
> completed at this time.  Please try your call later.  512 4T"

> This recording was on both their 800 and direct dial numbers.

> [Moderator's Note: After getting your note, I queried 512-555-1212.
> She knew of nothing amiss after asking the supervisor. Maybe it was
> just a fluke, a very temporary failure of some sort.  PAT]

I wouldn't expect the directory operator to know that there was a
dig=up on Research Blvd near Balcones Woods which caused outages in
service to Jollyville, Cedar Park and some other offices.


"Well-informed people know it is impossible to transmit the voice over
wires.  Even if it were, it would be of no practical value."
                                    -- Boston Post 1865


William Degnan,  Communications Network Solutions
-Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology-
P.O. Drawer 9530       | [e-mail] | [e-mail]
Austin, TX 78766-9530                |        Voice [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #282
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07817;
          26 Apr 93 10:04 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19769
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:57:12 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17281
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:56:31 -0500
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 04:56:31 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #281

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Apr 93 04:56:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 281

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    France to Offer Extra Phone Numbers (Jean-Bernard Condat)
    Scandal!! Germany: How to Tap Into Another Phone Line (Juergen Ziegler)
    York University to Start On-Campus Local Service (David Leibold)
    The Mysteries of the Telephone System (in 1900) (Mark Brader)
    US West Says I Can't Use 301+ on Voice Line (John Schroeder)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 26 Apr 939 06:59:59 GMT
Subject: France to Offer Extra Phone Numbers


All week, France Telecom added new direct services to the list of
special numbers beginning by {ZAB=} _36.  This new "36" numbers are
available all over the French regions with some restrictions.

Following the list of all services available April 26th:

                   LIST OF  36PQ SERVICES
                      APRIL 26TH, 1993


Number      Description of Provided Service

3600        Transpac access (1,200 baud/s)
3601        Transpac access (300 baud/s)
3602        Transpac access (2,400 & 4,800 baud/s)
3603        Transpac X.32
3605mcdu    "Numero Vert" by Minitel (it's like the 800 phone
            numbers but for X.25 computer access). FREE.
36062424    Asynchrounous computer access (300-2,400 baud/s)
360736du    Reference PAVI (for X.25 services test procedures)
36086464    Synchronous Transpac access 64 kbit/s
3609mcdu    Computer access for Alphapage (the French pager)
            message delivery. {mcdu=} 0909 for a 80-characters
            alpha-numeric message
3610        Automatic French access for calls using a "Carte
            Pastel" (the equivalent of an MCI or AT&T phone
            card, but with three options: (1) restricted access
            for children able to phone only to 10 predefined
            phone numbers; (2) national, and (3) international)
3612        Minicom, the France Telecom videotex mail system
            directly linked with your phone number
3613        Videotex access Teletel 1
            TTY access (no-business services)
3614        Videotex access Teletel 2
3615        Videotex access Teletel 3
3616        Videotex access, business services
3617        Videotex access, business services (high price)
3618        Minitel-to-Minitel communications (for blind peoples
            for example)
3619        International Minitel services (phone directories, e.g.)
3621        ASCII standard access
3622        Teletel access for Germany, Belgium Italy, Luxembourg
            and in a short time, all European countries
3623        Minitel--High Speed Access (2,400 baud/s and more)
3624mcdu    Business X.25 access
3625mcdu    Business X.25 access
3626mcdu    Business X.25 access
3627mcdu    Business X.25 access
3628mcdu    Business X.25 access
3629mcdu    Business X.25 access
3637        TV special abbreviated national phone number, like for
            "Telethon 1993" action
3638mcdu    ISDN France-Luxembourg
3642        Technician Position--FRANCE TELECOM (confidential)
36431111    International Phone Book
3644        DERAL (phone qualities parameters tests)--FRANCE
            TELECOM (confidential)
3646        Configuration tests--FRANCE TELECOM (confidential)
3650        Direct voice phone operator for "Carte Pastel"
3653        Systeme Teletext-Telex
3655        Phoned telegrams
3656        Telegrams posted by Minitel
3658        France Telecom' customers local reclamation service
3659mcdu    Local night phone information service
36606060    15-digit message for Alphapage
36616136    Operator's pager messages delivery service
3663mcdu    Numero Azur (another type of tarification for extra
            phone number: FRF 0.73 pro call without any restriction
            regarding the call duration)
3664mcdu    Audiotel, paided phone service
3665mcdu    Audiotel, paided phone service: 5 UT (FRF 3.65 pro call)
3666mcdu    Audiotel, paided phone service: MEDIA
3667mcdu    Audiotel, paided phone service
3668mcdu    Audiotel, paided phone service
3670mcdu    Audiotel, paided phone service
3672        MemoPhone: public answering system (maximum 5 messages
            of 30 secondes): FRF 1.46
3673mcdu    MemoPhone between all French departements: {mcdu=} {mcmc=}
            with {mc=} the departement postal code. For example, for
            Paris, {mc=} 75.
3689mcdu    Conference by phone (max. 25 persons)
3699        Voice clock


                   _____Jean-Bernard Condat_____
 [Editor of _Chaos Digest_, the first computer security e-journal]
             CCCF, B.P. 8005, 69351 Lyon Cedex 08, France
              Phone: [phone]; Fax: [phone]
          InterNet: [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 01:15:59 +0200
Subject: Scandal!! Germany: How to Tap Into Another Phone Line


This week's "Research and Technology" section of the German news
magazine {Focus} (Nr. 17/93, pg. 106) features an *interesting*
article about the German telephone network.

According to the article all you need to tap into another phone line
is a phone line which is hooked up to a modern digital switch and a
simple 16 key touch tone beeper. The article shows the original
TELEKOM beeper. For interested users, {Focus} included the TELEKOM
reorder number and its approval ID.

By dialing one of the special "A","B","C" or "D" keys (rightmost
column), you get acces to TELEKOMs switch testing facilities. After
you are in the testing system, you have to enter a three-digit switch
id. Then enter the phone number you wish to call or listen to. If the
phone line is busy, then just enter "1" and you will have a *forced*
three way call.

With a modem or any other computer controlled dialing devices it is
rather simple to find the available switch ids in several hours.

Since the testing facility will identify itstelf by sending a rather
loud test tone, most persons will find out, that there is something
strange going on, if they are tapped by someone. But there are also
others that will never take much care about this situation.

Isn't it STUPID that TELEKOM apprently has NOT learned anything what
happend around 20++ years within the USA with the blue/red/ ... boxes
that gave interested users nice and mostly free features?

This time you even do not need any *illegal* devices, but a rather
common and widely available touch tone beeper give you full control
over several local switches!

As elementary mathematics shows, any additional key to press would
lower the chance by 1 to 16 to get access to such a testing system. It
would have been so simple to hide the access code to this system
within a normal number range.  If that number would have been changed
regularly, then nobody would ever get access to it. But these measures
require work, and that seems to be hard for a monopoly company!!!


Life goes in circles, unfortunately! ;-((((((((((((((((


Juergen Ziegler.........    Obervogt-Haefelinstr. 48
  W7580 Buehl (Baden).....  Secondary Mail address:
  Germany.................  **[e-mail]  **.

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

Date: Sun, 25 Apr 93 23:11:27 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: York University to start on-campus local service


[This is an article from Computing News (York University), April 1993.
Computing News holds the rights to this material, but its copyright
policy permits reproduction for non-commercial purposes provided that
author, publication name and issue are acknowledged.]


Telecommunications To Provide Residence Phone Services.

Ulla Campbell

Beginning in September 1993, CCS Telecommunications will offer
telephone services to the undergraduate and graduate residences on the
York campus; thanks to recent changes to the CRTC (Canadian
Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission) regulations.

This means that York campus residents will get a wide range of
telephone services at rates lower than those of the current carrier,
Bell Canada. CCS Telecommunications will offer lower rates for
residential service as well as discount rates for long distance that
are similar to those already enjoyed by the faculty and staff.
Residents will have the options of renting telephone sets from
Telecommunications or using their own units.

In the near future, Telecommunications may be in a position to offer
residence connections to York's data communications network. This
would be done only after further analysis, and would give students
access to the full range of computing services available via the
campus backbone. Armed with an authorized "account", York campus
residents would be able to send and receive electronic mail, read
news, participate in the Internet, and run computer applications on
York's host systems.

Telecommunications has assembled a special project team for this
substantial undertaking. Key components are design and installation of
the communication switch for the residences, and arranging and
promoting residential and long distance services.

An enormous effort will be needed to upgrade the 20-year-old cable
plant to Level 5 UTP (Unshielded Twisted Pair) cable, which is
required to support both voice communication and high-speed data
transmission over computer networks. For more on Level 5 UTP, see
_Computing_News_, January 1993.

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 01:03:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: The Mysteries of the Telephone System (in 1900)
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada


The {Toronto Star} ran the following article on April 21, 1900 (and
it's therefore in the public domain).  I clipped it after they
reprinted it last year, and have finally got around to typing it in.
They don't write like this in the {Star} today ...


THE MYSTERIES OF THE TELEPHONE SYSTEM

A Visit to the Oval Room Where Young Women Operate Wires That
Enable You to Converse With Young Friends Across the City or
Across the Continent -- The Telephone.

Some thousands of the good citizens of this fair city beheld the
telephone exchange scenes in the show this week at the Grand Opera
House, representing the shapely girls doing the "Hello" act and
incidentally singing songs and doing dances and making themselves
generally agreeable. Those who did not have that pleasure, at least
those who were able to walk out to sniff the spring zephyrs, and who
had the normal optic organs, could not help but notice the gaudy
posters on all the bill boards, showing the graceful backs of the
telephone maidens, with their blue waists and zebra skirts, as they
sat on their stools, ostensibly doing their duty in the imaginary
central office.

Bill, the ten-year-old bundle of precocity at our house, saw them.

"Say, dad," said he, after he had said his prayers for the night.  "I
want to see a real 'Hello' factory."

And so it came about that the very next day Bill and his sedate pater
wended their way along Temperance street to the offices of the Bell
Telephone Co.

"Please, mister," explained the ever-ready youth to the Man.  "We want
to see your ting-a-ling place," and the courteous official immediately
conducted us up the narrow staircase to the sacred abode of the
goddesses of the telephone.

  An Oval Room.

This holy retreat consisted of an oval-shaped room surrounded by a
sort of light wainscotting, which is all pigeon-holed with tiny round
apertures scarcely as big as one's little finger.  Circled around in
front of the wainscotting were comfortably-looking, high backed
chairs, occupied by industrious young ladies, who kept their nimble
hands rapidly moving -- now pressing a button on a flat key-board, and
then pushing plugs which were suspended to heavy cords, into the
pigeon holes within their reach.  Each girl had a trumpet bound on her
ear, and a little round transmitter hung close to her rosy lips.

Bill took in the girls with a twinkle in his eye like unto his dad's,
and then surveyed the scene in general.

"Golly, it's clean up here, isn't it?" he summarized.

"Yes," explained the Man, "we have to keep it scrupulously clean.  You
might as well chop the wires with a hatchet as let a particle of dust
get on the connections."

"It's awfully quiet here," complained the youth.  "I thought you
wouldn't be able to hear yourself think for bells ringing and loud
talking and things."

"Well, that used to be the case in central offices long ago," replied
the fountain of knowledge.  "Then they dispensed with the bell ringing
and substituted a system of heavy drops, but that, too, made a lot of
noise.  Now, we have this scheme by which there is scarcely a sound
excepting the hum of low-toned voices."

  How Connections Are Made.

"Tell me," demanded the boy, "how a fellow gets the number he wants
when he rings up."

"It is done in this way.  You see those rows of little lids up there
along the top of the wainscotting.  There is a certain number of them
in front of each operator.  You also see a tiny incandescent light
before each girl.

"Now, when you ring the bell to call up someone you cause one of these
lids to lift up, and at the same time, the little lamp is lighted.
The uplifted lid discloses the number of your telephone and the lamp
becoming luminous attracts the attention of the operator to it.  She
presses a particular button on her keyboard, thus connecting herself
with you and you hear: 'What number?'

"When she find what you want she takes two of the plugs which are
hanging at the rear of her keyboard and one of these she puts in the
pigeon hole corresponding to the lid your call has raised and the
other goes in a hole belonging to the number you want.  The act of
shoving this second plug into hole rings your friend's bell, and there
you are connected.

"Each operator, of course, is within reach of the several thousand
holes corresponding to the numbers, one of which you might want.  She
learns to pick out the one desired like a piano player hits any key he
wants to."

"How does the girl know when I am finished?"

"There is a point.  Do you know," and the man's features hardened, "we
have kept some statistics and we find that not three out of ten people
who use the telephone ring off in such a way as to let the operator
know they are finished.  The girls all know this and so in order to
keep lines from being tied up half the time they have to keep
continually breaking in on your conversation with a 'finished.'  And
that is the way they find out generally when you really are done
talking.

"To ring off you must do more than give the handle a mere jerk or a
quarter turn; you must turn it right around a turn or two to do any
good.  If you do this one of the lower row of lids is raised and the
number shown will indicate what line has been freed."

Up to this point I had been a quiet listener.

"Each of these girls, you say," I ventured, is "within reach of all of
the numbers.  What is to prevent half a dozen of them switching
different people onto the same line at the same time?"

"Notice," said the Man, "one of the girls there.  Before she shoves
the plug in, she first touches it to the edge of the hole.  If the
line happens to be in use, a click is produced which she can hear and
she returns you the answer, 'The line is busy.'  If there is no click
the line is not in use and she connects you."

  Long-Distance Lines.

"Over here," he continued, "is the long-distance department.
Montreal, New York, Chicago are within each reach of us here, and
every day we have many calls for each of these places, as well as many
other distant cities.  Listen to the operator.  She is speaking in
quite a moderate tone and yet someone in Boston is probably at the
other end.

"The way to get the time that one of these lines is in use is
interesting.  We do it by an instrument with the awe-striking name,
calculigraph.  You see it has a face like a clock, but instead of its
hands moving the disc moves in the reverse way while the hands stand
still.

"When a connection is made a slip of paper is shoved into the slot of
the machine and stamped and again stamped at the moment the speakers
are finished, and the elapsed time down to seconds is read off.  There
can be no error; so don't ever think you are being cheated by a charge
for too long usage."

We turned to the staircase to go.  "Remember this, my boy," concluded
the Man.  "If you want to be heard distinctly, always speak with your
mouth not more than two inches from the transmitter."

Bill took a final glance around the girls.  "Say, dad," he said, "do
you remember the day you were cracking a joke to Central at the
telephone up at the house, and maw said, 'Well, if I were you, Edward,
I wouldn't be trying to flirt with some wizened up old maid.'  Say,
maw must have been having a dream that day."

"Well, I guess we'll leave her in ignorance as to the comeliness of
the 'Hello' girls, anyway, Bill."

As we walked home Bill was thoughtful.  "Well I believe I would just
about as soon go there as to a circus," he remarked.


Forwarded to comp.dcom.telecom by
Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Thank you! for passing it along; every word of it
was true by late 19th century standards.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Schroeder)
Subject: US West Says I Can't Use 301+ on Voice Line
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 01:42:41 GMT


I have had numerous problems with my phones.  Today I got told the
following as a US West technician after he told me that he could not
fix my line to be good for even 2400 baud service.  One note: When I
signed up for this line, I was assured I would be able to use my phone
with a modem with no problems. I had told those people (at US West)
that my primary use would be (and is) for modem use.  I still do not
have a decent line and have never gotten a totally clear line.  Now on
with the "transcript".

Well, I just had US West leave my house again and this is what I was
told:

2400 baud is too fast to be running on a "voice grade" line.  I told
them that MANY people are running 14.4 baud modems with no problems
(this guy seemed like he knew about modems/computers).

He: If we find them running 14.4's on voice lines, we'll disconnect
    them. They are lucky to be getting good transfers at that rate anyhow.

Me: Really?  Why?

He: They interfere with voice communication.  The only baud that will work
    over voice lines effectively is 300 and below lines.  2400 is WAY too
    fast to be transmitting.  If we get calls about problems and they are
    traced to your modem, we'll disconnect you too.

Later:

He: You might want to read up on yesterday (Friday, April 23, 1993)
    edition of the OWH about the new standard of phone communication.
    BTW: OWH is Omaha World Herald, a local news paper with Int'l events).

The moral of the story is this: He did very little to get rid of my
static, as they (US West) have NO responsibility to anything but voice
transmissions.  The funny thing is that when I got my line, I was
never told this.  I got the phone with the understanding that I would
be using it for MODEM USE! (primarily). Now I get told that I have
to downgrade to 300 BAUD?!!!  *shaking head in disgust* I was told
that I would have to buy a digital line or wait for the new lines for
(not a direct quote of the proper phrase, but comparitavely it's the
same thing) "multimedia" for phones lines to come in.

I'm going to be calling US West supervisors ASAP.


Thanks for any input on this,

John G. Schroeder   Data Communication Specialist - University Of Neb @ Omaha
The Oracle/NetSeer (NetSeer is now a NetSpec!!!)    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #281
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28699;
          26 Apr 93 19:49 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09989
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 17:05:56 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27870
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 17:05:07 -0500
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 17:05:07 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #283

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Apr 93 17:05:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 283

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    GTE NW Caller ID Offering in Seattle Area (Dave Ptasnik)
    Public Phone 2000s Still No Data? (Jeff Wasilko)
    Ameritech Offers Service to Charge Phone Bill to MC/Visa (John R. Grout)
    Kids and the Internet (Carl Malamud)
    Has Anyone Compiled Tpage2 Under SVRA? (David Vrona)
    Misdialed Numbers (Charles McGuinness)
    2nd RFD for Open Telematic Group (Ed Pimintel)
    AT&T Sent Me $75 (Gary Segal)
    Interesting AT&T Ad (Scott Loftesness)
    CCITT Standards on Line (Ing. Hugo E. Garcia Torres)
    Digital Cellular Service (Tom Holodnik)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 10:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dave Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Dave Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: GTE NW Caller ID offering in Seattle area.


Had the flier for a month or so, but am just now getting around to
reporting on it.  GTE is offering the following features with their
Caller ID announcement:

Basic Features -

Calling Number ID - (says in big print "INCLUDING NON-PUBLISHED AND
NON-LISTED TELEPHONE NUMBERS")

Cancel Calling Number ID - Per Call  *67, offered free.

Cancel Calling Number ID - Per Line  One time charge of $10 (residential
customers) or $12 (business customers) waived for first 90 days.

******* When I called GTE to ask about this, I had difficulty getting
a knowledgable rep.  The person I finally got said tha *67 would NOT
allow per line blocked customers to SEND their number on demand.  I
THINK this means that most of the special features listed below will
make it difficult for per line blocked customers to call users who
have many of the special features listed below.  A more cynical
person might think that GTE is hoping to discourage customers from
using per line blocking, as it will prevent them from calling many of
their friends ;).

Special Features -

Automatic Busy Redial - camps on to a busy line and calls you when it
is free.

Automatic Call Return - auto dials the last number that called
you (will not return calls to callers who have blocked their number).

Call Block - list of 12 numbers from which you will not accept calls.

Call Tracing - dial a code, get recorded instructions, number
forwarded to law enforcement.

Special Call Acceptance - Allows you to block calls from all but 12
pre-defined numbers.  Can be turned on and off.  Gives other callers a
message that you are not accepting calls.

Special Call Forwarding - Forwards calls only from callers on a list to
the number of your choice.  Can be turned on and off.

Special Call Waiting - allows you to define numbers that can activate
call waiting tone.  Other callers get a busy signal.

VIP Alert - Provides a special ring when you receive a call from
someone on a list, also provides a distinctive call waiting tone.

Except for one price (per line blocking), no charges mentioned on the
flier.  But I imagine that they will be in line with the rest of the
country.


Dave P    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Subject: Public Phone 2000s Still No Data?
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 13:57:30 EST
Organization: Air Age Publishing, Wilton CT USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Chris Turkstra ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Maybe just more Public Phone 2000's -- they take a card swipe, don't
> they?  I encountered one in Battle Creek, MI whose data functions were
> still disabled.

I had thought I heard that the data mode was enabled again on the PP
2000s, but I was in Boston last week and the PP 2000 I needed to use
didn't do data.

I called AT&T customer service, and they said that AT&T is still being
forced to disable data per a FCC ruling.

Does anyone know what's up with these things? I find them handy for
checking on the system when I'm away, and I really needed it this time
since our system was having problems.


Jeff's Oasis at Home.           Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                                                [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Grout)
Subject: Ameritech Offers Service to Charge Phone Bill to MC/Visa
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 18:17:18 GMT


My most recent statement from Illinois Bell described a new Ameritech
800 service to make telco payments via MC/Visa.  I used this service
to pay my bill via Visa yesterday, and liked it because:

(A) IBT added a four-digit extension to my phone number as my account
    number ... making it more difficult for others to use the service to
    harrass me or telco.

(B) It gives me a chance to look at my phone bill before paying.

(C) It lets you designate how much to pay ... it doesn't insist on a full
    payment.

(D) Each month is entirely separate ... I can choose to not pay by MC/Visa
    next month if I wish.

(E) I am given a confirmation number for the transaction which I can use with
    IBT (certainly) and my bank (hopefully ... since I trust my bank somewhat
    more than IBT).

(F) It lets me delay sending in my payment until two business days _before_
    it is due ... much safer than trusting the US Mail for two-day
    service. With the confirmation number, I assume they would have
    difficulty pulling the "late payment" scam (i.e., my payment being
    'late' because they screwed up its processing) on me ... but maybe not.

One thing the service needs ... an expert mode.  It lets you cut a
message short by typing ahead on your keypad, but does not appear to
have any options to leave out any of the relatively boring
intermediate messages.

I wouldn't mind an option where it remembered my Visa number from last
time (if it wouldn't get used without my authorization), but I know
some who would probably not trust telco enough to want them to store a
credit card number ...  at least without a written statement that
telco would never, ever use it to charge disputed bills without
express authorization.


John R. Grout     INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Malamud)
Subject: Kids and the Internet
Organization: Internet Talk Radio
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 00:00:00 CDT


Global Schoolhouse Project

For the past ten weeks, a team of volunteers from 30 organizations
have donated time, money, equipment, software, and bandwidth to make
the National Science Foundation's Global Schoolhouse Project a
reality.  This note briefly explains the project and its significance.

For the past six weeks, schoolchildren in grades 5-8 have been
conducting original research on the environment in their communities.
With the help of a curriculum developed by the FrEdMail Foundation,
they have conducted surveys and tests, have prepared videotapes and
other materials, and have read Vice President Gore's "Earth in the
Balance."  The children are located in schools in Oceanside,
California; Knoxville, Tennessee; Arlington, Virginia; and London,
England.

Using the Internet, the children have been exchanging messages with
each other using FrEdMail.  They have also been using Cornell
University's CU-SeeMe videoconferencing software and Sprint
audioconference bridges to communicate with each other.

On April 28th, they will conduct a videoconference on the Internet to
brief each other and national leaders on what can be done about the
environment.  Several prominent leaders have been invited to
participate, and a variety of dignitaries and members of the media
have been invited to observe.

Technically, the April 28 videoconference consists of CU-SeeMe running
on Macintosh computers donated by Apple equipped with a camera.
CU-SeeMe sends a video stream to a Sparcstation donated by Sun which
acts as a central reflector, sending the video from one site to the
other sites participating in the conference.  Xerox Parc has modified
the NV software to read CU-SeeMe streams, allowing the April 28
videoconference to be rebroadcast to the MBONE.  (Note that the 4-site
conference is our top priority and if we sense network problems, the
MBONE link will be cut.)

Each of the schools has been equipped with a local network, with all
of the resources donated or furnished on long-term loan.  This
equipment includes Cisco routers, Cayman Gator boxes, David System UTP
hubs.  The network connectivity for the Global Schoolhouse has been
furnished by SprintLink, CERFnet, the NSFNET, ICMnet, Suranet,
Metropolitan Fiber Systems, Pacific Bell and Bell Atlantic. Local loop
connectivity uses either T1 lines or SMDS.

Each of the schools has a teacher or group of teachers that has worked
hard on the curriculum and on using the technology.  Working alongside
these teachers have been Internet mentors.  We are grateful to
CERFnet, SNMP Research, the University College London, and Dave Staudt
of NSF for taking time out of their schedules to work with these
schools.

It has been remarkable to see how all these organizations have pitched
in to give children the opportunity to use the network as part of
their education.  The National Science Foundation is contemplating
expanding the project in future years to include additional
classrooms, other guests, and further advanced and improved
technologies.

There are several lessons that can be learned from the Global
Schoolhouse.  First, affordable (though not yet cheap) technology is
available that allows K-12 groups to join the Internet.  Second,
business/government/university partnerships can be a valuable tool for
bringing connectivity to new groups.  Third, because we have a
general-purpose infrastructure in the Internet, we were able to very
quickly make this project happen.

The list of vendors mentioned here is not exhaustive and is meant only
to illustrate the breadth of sponsorship.  The summary of this project
should not be taken to reflect the official views of the National
Science Foundation or any of the project sponsors.

My organization, Internet Talk Radio, sees events like the Global
Schoolhouse Project as the beginning of an Internet Town Hall, a place
where national and international leaders and citizens can hold a
continuing dialogue.  Internet Talk Radio, in cooperation with other
organizations, will be placing a 10 Mbps link from the Internet into
the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.  We hope that this
centrally-located site will be a place where we can bring our leaders
onto the network to talk to us on a regular basis.

For more information:

    About NSF: [e-mail]
    About CU-SeeMe: [e-mail]
    About FrEdMail: [e-mail]
    About This Message: [e-mail]

Regards,

Carl Malamud
Internet Talk Radio

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

From: [e-mail] (David Vrona)
Subject: Has Anyone Compiled Tpage2 Under SVRA?
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 13:45:30 CDT


Hi all,

I'm wondering if anyone has compiled the tpage2 software (ixo/tap
alphanumeric pager interface) to platforms other than the Sun platform
directly supported by the virgin release of the code.

I am having some trouble compiling tpage2 under SVR4 and could use
some tips.

Thanks very much.


David Vrona N9QNZ               [phone] (voice)
Hollister Incorporated          [phone] (fax)
2000 Hollister Drive            Internet: [e-mail]
Libertyville, IL  60048-3781    UUCP: {well connected}!ddsw1!hp1!dave
Opinions expressed are my own and not those of Hollister Incorporated.

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

From: [e-mail] (Charles McGuinness)
Subject: Misdialed Numbers
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 13:51:47 EDT


I have a situation where, given a particular telephone number, I need
to estimate the probability of it being mistakenly dialed. (The number
in question has three sets of repeating digits!).

I realize that there is much about this that is simply unknown (e.g.,
what "nearby" numbers are being dialed with what frequency), but I was
hoping to start with something simple, like the probability of a user
accidentally doubling a digit.  It may be possible to guess the rest
of the numbers.

Any pointers would be appreciated!


Charles McGuinness, JYACC Inc. [phone]   [e-mail]

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

Subject: 2nd RFD for Open Telematic Group
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 09:09:34 EDT
Organization: Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- [phone]


                         RFD
                 Request For Discussion
                       for the
                 OPEN  TELEMATIC GROUP

                         OTG


I have proposed the forming of a consortium/task force for the
promotion of NAPLPS/JPEG, FIF to openly discuss ways, method,
procedures,algorythms, applications, implementation, extensions of
NAPLPS/JPEG standards.  These standards should facilitate the creation
of REAL_TIME Online applications that make use of Voice, Video,
Telecommuting, HiRes graphics, Conferencing, Distant Learning, Online
order entry, Fax,in addition these dicussion would assist all to
better understand how SGML,CALS, ODA,MIME,OODBMS,JPEG,MPEG,
FRACTALS,SQL,CDrom,cdromXA,Kodak PhotoCD,TCL, V.FAST,EIA/TIA562,can
best be incorporated and implemented to develop TELEMATIC/Multimedia
applications.

We want to be able to support DOS, UNIX, MAC, WINDOWS, NT, OS/2
platforms.  It is our hope that individuals,developers, corporations,
Universities, R & D labs would join in in supporting such an endeavor.

This would be a NOT_FOR_PROFIT group with bylaws and charter. Already
many corporation have decided to support OTG (Open TELEMATIC Group) so
do not delay joining if you are a developer

An RFD has been posted to form a usenet newsgroup and a FAQ will soon
be be compose to start promulgating what is known on the subject.  If
you would like to be added to the mailist send email or mail to the
address below.

This group would publish an electronic quarterly NAPLPS/JPEG
newsletter as well as a hardcopy version.  We urge all who wants to
see CMCs HiRes based applications & the NAPLPS/JPEG G R O W, decide to
join and mutually benefit from this NOT-FOR_PROFIT endeavor.

NOTE: Telematic has been defined by Mr. James Martin as the marriage
of Voice, Video, Hi-res Graphics, Fax, IVR, Music over telephone
lines/LAN.


If you would like to get involve write to me at:

IMG Inter-Multimedia Group| Internet:  [e-mail]
P.O. Box 95901            |            [e-mail]
Atlanta, Georgia, US      | CIS     :  70611,3703
                          | FidoNet :  1:133/407
                          | BBS     :  [phone] zyxel 14.4k


[e-mail] (Ed pimentel)
gatech!kd4nc!vdbsan!willard!edimg
emory!uumind!willard!edimg
Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 10:41:02 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Gary Segal)
Subject: AT&T Sent Me $75


Last month I recieved an envelope from AT&T.  Being an MCI customer, I
wondered what AT&T wanted.  When I opened the envelope, I found a
check for $75 made out to me.  Cashing it would switch my dial-1
service to AT&T.

I've been using MCI for many years and have been quite satisfied with
voice quailty, price and service; so I felt no great need to change.
But $75 is no small hunk of change, so I decided to do some
investigation of my options.

My first thought was to go ahead and cash the check, but continue to
use MCI by dialing their 10xxx code.  So I called MCI to find out if I
could switch my account to "secondary" status and maintain all of the
plans I use (Friends & Family, Free Speech, e.t.c.).  I explained to
the service representative that the reason I wanted to do this was
because of the $75 AT&T check.  He said that they could set me up as a
secondary account and keep all my plans, but he offered me two other
options as well.  First, I could send the check to MCI and they would
credit my account with $75.  Or, I could cash the check switch to AT&T
and then switch right back to MCI.

Before I made my descion, I wanted to talk to AT&T too.  So called the
number on that came with the check and talked to an AT&T rep.  I asked
her what AT&T plan would make the most sense for me.  I described my
calling habits and she proposed the "i" plan: I'd pay straight AT&T
rates, but if I had over $30 (or so) a month, I'd get a 25% discount
for all calls to one area code, and %15 off the rest.  I asked for
rates for one number that I call often.

Even with the %25 discount, the cost per minute was 10.5 cents.  With
MCI, I pay 10 cents a minute and then get a 20% Friends & Family
discount.  So I decided to stay with MCI and let them give me a $75
credit.

Who knows, in another month, AT&T may ofer me $150!!


Gary Segal            Motorola Inc.
[e-mail]    Cellular Infrastructure Division

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

Date: 26 Apr 93 09:58:21 EDT
From: Scott Loftesness <[e-mail]>
Subject: Interesting AT&T Ad


[from a full page ad in Sunday's {San Francisco Examiner} Business
section.]

BRAVO, Pacific Bell

California, Get Ready.  You're About to Start Communicating Like Never
Before.

Pacific Bell has just announced its vision for the future of
communication.  And it's filled with exciting ideas and better ways
for all of us to be brought closer together.  Today and into the next
century.

It's seeing the person at the other end of the phone line.  It's
working and living in Lake Tahoe when your office is in Sacramento.
It's participating in city hall meetings from your home.  It's even
having doctors make video house calls.  And it's all in California's
future.

We at AT&T Network Systems applaud Pacific bell's vision -- and the
determination it will take to see it through.  We share their
determination and we're committed to supporting Pacific Bell with
world-class technologies.

To learn more about the future of communications, send your name and
address, by May 7, to Brave!, 251 Michelle Court, South San Francisco,
Calif. 94080.  We'll do the rest.

So, bravo, Pacific Bell.  For moving California forward.

AT&T Network Systems

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

From: [e-mail] (Ing. Hugo E. Garcia Torres)
Subject: CCITT Standards on Line
Date: 26 Apr 1993 17:48:19 GMT
Organization: ITESM, Campus Monterrey


I am looking for a online source of the CCITT standards, do anyone
know where to find them, maybe via ftp???

All the help would be appreciated,


Hugo Garcia    ITESM Monterrey Mexico

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

From: Tom Holodnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digital Cellular Service
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 12:31:32 -0400
Organization: Data Communications, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


I've heard several references made to cellular digital service, where
data is carried over the cellular spectrum.  Can any one provide me
with more details?

- what companies provide this?
- is it ubiquitous?
- what market projections are they making?
- does this include "follow me roaming?"

Is anything like this approaching standard form?


Thanks in advance for any hints!

Tom Holodnik   Network Development   CMU

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #283
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01407;
          26 Apr 93 21:05 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09218
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 18:43:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17207
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 18:42:31 -0500
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 18:42:31 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #284

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Apr 93 18:42:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 284

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 800 Portability ... NOT (Klaus Dimmler)
    Re: Broadband Symposium Reminder (Will Martin)
    Re: Area Code Listing Needed For USA (Carl Moore)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Dale O. Miller)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Carl Moore)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Mark Brader)
    Re: Clipper Chip and Divulsion of Codes (James J. Menth)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Hierophant)
    Re: Did I Get Slammed? (Justin Leavens)
    Re: Cellular Phone Information Needed (Hing Tong Ngan)
    Re: Cellular Phone Compatibility (John R. Covert)
    Re: Various Items of Interest (or Not) From New England Tel. (Paul Sawyer)
    AT&T 4ESS Switch; References or Information Needed For Modelling (Hank Lim)
    Prodigy: Privacy Thereof! (Ken Stratton)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Klaus Dimmler)
Subject: Re: 800 Portability ... NOT
Organization: Community_News_Service
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 13:36:28 GMT


On the issue of 800 reservations: A long distance company may reserve
any 800 number that it wishes. It must pay to Bellcore the same money
as it would if that number were actually in use by a customer. Many
long distance carriers are choosing the best vanity numbers and
reserving them for that reason.

A customer may purchase that number from a long distance carrier that
has ownership of that number. After the customer owns it, they may
transfer it to any long distance carrier they like.. that number now
belongs to them.

So in the case of the MCI/AT&T situation: You can get the number from
MCI, and then transfer it to AT&T.


Klaus Dimmler    [e-mail]
CNS, Inc   1155 Kelly Johnson Blvd, Suite 400
Colorado Springs, CO 80920   719-592-1240

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 8:44:33 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Broadband Symposium Reminder


An announcement like this totally confuses me. For well over a decade
now, my Activity has had a Sytek broadband network as one of our LANs.
In a previous site, it was the only LAN, and where we are now it is
one of several (the others are Ethernets). Now, we are in the process
of moving away from the broadband LAN (mainly due to the maintenance
costs of the Sytek boxes) and moving over to Ethernet, gradually.

During this time, I've gone to various meetings and conferences where
LANs are discussed, and it has always been like broadband doesn't
exist. People talked about Ethernet, Token Ring, Novell, etc., and
*never* mentioned broadband.

Now I read this announcement and it gives the impression that
broadband is the wave of the future. It reads like broadband is
something new and it will replace Ethernet and suchlike networks.
There's no hint of the fact that the technology has not only been
around a long time, but that it had been generally denigrated. (It
seemed to me that only government agencies were using it, and the
private sector had ignored it.)

So naturally I'm confused by this. Tell me, is what these people mean
by "broadband" something different, not the same as the cable-tv-like
technology used by our Sytek broadband LAN? That the term has changed
definitions? Or is there some other rationale for this discrepancy?


Regards,

Will

If header address doesn't work, try:
[e-mail] OR [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: *Everything and anything* can be the 'wave of the
future' Will, depending on who is peddling what.   :)    PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 9:56:50 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Area Code Listing Needed For USA


I am not sure what the telecom archives have at this writing, but be
warned that it is a huge amount of information you are asking for.
The V&H tape (I believe it's from Bellcore) has this information.
(Perhaps someone should incorporate your message in an FAQ?)

I will be shipping a copy of an area codes list for country code 1.
This includes the United States, but also has Canada and many
Caribbean points (the Caribbean points would be in area code 809).


[Moderator's Note: One of the reasons I've held off so long putting it
in the Telecom Archives has been the sheer volume of data. The archives
has every country in the world, in great detail, including Canada in
the 'country.codes' directory, and yet this entire compilation would
be dwarfed by the USA listings.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Date: 26 Apr 93 11:51:19 GMT
Organization: University of Arkansas at Little Rock


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

> 7) Where do utilities get telephone poles? Are they from special logs? Are
> there particular specifications?

Several people have mentioned the Bellcore spec on telephone poles.
However, there are very few poles which are telephone ONLY.  According
to my North Supply catalog, all of their poles meet ANSI and REA
specifications (they did not supply the particular specification
number, simply stated their poles met it.)  Poles are listed as class
1 through 9 (with no descriptive text explaining the class, I suppose
if I were ordering poles I would know :-)) in lengths of 25 to 80
feet.  Poles are available with either creosote or pentachlorophenol
treatment.  Just for more trivia information, there is an accompaning
chart (lifted from the ANSI spec) which provides approximate weight of
sothern yellow pine poles.  The lightest is a 25' class 9 pole at 293
lbs.  The heaviest is an 80' class 1 pole at 6400 lbs.

If you wish to order poles, North Supply may be reached at 913-791-7000.


Dale O. Miller - Systems Programmer
University of Arkansas at Little Rock
[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 10:26:39 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


Responding to [e-mail]:

In New York state, notice that you left out 518, which does fits that
old N1X rule. (607 does not fit it; 718 and 917 are much too new.)

How do you arrive at 609 covering all of New Jersey?  What limited
information was in telecom had it the other way around: 201 covered
all of NJ, then it split to form 609.

Furthermore:

Potshots at telephone buildings?  I don't know about this with respect
to last year's L.A. riots, but as a result of such riots, flights
to/from L.A. airport were curtailed, and one of the reasons was
concern about shots being possible at low-flying aircraft.  (The L.A.
curfew also cut off much traffic to/from the airport on the ground.)


[Moderator's Note: During the April, 1968 riots here, the Chicago-Kedzie
central office sat right in the middle of the riot zone. No one bothered
them at all, however they did have armed guards on duty during and after
the riot. In those days, Kedzie had a large force of operators working
at the old 'cord boards' and sent the entire crew which got off at 11 PM
each night (and brought in the handful of overnighters) by Yellow Cab
for close to a month at the company's expense. They did the same thing
for the operators at Chicago-Hyde Park which had its shift change at
11:30 each night. Always charge-account fares, with IBT getting the bill.

I remember well riding downtown to work (I also worked the midnight
shift at Amoco Credit Card) in a Yellow Cab -- I had a charge account
with them also -- and listening to the dispatcher who started out
routinely about 10:15 PM and wound up sounding like a radio evangelist
by 11 PM or so: "Drivers, I need another thirty cabs at Kedzie Bell ...
great fares! Remember, you don't ask for money, just mark the fare
down and add fifty cents for your tip. Have the ladies each sign one.
Turn the slips in for credit on your cab rental. All drivers should
wait in the parking lot near the rear entrance. Kedzie Bell!! Kenwood
Bell!!!!! Ah yes, Kenwood lets out at 11:30, I need 45 cabs there
starting around 11:20. When you drop your loads, go over there, wait
behind the UC dormitory at 60th and Kenwood in the alley. (now almost
screaming in the radio) Kedzie Bell!!!!!!!!!! get them first!!!! Whose
going? Okay that's twelve, I still need eighteen more drivers for Kedzie
Bell!!! .... all good fares and you get a fifty cent tip added on
automatically."  And about 11:10 or so the pitch would be feverish,
but the emphasis had changed to 61st and Kenwood Streets for that
bunch and it went on until almost midnight, with the cab dispatcher
exhorting the drivers to service waiting telephone operator passen-
gers: Kenwood Bell!!!! Kedzie Bell!!!  ("Another X cabs needed")  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 21:29:50 GMT


> ... The original plan provided that area codes would be three digits,
> with 0 or 1 as the second digit.  No area was to cross a state boundary...

But Canadian provinces and territories were not so privileged.  Area
code 902 still covers Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia, and
originally included New Brunswick also.  Similarly, the Yukon
Territory and the Northwest Territories share area codes with
provinces and each other.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (james.j.menth)
Subject: Re: Clipper Chip and Divulsion of Codes
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 14:38:47 GMT


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

> About this divulsion of codes required to un-encrypt the Clipper
> Chip's output: Are these codes actually released, or does the
> information from the conversation get taken to the two agencies who
> decode it and give it back?

> If the codes are actually given out, wouldn't the agency just write
> them down and use them at any point in the future that they wanted to,
> even if it was a while after when they asked for them.  As in: they
> may not be able to prove anything right now, but if they listen long
> enough, they can get almost anything, if twisted in the correct
> manner.

I probably won't be alone in pointing this out but the possession of
clear text matching a given ciphertext is very damaging to the
security of the system.  I believe that, if this scheme was used, the
requesting agency would be able to decode all other messages sent
using the same key pair, whether past or future and outside the time
constraints of the warrant.  It should also be possible for the agency
to produce fraudulent messages that would be difficult to detect by
the 'suspects' (the subjects of the warrant).


Standard disclaimers!!

Jim at Little Rock  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 11:21:23 -0500
From: Hierophant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System


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

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

>> You might also consider reports that Clipper has been in development

> Also, please note that "Clipper" is a trademark for a CPU chip that

Gee, and *I* thought "Clipper" was a database language developed by
Nantucket in 1986. Silly me :)

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 09:42:42 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: Did I Get Slammed?


> It would basically go like this.  Dial a number that's long distance,
> and you immediately land on their message.  No rings, just that
> message.  I guess the church up the street (who we got connected to)
> didn't have their long distance services straightened out.

I signed up for Com Systems for my LD on one line a couple years ago,
and when I went to make a LD call, I got the same thing: straight to a
message saying to call their business office. Apparently some of these
companies are not setup to immediately start accounts for everyone who
selects them as their 1+ company.  A call to their business office got
my account setup, though it did take about four days for them to make
my 1+ dialing work.


Justin Leavens : Microcomputer Specialist : University of Southern California
    [e-mail]    My opinion is that my opinions are my opinions

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

From: Hing Tong Ngan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Phone Information Needed Regards British System
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 16:10:16 EDT


One of my friends wanted to have a large quantity of Motorola cellular
phones which are compatible with the British system. So, would you be
so kind as give me the information such as company names and contact
phone no. Thanks in advance.


Samuel Ngan

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 15:06:07 EDT
From: John R. Covert  26-Apr-1993 1503 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular PHone Compatibility


Yuan Jiang made the incorrect statement that a regular cellular
telephone for the U.S. does not work in Hong Kong.

This is not true; my regular AMPS cellular telephone worked just fine
in Hong Kong when I went there a few years ago.  Hutchison operates
both a AMPS and a TACS system (and may be adding GSM soon).

The issue is not whether the phone needs to be modified or not.  The
issue is whether the local Hong Kong carriers will sign you up if you
show up with a phone.  I would have been glad to sell you my old
Motorola Micro-TAC for $200 when I upgraded to a Micro-TAC-Lite a few
weeks ago (someone else already bought it).

But Hutchison will charge you an extra service charge equivalent to
the difference in price between phones in the U.S. and phones in Hong
Kong if you come to them and ask for service on a phone you didn't buy
in Hong Kong.  I don't know if the entire problem is Hutchison, or
whether the GPO (General Post Office) is also involved in this, er,
arrangement.


john

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul S. Sawyer)
Subject: Re: Various Items of Interest (or Not) From New England Telephone
Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services, Durham, NH
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 16:35:26 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Mark Eklof) writes:

> Also, the new phone books came this week.  They have (for the
> first time) the separation of business and residence listings, as well
> as the last name only appearing once in a column format.  [...]

Another interesting "feature" is "pre-highlighted" listings in the
business section.  They have actually overprinted selected listings in
yellow (apparently a premium that can be added on to a larger type
with border listing).  If you like to highlight only those listings
interesting to YOU, then it is a big bother.  We have had these "new,
improved" directories in this part of N.H. almost a year, since they
stagger the printing schedule for different areas.

> Also, beginning on 17 July, we start seven digit dialing of
> all numbers within the 603 area code (i.e. we drop the '1' before
> in-state long distance calls).

Maybe.  It was scheduled to start in April in some parts (Seabrook??)
and either the PUC or the Legislature put it on "hold" because of the
oft-discussed here "1+ means..." debate.


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] (Hank Lim)
Subject: AT&T 4ESS Switch; References or Information Needed For Modelling
Organization: Aspen Semiconductor/San Jose, CA
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 20:18:12 GMT


Hello, I'm sure this is a shot in the dark, but I was wondering if
anyone could give me some references or share with me some experiences
on modelling the above mentioned telecom network.  Specifically I am
trying to model the network using the simulator "NetworkII.5".  I'm
trying to get a feel for what level of detail I need to arrive at a
meaningful simulation without getting mired in the minutiae.


Thanks in advance,

Hank

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

Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 12:34:36 EDT
From: Ken Stratton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Prodigy: Privacy Thereof!


I heard a rumor that the people at Prodigy can not only to my
harddrive but also look at the contents of my drive!  Do they check to
see what applications I use and sell this information to other
software companies!  Or am I just being too paranoid?


-Ken


[Moderator's Note: You are just being too paranoid. This is an old
urban legend which started one day when someone (I think it was a
lawyer in the original version of the story) discovered a file which
Prodigy had placed on his hard drive which was mostly empty but upon
examination was found to contain personal data of his which had
earlier (he thought) been erased. It turns out he had deleted a file
on his own, but the information remained on the hard disk. Prodigy
started a file, but did not zero out all the data which had been there
in the old file. This legend stems from the general ignorance of
people who are computer users (but not experts in the way DOS operates
on their hard drives) not realizing that 'deleted' information stays
on the drive even after a file is deleted until it physically gets
over-written with new data. Anyway, if Prodigy *did* want to spy on
you via your hard drive, *what* file name(s) would they look for? A
number of points could be raised about Prodigy's services; but spying
on people is not legitimatly one of them.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #284
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08518;
          27 Apr 93 0:43 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31869
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 22:11:20 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00711
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 22:10:29 -0500
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 22:10:29 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #285

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Apr 93 22:10:20 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 285

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Looking for DB SW (Summary) (Tony Dal Santo)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Paolo Bellutta)
    Re: Phone/Debit Cards and Rock Music? (Laird Broadfield)
    Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom (Graham Toal)
    Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom ([e-mail])
    Re: Phone/Debit Cards and Rock Music? (Daniel Omundsen)
    Re: Latest Prodigy News: New Charge For Users (Seng-Poh Lee)
    Alpha Pager Questions (Jeff Wasilko)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Dal Santo)
Subject: Looking for DB SW (Summary)
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 16:01:42 GMT


Here are the responses I received about my post asking if anyone knew
of software for managing wire plan, host info, phone info, and
billing.

Thanks to all those that replied,
Tony Dal Santo
[e-mail]

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

From: <[e-mail]>
call: Stonehouse & Company, Reston, VA
703-476-2215

They make a product called "Monies" (or something sounding like that)
which tracks cable records, circuit numbers, etc.
not cheap, but looked like the most complete package at ComNet.

Another place is:  ISIcad
(but I don't have their address handy. :-( )
Their product is like the Stonehouse product, but PC-based instead of
workstation/mainframe-based.

Hope this helps!

John Balogh, Penn State, Office of Telecommunications, Systems Engineer

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

From: David A. Titzer <[e-mail]>

Tony,

    Believe it or not, a guy here at NRL is using Autocad with
floor plans, merging a flatfile database of equipment and locations,
and displaying a full layout of buildings and where things are placed.
He says that Autocad has the capability to program it to fetch
information if you click on an object (say a bridge in a building) and
pull information from a database, or in this usage, run a script to
find and display flat file information. I hate flatfile databases, so
something like dbase and Autocad would work nicely together. Talk to
the techies, rather than sales gomers, about this at Autocad.

David A. Titzer
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]

Tony,

I'm not really sure that a database software product is all you need
to store the types of information you need.  You may have to rely on a
combination of software products to produce the desired results.

For example: You may want to use a graphics and wordprocessing
combination of software to draw your system layout and write out the
addresses associated with the users.

    You may also want to supplement this with a database that is
sortable to maintain an accurate log of addressees.  For costing data,
you may want to use some form of spreadsheet to keep up to date with
this type of information.

I suggest you may want to look into things like Paradox, Harvard
Graphics, WP or Microsoft Word, Quatro Pro or Lotus 123, to start
getting ideas about how you want to archive your network data.

I may be off track a little here, but from my past experience with
various software products, I have learned that in a lot of cases, one
type of software product isn't enough to get the job done efficiently.

I hope this info helps.


Phil Johnson

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)

First, let me say that I'd like a copy of anything you hear of. I
maintain a list of help-desk related stuff...

ONe that I can reccomend you look at is Delmarva Light + Power's Help
desk Management System. They include capabilites for tracking a cable
plant (both data and voice). The HDMS is free, but the catch is that
you have to have the Unify database environment. That'll run you
around $5k (to start). You can get HDMS from ftp.delmarva.com. Even if
you can't get Unify, the HDMS documentation and database schema is
helpful.

I've got a collection of pointers to other help desk apps. I'll
include it at the end.

You might want to talk the folks at Switchview (214-918-9979 or
519-746-4460).  They have a suite of apps for telecom management,
centered on the Northern Telecom Meridian 1 systems. They claim to
have the following modules: sys admin, traffic mgmt, acd mgmt, network
routing, call accounting, fault mgmt, asset mgmt, cable mgmt,
directories, dial by name & VMX mgmt.

The software runs under SCO Unix.

Please be sure to forward anything you get...

Jeff

(Jeff Wasilko's collection of pointers)

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

From: [e-mail] (Paolo Bellutta)
Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers
Organization: Oregon Health Sciences University
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 23:19:14 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Charles McGuinness) writes:

> I have a situation where, given a particular telephone number, I need
> to estimate the probability of it being mistakenly dialed. (The number
> in question has three sets of repeating digits!).

This is a typical pattern analysis problem.  You might want to take a
look into that.  Basically what you should do is to define the
"tokens" (strings of digits) and the distance between the "elements"
(the digits) of the tokens.  You might define 1 the distance between 5
and 4, 6, 8, 2, while define 2 the distance between 1 and 7, and so
on.  Then you define the distance between the tokens as min between
the corresponding elemnts, or the average of the distances, or
anything you believe represents the "difference".


_   /|   Paolo Bellutta -- e-mail: [e-mail]
\'o.O'   B.I.C.C - Oregon Health Sciences University
=(_o_)=  3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd. - Portland, OR

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Phone/Debit Cards and Rock Music?
Date: 26 Apr 93 23:52:00 GMT


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

> Perhaps in the near future these debit cards will be the hot "promo"
> items of choice at conventions -- instead of handing out pens or
> rulers, give out debit cards with your company's symbol?  Heck, you
> could even go so far as to have your *business* cards be phone debit
> cards.  Might encourage prospective clients to give you a call, if it
> was "on you." :)

Aha!  Epiphany.

Okay, follow along here: First, think back to Aliens, when Ripley
inserted what was clearly Carter's business card (clear plastic,
otherwise rather business-card looking) into the phone, and it called
him.  Same idea as Shag has.  Can't do it today, because phone doesn't
have a place to put card, right?  (I looked all over, I couldn't find
one ...)

Now, how many of you have seen those musical greeting cards, or the
COMDEX invitations to some of the parties that actually had about 30
seconds of recorded speechand music?  Generating DTMF should be at
least an order of magnitude easier; presto!  "Hold my business card up
to the handset, and squeeze the corner."


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

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 13:21:22 EDT
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Rudolph T
Maceyko) says:

> 2. Press AT&T TeleTicket Number ->  XXXXXXXXXX

Wouldn't it be a hoot if they were sequentially, or predicably assigned?

Master the possibilites.


Pete

[Moderator's Note: I think some algorythm is used to number the cards
so that the creation of a valid number on the fly is difficult at
best. Hint: the authorization codes are eleven digits long.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 93 21:53:34 GMT
From: Graham Toal <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom


> [Moderator's Note: I think the reasoning here is that in the USA we
> have a dispropportionate number of 'regular' pay phones as opposed to
> the card reader type. Maybe one out of a thousand here is a card
> reader; the rest are not capable of handling cards that are swiped.
> Speaking of shrines, maybe I could get them to print up a series with
> my picture on it.  :)  PAT]

Yes, in Britain you could!  I can't remember whether it was Mercury or
BT, but I saw an advert a couple of years ago when the cards first
came out offering just that - your custom design on a card for use as
a business promotion.  In fact, I also remember that BT executives
were giving them away instead of ordinary business cards for a time.


G

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 19:34:49 CST


[Reference a previous message from Pat about a new debit type calling card
from AT&T and Pat's comments about them wanting the Digest list, and not
getting it, but possibly AT&T making samples available to Digest readers, and
No mention of PAt about the Orange Card].

Inserting tongue in cheek ...

Pat ... How dare you post this message :) It's one thing to allow
mention of competition to the Orange Card in order to make yourself
not look so bad, but to promote the card by allowing them to possibly
announce a free sample in the Digest, and then, of all thing, to fail
to follow the message with a [Moderator's Note:] mentioning the Orange
Card?  I am shocked.

Why, do you realize how silly this will make all those who are
criticizing your alleged commercialization of the Digest look?  After
all their criticism of you, you have the audacity to do something
reasonable and fair, and put the Digest and its readers ahead of the
Orange card for even ONE MESSAGE.

Removing tongue from cheek ...

Seriously, no offense is intended to anyone here.  I realize that some
people who criticize the Orange Card are expressing valid concerns
(that I don't happen to agree with) about commercialization of the
internet; however, I couldn't resist the urge to point out the
absurdity of some of those arguing that Orange Card is bad --> Orange
Card is mentioned occasionally in c.d.t --> Digest appears in c.d.t, -->
-Pat moderates Digest --> therefore, PAT is bad.


 Brett   ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Well, the natives are going to be restless tonight
for sure then ... since I today got the final word on the Talk Tickets
and will be mailing out a special summary Monday night explaining how
to get them for $2 each (normal denominations will be $5, $10, $20, $50
when the program gets officially underway early in May.) Anyone who
wants them -- and I am sure our non-USA readers will find a use for
them above all -- will be able to get all they want by following the
instructions in the notice I will mail later tonight.   PAT]

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

From: Daniel Omundsen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone/Debit Cards and Rock Music?
Organization: Telecom New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand


> [e-mail] wrote (in rec.music.info):

>> Split Enz Phone Cards
>> ---------------------
>> A couple of months ago it was reported in Rip It Up that Festival were
>> planning to have a set of Enz phone cards made up for media and record
>> retail personnel. And also, that other NZ bands may be honoured.
>> But I haven't heard anything else about it.
>> I shall ask around - BOUND to be a collectors item.

> It would, admittedly, be pretty interesting to have my IQ card feature
> the emblem of my favorite metal group (and actually, I could probably
> ink a small representation of it below the IQ symbol)... has anyone
> (outside the US, since I'm fairly sure we can't get such nifty cards
> here) seen such cards?  I'm not sure whether they'd be permanent
> plastic cards, or the debit cards that've been discussed recently.

In New Zealand, most pay phones use plastic, credit-card sized debit
cards which are purchased in fixed denominations ($5.00, $10.00,
$20.00, etc).  These have a graphic design on the front and a series
of magnetic stripes on the back, into which is encoded an encrypted
pattern representing the amount on money left on the card.

Payphones deduct the cost of your call from the value on the card, and
write the new value onto the card before returning it to you. Calls
are charged at 20c per minute (US 10c) for local calls, and at peak
rates for all toll calls.  When the value of the card is used up, it
is discarded.

The design on the front of the card is changed from time to time,
often depicting current events such as the Olympic games or Christmas
 -- much in the same way as postage stamps do. Special batches of cards
do get printed up for various promotions or special events, as
mentioned above.

Like postage stamps, phone cards have become somewhat of a collectors
item. Dealers here will often buy up your used cards for 20c each.
Used $2 cards from the initial trial will fetch $2 to $5 each. Flawed
or errored cards are worth much more, in the order of several hundred
dollars. I know a guy who has an uncut sheet of cards that were
printed up in order to test the printing process before the cards were
manufactured -- it has no magnetic stripes but is reputed to be worth
somewhere around $15,000.

>Perhaps in the near future these debit cards will be the hot "promo"
>items of choice at conventions -- instead of handing out pens or
>rulers, give out debit cards with your company's symbol?  Heck, you
>could even go so far as to have your *business* cards be phone debit
>cards.  Might encourage prospective clients to give you a call, if it
>was "on you." :)

Individualised cards like this have not really taken off here (at
least, as far as I am aware) but I have heard of this happening in
Japan. Perhaps someone from there would like to comment?


Daniel Omundsen.

*DISCLAIMER* - Although I work for the phone company, I have nothing
whatsoever to do with phone cards. These observations are made purely as
a user of the service, and are NOT official in any way. So there.


[Moderator's Note: The ten thousand dollar denomination Talk Tickets
being started here will have my picture on them, in my role as
Comptroller of the TELECOM Digest Treasury; you know, all the money I've
accumulated from my abuse of the Internet and its denizens and all
that.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 22:23:53 -0400
From: Seng-Poh Lee <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Latest Prodigy News: New Charge For Users
Organization: Public Domain Inc.


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

> [e-mail] (Arthur R. McGee) writes:

>> Don't forget to let them know that America Online is now CHEAPER than
>> Prodigy! American Online is ONLY $9.95 month for five hours of service
>> and $3.50 per hour thereafter. Prodigy is $14.95 per month and I
>> forget what the price is per hour.

> Close ... Prodigy is now $14.95 per month and 0.00 per hour for a vast
> majority of their services offered.  They do have some premium areas,
> but most people that I know that use the service don't use them.

> The change in fee structure occured when Prodigy opened up higher
> speed access numbers to their system.  They now support 9600 baud in
> most areas and I believe 14.4kbps in some ares.

This is not correct. That was the PREVIOUS rate change. The RECENT
rate change adds timed charges (about $4.80/hour after two hours free
per month) to the following previously untimed services:

All Bulletin Boards (except the one for Prodigy Feedback)
Stock Quotes
Dow Jones Company News
AA Sabre Online Reservation

They removed the surchage for 9600 bps access. These timed charges are
due to go into effect July, unless you've prepaid for the year.

Apparently, these services cost Prodigy the most in terms of tied up
modems, and outside company fees and communication charges.  However,
the on screen advertisments still come for free :-)


Seng-Poh Lee   <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Subject: Alpha Pager Questions
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 20:31:24 EST
Organization: Air Age Publishing, Wilton CT USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I've finally decided to pick up a pager to keep in touch with the
office. I think I'd like to pick up an alpha pager so that I can
recieve textual messages via 'tpage' from our system.

What can you recomend as a good alpha pager? A answering service we
deal with sells both Motorola and NEC pagers (and they prefer NEC).

Also, can alpha pagers receive a simple numeric page (dial a number,
hear a tone, dial a call-back number)? Our voice-mail system provides
for notification of urgent messages via a numeric pager, so I'd like
to be able to use the alpha pager for that, too ...

Any other comments about alpha pagers would be appreciated.


Thanks,

Jeff
Jeff's Oasis at Home.     Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                                          [e-mail]
------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #285
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08717;
          27 Apr 93 0:49 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00116
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 22:25:53 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26635
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 26 Apr 1993 22:24:56 -0500
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 22:24:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Talk Ticket Debit Cards Now Available by Mail


The 'Talk Ticket' telephone debit calling cards I mentioned last week
are now available as (very) limited-value samples for anyone who wants
them. When the program gets officially underway during May, the cards
will be in denominations of $5, $10, $20 and $50.  There were some
errors in my earlier report I want to correct at this time.

The cards will NOT be renewable. There were too many privacy concerns
about using a credit card over the phone to re-instate the authori-
zation codes when they were used up. I agree with that concern.  There
are lots of people who want ANONYMOUS long distance calling without
the ability to back-track through records to them. So instead of
renewing the cards, you will simply buy new ones and toss out the old
ones each time, in the quantities desired. If you think you want more
to start with, just ask for more when you originally order them. They
do not expire after any certain time; they are good until you use them.

I was slightly incorrect on the *price per minute of usage*. The base
rate on small purchases will bring the effective rate to fifty cents
per minute -- but with no surcharge. So like the Orange Card, you are
best off using these debit pre-pay cards to your advantage from pay
phones, hotels, etc where a surcharge would apply, and holding your
call down to two or three minutes. The cards can be used for local or long
distance calls, all at the same price.  Where the cost per minute
grows less is in the bulk purchase of the cards. For instance, a
person buying several of the $50 denomination cards -- once the
program gets underway -- will be given a substantial discount. I'll
have more precise details on the discount structure later on.  For the
people who want to try the program now with the special two dollar
tickets, there will also be a 25 percent discount in quantity.

You can use these tickets to call anywhere in the world. Bear in mind
that an overseas call will only get you about a minute of talking with
the two dollar sample card. Cards cannot be associated with each other;
that is, you cannot use the four units on one card in combination with
the four units on another card to get eight units of talking (or about
two minutes) on an international call. When one card dries up, the
phone line is disconnected. So for all intents and purposes, to get at
least a few minutes of talking on an international call, you will need
to have a larger denomination ticket(s) ...

The switch where these tickets will be honored is an 800 number you
dial, followed by the ticket serial number and the number where you
wish to call. Included in the deal is voicemail, news, a speed dialing
arrangement for frequent users, etc. All this gets charged off on the
ticket as well as the actual calls you make. Each time you use the
ticket the computer will tell you how many units (or minutes) remain
available.  All the traffic will move on AT&T. With the sample tickets
will be a telephone number you can call should you wish to deal in
these tickets yourself at your company, your school or whatever. If
all you want is a few tickets for your own use as you travel around
the USA this summer, that is fine also. You should remember that fraud
is limited to the value of the ticket, which in our application at
hand is two dollars. You would not carry all these tickets in your
possession at one time, I presume, any more than you would carry all
your money around at one time letting people see it, etc.

Here is how to order:

   Send $2 for each sample ticket desired. I am reluctant to say send
   cash through the mail, but I am equally reluctant to ask you to
   write a check or buy a money order for that little. Obviously if
   you want several tickets, a check/money order would be a better
   idea for your protection and mine. If you want ten sample tickets
   or more, send $1.50 for each (fifteen dollars for each group of
   ten Talk Tickets, in other words.)  Make checks or money orders
   payable to 'Telecom Digest'. I am handling these at cost (other
   than a few sample tickets -- very few -- they tossed my way) in
   order to aquaint Digest readers with this new product, so I
   am asking that you include a  LONG, SELF-ADDRESSED, STAMPED ENVELOPE
   *or* a 29 cent postage stamp with your request. I'd prefer to
   be able to toss the tickets in an envelope and send them back
   to you with no further bother. If you are reluctant to send
   much money, then just get one for two dollars; I'll have more
   for awhile, but no guarentees how long. I'm hoping if you like
   these Talk Tickets and find them useful, you will consider
   buying more of them from me when the program gets under way
   with the larger denomination 'regular cards' next month.

Anonymous purchases: Mail is delivered to a post office box by box
number only. Send your two dollars (or a money order if for more
than that, as you wish) in whatever name you wish. Tickets will be
sent to that box address in the name specified, if any, or just to
'occupant'.  Ditto, 'occupant' with a specific street address and
apartment number usually gets through okay. If you are in the Chicago
area you can pick them up at my office by appointment. Any one of
you can buy several on behalf of friends who do not wish their name
given out. If this works out okay, you'll want to buy more tickets as
time goes on.

If outside the USA: Bear in mind that calls on the ticket must *originate*
in the USA, although I guess you could use a 'call home' program and
connect to our 800 number if desired. If you will be coming to the
USA this summer, order a few sample tickets for use when you are in
this country. If someone in Europe (for example) wants to be responsible
for a large quantity of these tickets for redistribution to students
or others coming here this summer, contact my office by phone or fax.

Also if outside the USA and buying a ticket or two for casual use by
yourself, please send US currency and postal union coupons good for
an ounce of postage.

So that's about it:

$2 per sample requested or (multiples of) $15 for (each group of) ten;
Enclose a LONG stamped envelope addressed however it will reach you;
Checks (or money orders if purchasing anonymously) payable to Telecom
Digest or my name;

Telecom Digest
2241 West Howard Street - Suite 208
Chicago, IL 60645

Phone for information: 312-465-2700
Fax: [phone]

Allow about ten days; my rep will be here this week to see me with
the ticket stock. I'll fill as many orders each day as I can. When/if
the initial stock runs out, I will get more but it takes a couple days
for them to get the tickets to me.  Right now nothing but the $2 size
is available, as they are just 'testing the water' so to speak.

For confirmation order was received/sent if desired:

When you put it in the mail, send email to '[e-mail]'
with a subject line 'tickets ordered' and a single line message
'number ordered, when mailed'. I will cross check this and reply by
email when the order leaves here. Only if you want the additional
check on the postal service, etc.

All samples will be sent in total confidence. NO ONE will ever know
who bought what (particularly if John Doe sends a money order to
have one sent to a PO Box somewhere!)


PAT











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20533;
          27 Apr 93 6:18 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13560
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 27 Apr 1993 02:43:19 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28654
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 27 Apr 1993 02:41:36 -0500
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 02:41:36 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #286

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 27 Apr 93 02:41:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 286

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Block CNID vs Call Block/Return (Brad Hicks)
    Interesting Phone Call (Jim Surine)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (John Nagle)
    Re: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910) (Tony Harminc)
    Re: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910) (Barry Margolin)
    Re: 800 Portability ... NOT (Tony Harminc)
    Re: 800 Portability ... NOT (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: AT&T Sent Me $75 (Bryan J. Abshier)
    Re: US West Says I Can't Use 301+ on Voice Line (Harold Hallikainen)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 27 Apr 93 02:57:46 GMT
Subject: Block CNID vs Call Block/Return


I live in Southwestern Bell territory (there are worse fates, I
gather), and enrolled in all of the CLASS features as they became
available. Use most of 'em, too, which is more than I expected.  Call
Queue (*66) surely came in handy when my cable was knocked out during
the other night's hailstorm, and half of the county tried to call
Continental Cablevision at once ... but that's another story.

But lately when I've gone to *60 (Call Block) teleslime, or *69 (Call
Return) calls that hung up as soon as I answered, six out of the last
seven times I got an error message that said something to the effect
of, "This service won't work with that number."

Now, I refuse to believe that I'm getting carpet salesmen calling from
outside the St. Louis LATA, and I can't believe that four out of five
wrong number hangups happen to be from the only four small clumps of
exchanges (only two local to me!) in the St. Louis LATA that aren't
CLASS compatible.

It's not that my CLASS services are down, either.  I use *69 to return
most of my calls now (being lazy), and it always works with my
friends; it just never works with teleslime or silent hangups.
(Burglars wanting to know if I'm home?  Or -- say it softly --
surveillance?)  (=What= anti-paranoia shots? Did THEY tell you to ask
me that?)

The (very helpful, very friendly) SWBT repair rep that I asked about
all of this insisted quite firmly that per-line blocking has not been
implemented for anyone, =period=.  He was also pretty sure that
per-call blocking hadn't been implemented yet, either, but I have my
doubts about that.  What I'm beginning to wonder is if people who make
their living annoying people with phones are dialing *67 (Block CNID)
before they call me (and presumably others), and if they are, is that
what's killing my Call Return/Block?

So here's what I need: somebody with a listed number in the St. Louis
LATA, preferably a free call to/from 314-878-xxxx, who'll make
arrangements with me to dial *67 and then my number and see if I can
Call Return or Call Block it.  (E-mail me for the phone number.)  I'll
report the results to the Digest.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Surine)
Subject: Interesting Phone Call
Organization: Information Access Technologies, Inc. of Berkeley, CA
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 03:29:30 GMT


I just had a most interesting one-sided phone call. I got home from
work just in time to catch a hangup after four rings call. My
answering machine also had one of these earlier. But I later I got
another call. I could here only one side of the conversation
interspersed with what sounded like relay clicks and pauses. This
person appeared to be calling from someplace related to the phone
company. I could here in the background a woman say something like
"you should call 1-800- ..." with office sounds in the background.
However this man was discussing with some other party setting up a
telephone wiretap. All I could catch were snippets of conversations
but here are some of the ones I was able to write down afterwards.

"Ya, the wiretap should be all set up."

"We do it all over the satellite from here."

"It's all fiber optics..."

"No I think SETI has some international juristiction ..."

"... SETI ..."

"I don't think it should disturb the phone at all."

"... let me put you on hold a minute."

The phone went to dial tone a short time after that. Either the
government is wiretapping my phone and doing a real poor job of it or
there are just doing a bad job. I have know idea where SETI fits in
with this but I was not expecting it when I heard that. He definitely
said SETI. Anyone have any idea what is going on? I suppose if you
actual do you can't tell me, then I'll take guesses instead.


Jim Surine    [e-mail]   San Francisco CA

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 03:34:32 GMT


[e-mail] (John Pettitt) writes:

> BZZZZT.  Wrong -- while as you point out SCAN will not give you a
> balance if you call 408 983 0588 (Bank of America) you can tone in an
> account number and check amount and be told if it will clear.

      It's worse than that.  Call the BofA customer service number,
then select "Credit Rating", and enter the account number as
instructed.  This will give you the approximate balance, given as,
say, "high four figures" ($6666 - 9999).  This is a service BofA
offers to anybody; no password is required, and you can ask for any
account (even savings accounts!).  Clearly they consider this public
information.

      For your own accounts, you can find out more, but the "Credit
Rating" thing is clearly for asking about the accounts of others.


John Nagle


[Moderator's Note: As I said earlier, banks talk about anything and
everything.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 00:10:51 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910)


> From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)

> "It is I who want to know whom I am calling."
> "I won't talk any more," and the operator banged up the receiver.

Hurray for that operator!  I get all sorts of callers who ask me "who
is this?".  The nerve!  Those callers will not get much further until
they identify themselves.

> The Aikenhead Hardware Company and the King Edward Hotel answered with
> the firm's name.

> Among the others who retained the old "Hello" are Barber, Ellis Co.,
> Arnoldi, Gierson, and McMurrich, McKendry's, Massey-Harris, and
> Aylesworth, Wright, and Moss.

It's amusing to note which of these firms are still in business.
Aikenhead Hardware is still there (in fact until a couple of years ago
they were still at the same address they had had since 1850 or so).
The King Edward Hotel is still in the same place (I had my wedding
reception there in 1987).  Barber, Ellis still exists (though now out
in the suburbs).  Massey-Harris is a shell of its former self (once
the largest farm equipment manufacturer in the world, it became
Massey-Ferguson in the 1950s or 60s, and more recently much downsized,
shuffled off to Buffalo, NY under the name Varity Corp.)

Union Station still exists, though not the same one.  The current one
(the one that featured in the 1970s movie Silver Streak) was built
about 1920.  And of course the Bell Telephone Company (now known as
Bell Canada) is still going strong.


Tony Harminc

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Margolin)
Subject: Re: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910)
Date: 27 Apr 1993 04:53:21 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
writes:

> The reason why so many are silly enough to ask a question which
> already has been answered for them is probably simply a case of force
> of habit.

These days most businesses do seem to answer with the firm's name.
However, I find that I must often ask this redundant question, because
I can't understand the name.  I expect that they're saying it while
the receiver is still moving towards their mouth.  Or it's just gotten
so repetitive that they no longer enunciate well.

On the other side, I always answer my office phone with my name, yet
frequently the first thing a caller says is, "May I speak with Mr.
Margolin?"

The reporter's attitude in those transcripts sure seemed annoying.
It's pretty rude for a caller to demand to know who the callee is
before identifying himself.  After all, the callee has a reasonable
expectation that the callee is who he expects, but the callee has no
idea who is calling.  And the callee is also interrupting the callee.
These rules of phone etiquette are less strict when calling a business
(if you reach a receptionist, answering your call *is* the job, not an
interruption); however, if you're not sure that you've reached the
correct party, you may have reached a residential number and should
follow the protocol.


Barry Margolin System Manager,  Thinking Machines Corp.
[e-mail]          {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar

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

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 00:47:40 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 800 Portability ... NOT
Reply-To: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>


> [Moderator's Note: My understanding on this from my contacts at my 800
> number supplier are that starting May 3 (May 1 is Saturday), ALL 800
> numbers will be in a single database maintained by Bellcore. Each number
> will be marked as taken by someone, or free to be taken. There will not
> be 'numbers reserved for customers'.  First come, first served. I've
> been proceeding on that assumption in the process of taking orders for
> my 800 service. On the same topic: (listen up!) if you presently have
> 800 service and spend $50-100 per month or so on it and can live with
> rates of 17-18 cents per minute and no monthly surcharge, *please*
> give me the account!  It'll make it that much easier to keep the
> Digest coming out 3-4 times per day and me eating once a day. Thanks. PAT]

So what happens to the other NANP countries?  Canada will have 800 and
900 number portability *for US numbers* starting 1st May, but not for
Canadian numbers until some months later (mainly because until last
year there was no long distance competition, and equal access won't be
here for some time yet.)  So are the prefixes currently used by
Canadian carriers unavailable to US customers until complete
portability?  Maybe PAT could request a 387 or 268 or 668 number and
see what happens.

[Two nifty Bell Canada 800 prefixes are NOT and FUR.  A former
employer's helpline was FUR-HEAD (quite by accident).]


Tony Harminc


[Moderator's Note: Special cases such as you describe will be shown as
unavailable in the database where Bellcore has no control over the
number because it is outside USA jurisdiction. They'll be listed, I
think, but with a notation they cannot be used by USA customers at the
present time. Has anyone noticed any changes in the way calls to 800
numbers are being processed lately (since the database was installed)?
Illinois Bell apparently has a record of all 800 numbers which relate
to *its* local area subscribers; when I call an 800 number which is in
Chicago from another phone in Chicago it rings instantly -- not even a
two second delay. Maybe it is in a cache of some kind which they check
as part of the look-up process in order to avoid any more trips to the
database than necessary -- I know calls to 800 numbers in Chicago have
never been so fast. Furthermore, in the past when a call to ones's own
number resulted in a busy signal but a call to one's 800 number --
even if it wound up on the same line -- resulted in call waiting or
referral to voicemail, etc after a five second or so round trip to the
800 carrier's switch where it got supervised and sent on its way back,
(to you) now IBT seems to have the ability to dump the call right on
the subscriber's line if speed in handling is a factor and the fact
that the call is still unsupervised when its return path hits the same
line where it started out.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: 800 Portability ... NOT
Date: 27 Apr 1993 07:09:31 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


Another interesting thing that is now happening as a result of 800
portability is that calls to unassigned numbers get intercepted by the
local telco, and a local telco "not in service" recording is played.
Presumably, when the local telco does the database lookup, the
database returns "not in service" instead of the carrier code, so
there's no reason to hand it off to any long distance carrier.  I
would imagine that all 800 calls from just about any telco are now
going through the lookup procedure in preparation for the May 1
introduction of portability.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 05:16:32 GMT


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

> In the 60/70s, ANI equipment (Automatic Number Identification -- used
> for Toll Ticketing) used Light Sensitive hardware to identify lines
> for Toll Billing. I don't remember exactly how it worked, but it was
> prone to falsing if the light levels were elevated but things like
> Photographic Flash guns and Bright sunlight. (One of the reasons that
> flash cameras were prohibited in Central Offices).

> One result of this, was the Central Offices were built with no
> windows, to ensure that sunlight, at certain times of day, didn't
> increase the problems with false ticketing.

> As I recall, the ANI equipment wasn't the only equipment with this
> sensitivity to light levels but It was a long time ago and memory
> fades :-).

    At last week's National Association of Broadcasters
convention, I got to visit with the guy who installed the broadcast
automation system at a station I worked at in 1972 or thereabouts.
The next company he worked for used photosensors instead of mechanical
limit switches to determine where a tape cartridge was.  He told of
people taking a flash photo of the system at conventions.  The flash
would cause all the cartridge machines to tray out the carts, rotate
around to the correct position again, then tray back in.  Also, they
kept getting customer service calls from one station at a certain time
of day.  The system worked fine the rest of the time.  Turned out the
afternoon sun was falsing those same opto detectors.


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] (Bryan J Abshier)
Subject: Re: AT&T Sent Me $75
Organization: The Ohio State University College of Law
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 05:49:56 GMT


     I used to be a Sprint customer until AT&T sent me that $75.00
check.  I really don't know how much thought they put into this
incentive program.  How did they select the people to whom the send
these checks?

     I have been a student for the past seven years and have had
roughly five different homes and phone numbers.  I will be moving
again in a few months and when I sign up for new phone service I'll
probabily go with Sprint again.  Furthermore, my monthly long distance
bill is not usually more then $40.00 a month.

     Now I really don't want to sound like I'm complaining, I kinda
like this competition thing.


Bryan J. Abshier _O_ [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: US West Says I Can't Use 301+ on Voice Line
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 06:16:59 GMT


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

> The moral of the story is this: He did very little to get rid of my
> static, as they (US West) have NO responsibility to anything but voice
> transmissions.  The funny thing is that when I got my line, I was
> never told this.  I got the phone with the understanding that I would
> be using it for MODEM USE! (primarily). Now I get told that I have
> to downgrade to 300 BAUD?!!!  *shaking head in disgust* I was told
> that I would have to buy a digital line or wait for the new lines for
> (not a direct quote of the proper phrase, but comparitavely it's the
> same thing) "multimedia" for phones lines to come in.

    I did a quick look thru parts 40 to 69 of title 47 of the Code
of Federal Regulations, hoping to find specs on a POTS line, but I
didn't find any.  There are lots of specs on customer provided
terminal equipent in part 68, but I didn't find anything on what the
line was supposed to do.  I imagine such specs exist in the tarriffs
filed with the PUC or FCC (but don't know for sure).  I'd certainly
expect numeric specs on noise, frequency response, loss, envelope
delay distorition, etc.  Having a telco tech say "sounds ok to me"
hardly guarantees consistent service.  Further, I'd be real surprised
if a telco disconnected a line for running a 14.4 K modem.  If the
modem is FCC registered under part 68, it should not cause
interference to other users.  So, it would be interesting to know what
the telco specs are as to what kind of quality they are supposed to
deliver.  It would then be interesting to see graphs of bit error
rates for modems under various degrees of line impairment.  It sure
doesn't seem right to be restricted to 300 bps!


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 #286
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20730;
          27 Apr 93 20:24 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06015
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 27 Apr 1993 17:01:44 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15370
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 27 Apr 1993 17:00:59 -0500
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 17:00:59 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #287

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 27 Apr 93 17:01:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 287

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910) (David W. Tamkin)
    Re: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910) (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Jeffrey Jonas)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Public Phone 2000s Still No Data? (Edwin G. Green)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Mike Vevea)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: Alpha Pager Questions (Brad Hicks)
    Re: Faxmail Service in Manhattan (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: Digital Cellular Service (Jim Rees)
    Talk Ticket Privacy Problem? (J. Harrison)
    Grand Canyon Phone Service (Ed Greenberg)
    DTMF Universality? (John Perkins)
    Re: Wireless City ([e-mail])
    1.2 Watt Handheld Cellular Phone? (Bob Longo)
    Needs For Telecom: The "Smart Toilet" Story (Ross Stapleton via Boolootian)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 12:06 CDT
Subject: Re: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DWT)
Organization: Contributor Account at MCS, Chicago, Illinois  60657
From: [e-mail] (DWT)


Mark Brader shared in <[e-mail]> in comp.dcom.telecom:

> Here's one more old {Toronto Star} article.  This one was run
> originally on August 17, 1910, and again, reprinted last year.
  ...

> "No, I do not.  I have been watching this subject rather closely and I
> have been experimenting myself.  I did answer 'Murray's' for a time,
> but almost invariably the women would immediately ask: 'Is that
> Murray's?' just as if I hadn't told them."

> Yes, we are.  We tried the new method, but dropped it for nearly
> everyone persisted in asking again: 'Is that Hobberlin's?'"

For the few people who caught the name, the runaround was saved, and
for the many who didn't, it was no worse than "Hello": never worse and
sometimes better.  So neither of those stores really had a reason to
revert to "Hello".

Substitute the single word "Murray's" or "Hobberlin's" when callers
expect the single word "Hello" and of course the callers won't notice.
Had their receptionists answered the phones with "You've reached W. A.
Murray's.  How may I help you?" or "Good morning.  This is Hobberlin's
Haberdashery," most callers would have noticed the difference and
gotten the message.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910)
Date: 27 Apr 1993 18:06:22 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Barry
Margolin) writes:

> These days most businesses do seem to answer with the firm's name.
> However, I find that I must often ask this redundant question, because
> I can't understand the name.  I expect that they're saying it while
> the receiver is still moving towards their mouth.  Or it's just gotten
> so repetitive that they no longer enunciate well.

I think this reflects the general laziness and lack of attention to
detail that plagues so many American businesses.  What do these people
think the point of announcing the company name is if the caller can't
understand them?  I suppose that in a lot of cases if you know the
name of the company you are calling, you'll be able to understand a
sloppy pronunciation, but many times people may just have a phone
number, and really need a clear announcement.  I think it was Zig
Ziglar who claims that he can select any ten businesses at random from
the Yellow Pages, and be sure that in no more than four cases will he
be able to tell the name of the business based on how they answer the
phone.  I guess that with the advent of more and more businesses
having automated attendants answering the phone, that this problem is
diminishing.

Sometimes I have people call me that must be some sort of sleazy sales
people or list builders -- I've never been able to nail it down.
They'll ask a question such as "How long have you worked there?"  I'll
respond with "Work where?"  I often have several different numbers
forwarded to the same location, and I honestly won't know what the
context of the call is until the caller lets me know where they
called.  In this particular case I'm thinking of, the caller replied
"There!", then hung up without saying anything further when I asked
another question.  Who knows what they're up to.

While we're on the subject of telephone protocol, shouldn't be
standard procedure to always leave an area code in a message wherever
a telephone number is given?  I've had several times where I'll have a
message in my voicemail where the caller gives just a seven digit
number.  Many times, I have several numbers in different area codes
that terminate at the same voicemail box, and I have no way of telling
what the context of the call is.  I suppose that this can be a big
problem in a place like Los Angeles, where there are several area
codes within the "local" area.  I now make it a point to always give
the area code with the phone number.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 12:00:35 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas)
Subject: Re: Misdialed numbers


I'd think that some Bell Labs Technical Journal would have that
somewhere under statistics, or perhpas an ACM journal.

The failure modes are mostly human factors, but there are technical
details too.  Rotary phones were prone to "off by one" dialing of any
digit if your finger slipped from the hole.  I'm not sure what error
worn dialers would make (due to dirty contacts failing to tap, or
bounding, or the dial going at a wrong speed).

Touch tone phones seem to be prone to dialing adjacent keys in error.
I'd guess the keys underneath the desired key is often struck.  Using
that logic, numbers that favored the lower rows (7, 8, 9, 0) would be
less mis-dialed.  Transcription errors: reversed digits, confusing the
letter O with the number 0, the letter I with the number 1.

I wish I could be more constructive and give references, but I'm no
longer at AT&T with their library and lovely librarian.

I'm personally favored numbers that repeat a digit so I can keep a
finger on that button and dial quite rapidly as I rock my fingers back
and forth.  555-1212 is fast and easy to dial.  So are numbers that
form a pattern on the keypad, such as across a row or column, or the
corners (think of Tic Tac Toe or bingo patterns).  Numbers such as
5456 are fast to dial if you start with your little finger on the 5
and type as on a calculator.


Jeffrey Jonas   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers
Date: 27 Apr 1993 15:54:39 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Charles McGuinness) writes:

> I have a situation where, given a particular telephone number, I need
> to estimate the probability of it being mistakenly dialed. (The number
> in question has three sets of repeating digits!).

A couple of years ago, I had the number 841-7249.  With great
frequency, when I gave the number to someone, they would transpose the
2 and the 4, and say 841-7429 when they read it back to me to verify.
It was always those two digits that got transposed, and it happened a
lot.  I've never had another number that had that property.  With all
of the other numbers I've had, people generally get it correct the
first time, with the occasional random error that has no pattern to
it.  It has really intrigued me as to what is special about 7249 such
that a great many people would routinely transpose the middle two
digits.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 08:30:24 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Public Phone 2000s Still No Data?
Organization: AT&T


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

> Chris Turkstra ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> Maybe just more Public Phone 2000's -- they take a card swipe, don't
>> they?  I encountered one in Battle Creek, MI whose data functions were
>> still disabled.

> I had thought I heard that the data mode was enabled again on the PP
> 2000s, but I was in Boston last week and the PP 2000 I needed to use
> didn't do data.

> I called AT&T customer service, and they said that AT&T is still being
> forced to disable data per a FCC ruling.

> Does anyone know what's up with these things? I find them handy for
> checking on the system when I'm away, and I really needed it this time
> since our system was having problems.

The FCC has not forced AT&T to turn off data services.  AT&T has
voluntarily turned off all data services pending FCC approval.

The services have not yet been restored.  I will post to this group as
soon as there is any change in status of this situation.

Sorry for the inconvenience.


Edwin G. Green   AT&T Bell Laboratories   Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
INH 1E-506       317-845-3659    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 09:02:41 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike Vevea)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


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

> 7) Where do utilities get telephone poles? Are they from special logs? Are
> there particular specifications?

Yes, they are from `special' logs.  I haven't been involved in timber
sales for over 15 years, but in the mid seventies, in central
California, pole sales were very desirable.  There were a variety of
requirements; I don't remember details, but they had to do with
minimum size, maximum taper (they want logs which are close to
cylendrical, not sharply tapered), size, number and tightness of
knots, max and min growth rates, and a few other things.

Dealing with the poles was a bit of a hassle, particularly for the
truckers (the mill, for `ordinary' logs, was about 25 miles away, but
the people who wanted poles were about 150 miles away.  Even so, after
the loggers figured in the extra handling, extra driving, etc, the
stumpage (that's the amount we were paid) was over twice what we got
for `ordinary' logs.


mikeV <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Date: 27 Apr 1993 13:46:58 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm


In article <[e-mail]> Hierophant <ozone@sanger.
chem.nd.edu> writes:

>> Also, please note that "Clipper" is a trademark for a CPU chip that

> Gee, and *I* thought "Clipper" was a database language developed by
> Nantucket in 1986. Silly me :)

Oh, come on.  Everybody knows that "Clipper" is a RISC processor
developed by Fairchild.


scott

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 27 Apr 93 14:30:57 GMT
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Questions


I use a Motorola Advisor (not that I can tell by looking at it,
Cybertel pasted their logo over the Advisor logo), and I think it's
just about the coolest toy I have.

It stores about 20 pages, and hasn't choked on long ones, either, so
apparently it can handle up to the 230 or so byte limit of IXO. It
also has a "personal storage area" where you can store a kilobyte or
two worth of pages and they won't age off. The text display is 4 rows
by 20 columns, with 5x9 pixel characters in mixed case; it can display
any ASCII character from 32 to 126 (and doesn't choke on characters >
126, it just doesn't display them right). Each message is stamped at
the end with time and date.

The controls are a snap: two function keys and a standard cursor pad
(up, down, left, right).  The green button is the "read" key and the
red button is the "action key." While reading, the left/right buttons
take you from page to page and the up/down buttons scroll through
them.

When you press the "action" key, you get an iconic menu (a GUI on a
pager!) at the bottom of the screen, and use the left/right keys to
select from it. The functions are change beep, set clock, set alarm
time (yes, it also serves as a travel alarm clock), audio vs. vibrate,
lock the current page (keeps it from aging off), add the current page
to personal storage, and delete the current page.

It has six different beep patterns, giving you control over volume,
duration, and whether or not it starts of soft and gets louder with
each beep. When set to vibrate, it can be also be set to chime once
when the page comes in. It's also easy to set one of the two settings
to be "no notify"; I normally just press a button when I go to bed to
switch it from vibrate to no notify, and check it in the morning.

If you press and hold the action button for about a half-second, a
flourescent panel behind the display lights up, bright enough to be
used as an emergency flashlight.

It is a fairly heavy unit, and the vibrate motor is accordingly pretty
strong, so the thing goes through batteries like they were going out
of style. If you do get a Motorola Advisor, you may want to invest in
a battery charger and some AAA rechargables.  Also because it's so
heavy, the unit is actually in two pieces, a solid plastic belt-clip
that stays on your belt and into which the main unit snaps.  This plus
the weight is a drawback for some users; in particular, my co-worker
Shelly one complains that few of her normal work outfits have a heavy
enough belt to hold it, so she ends up leaving it behind a lot.

Overall, I give it the big Thumbs Up.


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

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Faxmail Service in Manhattan
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 10:16:00 PDT


> I want to know if there is a Enhanced Faxmail Mailbox service
> available from NYTel/NYNex 212 area code folks. Something similar to
> the Faxtra/US West Enhanced Fax offering. The Droid in the NYTel Biz
> office didn't even know what enhanced fax services were.

AT&T offers a service called Fax Mailbox.  For further details, try
800/446-2452.


Regards,

Lynne

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Service
Date: 27 Apr 1993 19:14:16 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI


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

> I've heard several references made to cellular digital service, where
> data is carried over the cellular spectrum.  Can any one provide me
> with more details?

There are two competing digital cellular systems in the US, TDMA and
CDMA.  As far as I know, TDMA makes no provision for data.  CDMA is
the Qualcomm system and does provide for data, at rates up to about 10
Kbps.  It's spread spectrum and operates in 1.25 MHz slices of the
current analog cellular spectrum.  There is a pilot system in San
Diego but no commercial providers yet.  I think most cellular
operators see digital as a way of cramming more voice users onto the
system rather than a way of going after data users, so you're not
likely to see data cellular in widespread use any time soon except
maybe in the saturated markets like LA, NYC, and Chicago.

There is also something called Cellular Digital Packet Data (CDPD), or
Celluplan II.  It's a data overlay for existing analog FM systems.  It
sends packet data on idle channels using slow frequency hopping.
Supports tcp and osi protocols.  It's seen as mostly a stopgap until
full digital cellular (CDMA or TDMA) is available.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 09:18:08 +0100
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Talk Ticket Privacy Problem?


Nobody can trace back who bought which ticket, but can any individual
call be tracked to any particular ticket?

Suppose you use a ticket to call home 17 times, then use it to make a
call you really want to be anonymous. If somebody were to look at the
list of calls made by that ticket it would be fairly clear who you
might be.

The practical benefits sound like they surely outweigh any small
chance of un-anonymity though.


Joe Harrison     Phone: [phone]     | ICL Ltd. Bracknell
S=Harrison/I=J/O=icl/P=icl/A=gold 400/C=GB | Berkshire RG12 1BD
[e-mail]          | United Kingdom


[Moderator's Note: So use one ticket exclusively for calling one
number and another ticket exclusively for calling another number if
you do not want called numbers associated with each other. Although
the Talk Ticket program *can* be used for anonymous calling without
coins as you go along, it is mainly intended for people who want the
convenience of calling that way instead of with a regular calling
card. As long as an envelope arrives here addressed to *some name
somewhere*, I'll send out the tickets without regard to who it is. PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Grand Canyon Phone Service
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 8:04:46 PDT


Who provides phone service at the Grand Canyon.  I note that all
service for hotel properties listed in the AAA book is from the
602-638 exchange.  This is true for both North and South Rim.

Does anybody know: Is this an old step office?  Is there something
interesting to see, telecom-wise?


Edward W. Greenberg  | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
1600 Stokes St. #24  | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95126  | Fax:  [phone] | Ham Radio: KM6CG

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

From: [e-mail] (John Perkins)
Subject: DTMF Universality?
Organization: Rosemount, Inc.
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 17:12:47 GMT


Does anyone know if the rest of the world generally uses the same DTMF
frequencies (and button assignments) as are used in the US?  (I'm
particularly interested in the UK.)

DTMF Frequencies:

    1: 697+1209
    2: 697+1336
    3: 697+1477

    4: 770+1209
    5: 770+1336
    6: 770+1477

    7: 852+1209
    8: 852+1336
    9: 852+1477

    *: 941+1209
    0: 941+1336
    #: 941+1477


John Perkins

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

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 14:59:32 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Wireless City


Days ago I read in {Globe and Mail} (a Canadian newspaper) a story
which mentioned a company in Montreal. SR Telecom makes point-to-
multipoint microwave products for telephone system in remote areas. I
am wondering if there are any similarities between the SR system and the
InterDigital system mentioned here?


MIN

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

Subject: 1.2 Watt Handheld Cellular Phone?
From: [e-mail] (Bob Longo)
Date: 27 Apr 93 10:53:48 PST
Organization: Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines


With all of the concern recently about cellular telephones causing
cancer, I'm curious about an ad I saw yesterday.  It seems that there
is a handheld cellular phone available that boasts 1.2 watts.  The
picture of this Blaupunkt model TC-132 shows that it is a true
handheld -- antenna next to your head and all.  The ad says: "With
twice the power of any other portable cellular telephone available,
the TC-132 gets through when others fail".

Anyone have any information on this phone and how they got around the
"rules" (whatever they are) on maximum wattage for handhelds?


Bob Longo ([e-mail])   Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines  Los Angeles, CA

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: Needs For Telecom ... The "Smart Toilet" Story
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 08:04:18 -0700 (PDT)


[Moderator's Note: Mark forwarded this to the list.   PAT]

  Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1993 21:11:18 -0700 (MST)
  From: [e-mail] (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton)

The comment about AARP constituency reminded me ... at NCF'92 in
Chicago in October, one of the speakers talked about Japan, and the
idea of "smart toilets."  What's a "smart toilet?" I hear you ask.  A
toilet that networks, of course.  But why would you network a toilet,
and who in his/her right mind would buy one?  The apparent answers: to
economize on health care, and geriatric Japanese.

According to the speaker, there is a growing market for "smart
toilets" containing embedded sensors, which allow them to perform
tests on what it is that they process (and, of course, there's always
"traffic analysis" :-) The networking of these sensors allows them to
communicate their analysis to the local clinic -- for the price of a
tiny slice of telephone bandwidth (plus the commodus intelligentus
itself), elderly Japanese can cut down on the number of clinic visits
required, with those clinics automatically compiling health data ...
net gain is in more efficient health care, at resulting lower cost.

It's this sort of thinking that is letting the Japanese eat our lunch
(and subsequently deposit it in smarter toilets, post processing), and
it's this sort of innovation that's needed to deal with problems such
as health care cost.  And there's no telling which constituencies may
find real needs for high-performance telecom ...


Ross

Disclaimer: "The opinions expressed above are mine and mine alone,
and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Arizona
or the US Government, nor any other organization with which I am
affiliated."    Ross Alan Stapleton

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #287
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07794;
          28 Apr 93 6:10 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25520
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 28 Apr 1993 03:15:58 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31126
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 28 Apr 1993 03:15:05 -0500
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 03:15:05 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #288

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 28 Apr 93 03:15:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 288

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    A Star is Born (Jack Dominey)
    V.35 Null Modem / Modem Eliminator (Lenny Jacobs)
    AT&T Area Code Handbook (Shawn Nunley)
    Any Good Cabling Reference? (Wong Chee Heng)
    Canadian Reseller Uses Door-to-Door Salespeople (Nigel Allen)
    Satellite Services and Regulations (Ing. Hugo E. Garcia Torres)
    Re: Digital Cellular Service (Ron Dippold)
    Re: Miscellaneous ATM's (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: 1.2 Watt Handheld Cellular Phone? (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service (Paul S. Sawyer)
    Re: Alpha Pager Questions (Brian T. Vita)
    Re: Alpha Pager Questions (David Singer)
    Re: Alpha Pager Questions (Stephen Fleming)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Dave Levenson)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 27 Apr 93 21:44:48 GMT
Subject: A Star is Born


Regular Digest contributor J. Brad Hicks is prominently featured in
the April 19 edition of {InfoWorld} magazine.  The article, in the
Enterprise Computing section, is a case study of the telecommunica-
tions challenge that Hicks and a SWAT team at MasterCard International
faced.  Their job was to provide "transparent access to E-mail, host
systems, and remote file servers via MasterCard's global network," as
the article says.

I thought the piece was well written, seemed to highlight the
important issues and concerns pretty well, and mentions a fair number
of products for anyone interested in the topic.

And as a bonus, you get a 3"x2" photo of J. Brad's smiling face. (BTW,
nice hat.)

P.S. I didn't send a copy of this message directly to Mr. Hicks
because I'm not smart enough to figure out his address from AT&T Mail.


Jack Dominey AT&T Network Planning, Atlanta GA
[phone]  AT&T Mail !dominey or try [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lenny Jacobs)
Subject: V.35 Null Modem / Modem Eliminator
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 19:49:20 GMT


We are trying to connect two V.35 DTE devices located about 15 feet
from each other in the same room. Specifically these are an AT&T
Datakit VCS equipped with a SAMSL card and an AT&T SAM 64 equipped
with a SAMSL card. The SAMSL's were designed to connect to a 56 kbps
data circuit via a DSU. We believe that we can do this without using a
modem eliminator (about $500 from Black Box) by using some sort of
null modem cable. Both devices have "Winchester" type connectors (a
male at the Datakit and a female at the SAM 64). We tried to construct
such a cable from a diagram in the Black Box catalog as shown below:

B------B
C------F
F------C
D------H
E------H
H------D
H------E
R------P
P------R
T------S
S------T
U------V
V------U
X------W
W------X

We departed from the Black Box diagram by adding the D to H
connections in order to satisfy CTS. We can't seem to establish a
connection. We would appreciate it if someone could supply us with the
proper wiring diagram.  (I think that we're pretty close with this
one)


 <-> lenny <-> [e-mail] <-> [e-mail] <->

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Nunley)
Subject: AT&T Area Code Handbook
Organization: Novell, Inc.
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 22:51:03 GMT


With all the discussions about area codes that go on here, I thought
this handbook would be of interest.  It is published by AT&T, and I
beleive you can get it for free from:

AT&T's Customer Information Center
Indianapolis, IN 46219
1-800-432-6600

My copy is Issue 15, for 1993.

Contents:

Index to States, Provinces, International Countries, and Other Locations

Alphabetical Listing of Area Codes for the United States, Canadian
Provinces, and Other Locations

Map of the United States with Area Codes

Area Codes for States, Provinces, and Other Locations

Numerical Listing of Area Codes for the United States, Canadian Provinces,
and Other Locations

*** New Area Code Changes, Present and Future

Dialing the U.S. from an International Country and
International Access Codes

Alphabetical Listing of International Country and City Codes

Numerical Listing of International Country and City Codes


For the curious, the area code changes coming up that were listed were:

OLD NEW                     Effective     Permissive    Dialing
NPA NPA  State                Date           Date         End

714/909  California         11-14-92       11-14-92      8-14-93
416/905  Ontario            10-02-93       10-02-93      3-26-94
919/910  North Carolina     11-14-93       11-14-93      2-13-94
313/810  Michigan           12-01-93       N/A           N/A
215/610  Pennsylvania       1-94           N/A           N/A

Also, there is a note about the 917 NPA for New York:

*917 is not an NPA Split - It is only for new growth. At this time
there is no plan to move an existing customer of 917. Only new
Cellular and Pager customers will be given 917 telephone numbers. As
of 12/01/92, some new residence and business customers have been
issued the 917 exchange.


So, there you have it.


Shawn    Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP: {ames,sun,apple,mtxinu,cae780,sco}   !novell!shawn
Shawn Nunley    Tel: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Your article is good, but there is one correction.
The Area Code Handbook is not free; the price was $2 a couple years
ago and it may be $3 now (haven't called to inquire in awhile). When
you call, ask for Select Code 999-600-111.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wong Chee Heng)
Subject: Any Good Cabling Reference?
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 03:27:37 GMT


Is there a good reference guide book/reference on campus network
wiring covering voice, data, video using UTP, fiber, coax, etc?

How does the latest Telecom and network technology like ATM, ISDN ,
FDDI, affect the cable choice and the network equipment?

Any input is welcomed.


[e-mail].    Systems Programmer   NUS

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 20:00:00 -0400
Subject: Canadian Reseller Uses Door-to-Door Salespeople
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


People in the U.S. have described how long distance companies use
telemarketers and direct mail to get consumers to sign up for long
distance service, but a Canadian long distance reseller, Smart Talk
Network, is using an additional sales technique: door-to-door
salespeople. The one at my front door was wearing a jacket with the
Smart Talk Network logo on it.

Apparently the company is using both students and full-time employees
for its door-to-door program.

Has anyone in the U.S. encountered a representative of a long-
distance company at their front door?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ing. Hugo E. Garcia Torres)
Subject: Satellite Services and Regulations
Date: 28 Apr 1993 00:31:33 GMT
Organization: ITESM, Campus Monterrey


I am looking for information regarding a catalog or a list of the
service providers of satellite broadcast video transmission. I am
looking for a satellite service provider with coverage over Canada,
Mexico (northern part) and the USA. I know that many small companies
offer the uplink service. What is the procedure to ask for satellite
service? Do companies like GE or Hughes offer this kind of service?
Who operates the satellites? How are they maintained?

What if someone in Mexico want to use the service of an American or
Canadian satellite? Is this possible? What are the regulations?  What
if someone in the southern US received and repeated a signal from the
Mexican satellites? Is this legal?


Any help would be appreciated,


Hugo Garcia    ITESM Campus   Monterrey, Mexico

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Service
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 19:02:16 GMT


Tom Holodnik <[e-mail]> writes:

> I've heard several references made to cellular digital service, where
> data is carried over the cellular spectrum.  Can any one provide me
> with more details?
> - what companies provide this?
> - is it ubiquitous?
> - what market projections are they making?
> - does this include "follow me roaming?"
> Is anything like this approaching standard form?

There are two competing standards for digital in North America, CDMA
and TDMA. TDMA has been an official standard for a long time, but CDMA
just passed balloting by the TIA (Telecom Industry Association).
Outside North America, there's GSM and CDMA.

The driving force behind TDMA is industry biggies such as Ericsson and
Hughes Network Systems.  The driving force behind CDMA is QUALCOMM,
Inc. (I'm an engineer on the CDMA project).  However, a driving force
is not sufficient, you need manufacturers to build equipment and
carriers to offer the service.  Both CDMA and TDMA have plenty of
carriers and manufacturers lined up behind them, so there's no problem
in either case.

It's not ubiquitous yet (although the planning is ubiquitous).  It
should be eventually, because both systems allow the old analog phones
to work, as well as the new digital phones, and the advantages of the
digital phones are many.  CDMA phones use 10-1000 times less power,
sound far better than analog phones in marginal coverage situations
(they should both sound good where the signals are strong), and offer
10-20 times more capacity for the carrier.  This is a big issue in
areas that are approaching saturation (or have already reached it)
like LA, New York, Chicago.  Every mobile that can't make a phone call
is lost revenue to the company.  In addition, the data capabilities of
CDMA phones have carriers drooling, since this is potentially a big,
big revenue area.

TDMA and CDMA are incompatible.  TDMA phones should work as regular
analog phones in CDMA systems but they won't get the "advantages" of
TDMA, and CDMA phones just act as regular analog phones under TDMA.
This is just what the industry wanted to avoid.  As a little history,
TDMA was accepted as an industry standard long ago (two years?), but
the advantages of CDMA over TDMA are so great (obviously I'm biased,
but this isn't just our opinion, and if I thought TDMA was superior
I'd be working on that instead) that we've come out of literally
nowhere in that time to a position of precedence.  TDMA has had the
advantage of being the official standard, but we've got the momentum.

Market projections I can't give you, although initially I expect that
the digital phones will go to people who make lots and lots of calls.
Because the phones are going to be slightly more expensive till they
reach equivalent quantities.  I will note, however, that almost every
projection of analog phone growth has been too conservative.

Follow me roaming is a registration thing, I believe it's IS-41 or
something like that.  CDMA phones should do the appropriate thing,
it's a matter of whether the individual phone company supports the
database stuff that has to be done for Follow me.

Now, if you just want to send data over the existing system, you can
buy a modem that can handle the extra stresses put on it by cellular
(such as a CellBlazer) and do that right now.  The speeds aren't
phenomenal, but it usually works.

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous ATM's
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 11:28:00 PDT


No, no ... not automatic teller machines.  Though most of us STILL
think of ATM's as cash dispensers, THIS one requires you to put the
cash IN.

The state of ATM is similar to that of FDDI in 89-91.  Few companies
have boldly ventured into ATM deployment, though Bear Stearns has been
singing the praises of ATM for the last year or so (again in last
week's {Information Week}).  Although BS's managing director finds
FDDI 'too constricting', that's exactly what most firms are choosing
for high speed data transports (backbone).  The price of FDDI has come
down to the point that it's realistic to choose FDDI as your backbone.
ATM is still in that early phase where you'll be on the bleeding edge
and you'll pay extra for that privilege.

Sooner or later, as an Ethernet grows, it runs out of gas.  Lashing
Enets together on an FDDI backbone is the way to go.  There are also
some companies that build channel interfaces allowing you to take Enet
direct to a host channel (avoiding a FEP bottleneck).

So what's the big deal with ATM?  The promise to support data, voice,
vid, and graphics -- all at high speeds.  FDDI is data transport only.

Who's doing ATM?  Adaptive was an early developer and I suppose is
considered the leader.  Fore Systems also makes an ATM switch.


ADAPTIVE       (division of N.E.T.)
200 Penobscot Drive    Redwood City   CA 94063    415-366-9500


Regards,

Lynne

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: 1.2 Watt Handheld Cellular Phone?
Date: 27 Apr 1993 20:49:07 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


I believe the ad maybe a little missleading. Having looked at that
phone before I bought by OKI I was told that you would get the added
power when used as a hands free phone in a car power supply. I do the
samething with my OKI with the extra add ons.

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul S. Sawyer)
Subject: Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service
Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services, Durham, NH
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 22:33:36 GMT


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

> Who provides phone service at the Grand Canyon.  I note that all
> service for hotel properties listed in the AAA book is from the
> 602-638 exchange.  This is true for both North and South Rim.

> Does anybody know: Is this an old step office?  Is there something
> interesting to see, telecom-wise?

I was there about a month ago, but the last thing I was looking at was
the telephones ...  :-)

I did use a pay phone on the South Rim, and it was US West.  The label
said that LD service was AT&T, but I got some other name when I
dialed, so I hung up and 10288.

I would be glad to go back and do some research, though, if there is
grant money ...  :-) :-)


Paul S. Sawyer - University of New Hampshire CIS
[e-mail]   Telecommunications and Network Services
VOX: [phone] College Road - FAX: [phone]
Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3523

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

Date: 27 Apr 93 23:07:44 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Questions


I've been carrying a Motorola Advisor pager with vibe option for about
two years now and I'm quite happy with it.  I've also have a Motorola
PMR2000 for coverage in Vt.  By comparison the PMR2000 is a pig as it
is much larger and uses either an expensive mercury battery or a nicad
with an incredibly short life.

Most of the questions that you asked are specific to your "airtime"
provider.  Here are some answers that seem to be consistant from
carrier to carrier:

1.      Most pagers are dispatched having your software dial a local or "800"
        access number, sending out the data string, acknowledging and hanging
        up.

2.      In a pinch you can use any standard communications program by using
        the steps below:
           a.  Dial the terminal
           b.  At the prompt "Id =" type an upper case "M"
           c.  At the prompt "Pager Id = " enter the pager id as directed
                   by your paging carrier
           d.  At "Enter Alphanumeric message" type away
        There are slight variations on this from company to company.

3.      Most paging companies assign a regular (3A type) telephone number to
        the pager so that it can be dispatched as a numeric pager from any
        DTMF telephone.  In many cases this phone number is also used as the
        pager id for the alpha dispatch.

A typical script for your modem would be as follows:

        Dial 1-800-XXX-XXXX WAIT
        RETURN
        PROMPT "ID="  TYPE "M" RETURN
        PROMPT "PAGER ID" TYPE XXX-XXXX
        PROMPT "ENTER ALPHA...."

Be forewarned that most paging company customer service reps know as
much about their product as my butt knows about piccolo playing.  They
will promise you all kinds of service and coverage.  Make sure that
you see their rates in writing and check out their printed coverage
maps.

Hope that this helps.


Brian T. Vita   CSS Inc.   CI$ 70702,2233

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

From: <[e-mail]> (David Singer)
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Questions
Reply-To: <[e-mail]> (David Singer)
Organization: IBM Almaden Research Center
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 21:23:04 -0800


I also have a Motorola Advisor pager (with a PageNet logo); in general, I
agree with Brad Hicks' comments, but I have one warning -- there seems to
be no way to disable the "low cell" warning on the pager.  So, if you keep
your pager on your bedside table, and one night at 2am the voltage gets
a little low, be prepared to be awakened by very loud, very annoying beeping.

I now turn my pager off at night because of this.

(By the way, PageNet provides both alphameric and numeric paging numbers for
the pager -- both work fine.  I don't know if this is an extra-cost service
or normal operation for paging companies.)


David Singer -- Internet: [e-mail]   BITNET: SINGER at ALMADEN
                Voice: [phone]              Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Questions
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 18:57:16 PDT


A couple of details.  The Motorola unit has nicer controls than the
NEC.  Also, the NEC unit is 2400 bps, while the Moto is 1200 bps.
Imperceptible difference in U.S. operation, but the NEC units do not
work in Canada!  (I had to swap mine out ...)


Stephen Fleming    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 21:51:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Andy
Behrens) writes:

> Sorry, Pat, but that's the wrong answer.  Banks don't give this sort
> of information out to anyone who happens to know an account number.

Pat adds (in part):

> ... The float seldom will buy you more than a day or two now; it
> used to be I could go to the store on Tuesday and write a check for
> which funds would be deposited Friday and get by with it;

Pat is correct here; the banks are transferring debit and credit
information electronically (plug: some of them even use Westmark
systems to accomplish this!) and very fast.  But before we get too
upset over it, let's remember that it works both ways.  Pat, next time
you deposit a check you have received from someone else, watch how
fast you get credited!


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 #288
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02125;
          28 Apr 93 18:34 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14777
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 28 Apr 1993 15:53:47 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16666
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 28 Apr 1993 15:53:08 -0500
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 15:53:08 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #289


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 28 Apr 93 15:53:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 289

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: A Star is Born (Justin Leavens)
    Re: Cellular Phone Compatibility (Mark Rudholm)
    Re: Talk Ticket Privacy Problem (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards (John G. Myers)
    Re: Interesting Phone Call (Jeff Sicherman)
    Re: 1.2 Watt Handheld Cellular Phone? (Ron Dippold)
    Re: Misdialled Numbers (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: AT&T Area Code Handbook (Carl Moore)
    Re: DTMF Universality (Tony Piper)
    Re: Bell Canada Phases Out Rotary (Pulse) Dialing (Joe Markovic)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (John R. Gersh)
    Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service (Marc Wiz)
    Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service (Don Wegeng)
    Vocoders and Transmitters Mailing List (Marcus J. Ranum)
    Need: Coupler With Answer Supervision (Joe Markovic)
    Telecom Industry Role in Info Super Highways (Sarat Vemuri)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: A Star is Born
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 08:00:00 PDT


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

> Regular Digest contributor J. Brad Hicks is prominently featured in
> the April 19 edition of {InfoWorld} magazine.  The article, in the
> Enterprise Computing section, is a case study of the telecommunica-
> tions challenge that Hicks and a SWAT team at MasterCard International
> faced.  Their job was to provide "transparent access to E-mail, host
> systems, and remote file servers via MasterCard's global network," as
> the article says.
> And as a bonus, you get a 3"x2" photo of J. Brad's smiling face. (BTW,
> nice hat.)

Oh, now see, this isn't his first brush with the public. His smiling
face was projected on a big screen at a Shiva Corp. Remote Networking
Seminar I attended some months ago. In glorious QuickTime video, he
described the remote computing needs of Mastercard to us all. In fact,
I think he garnered the only laugh of the morning ...

> P.S. I didn't send a copy of this message directly to Mr. Hicks
> because I'm not smart enough to figure out his address from AT&T Mail.

I sent one at the time, but have no idea if he got it.... :~)


Justin Leavens : Microcomputer Specialist : University of Southern California
    [e-mail]    My opinion is that my opinions are my opinions.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 17:43:32 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark Rudholm)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Compatibility


In TELECOM Digest V13, #282, Message 9 of 12, [e-mail]
(Yuan Jiang) writes:

> I want to buy a cellular phone in the US or Europe, which can be used
> in Hong Kong.  A cellular phone in Hong Kong costs twice as much as in
> the US.  But a regular cellular phone from the US market does not work
> in Hong Kong.  Here are my questions.

> 1) Are there any venders who sell cellular phones that is compatible
> with those in Hong Kong?

> 2) Are cellular phones in Europe compatible with those in Hong Kong?
> Is it just the frequency difference between phones in the US and HK?

> 3) Can I modify a cellular phone bought in the US to be used in Hong
> Kong?

Hong Kong is the only city in the world (that I know of) that has an
AMPS (the US system) and a TACS (most of the non-AMPS world) cellular
system.  The AMPS system is run by Hutchison Telecom.  Any AMPS
cellphone that works in the US will work on Hutchison's AMPS system in
HK. They allow credit-card roaming to Americans who bring their
phones with them to HK while visiting.  Get in touch with them, I'm
sure they can help:

Hutchison Telecommunications Ltd
27th Floor, Great Eagle Centre
23 Harbour Road   Wanchai   Hong Kong
[phone]


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

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

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 23:07:58 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Talk Ticket Privacy Problem


[e-mail] wrote:

> Suppose you use a ticket to call home 17 times, then use it to make a
> call you really want to be anonymous. If somebody were to look at the
> list of calls made by that ticket it would be fairly clear who you
> might be.

It's been pointed out that the German and French stored value cards
(the kind that are read by the phone) do have serial numbers and they
do pass it to the switch during call setup.  I doubt that the British
(BT) ones are smart enough to do it though.

> [Moderator's Note: So use one ticket exclusively for calling one
> number and another ticket exclusively for calling another number if
> you do not want called numbers associated with each other. Although
> the Talk Ticket program *can* be used for anonymous calling without
> coins as you go along, it is mainly intended for people who want the
> convenience of calling that way instead of with a regular calling
> card. As long as an envelope arrives here addressed to *some name
> somewhere*, I'll send out the tickets without regard to who it is. PAT]

So how long before these cards are outlawed because they might allow
the evil Drug Dealers to make anonymous calls from payphones?


Tony Harminc


[Moderator's Note: The next article today raises similar questions, so
I will respond after that.    PAT]

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

From: John Gardiner Myers <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Talk Tickets - New Debit Cards From AT&T/US Fibercom
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 12:15:24 -0400
Organization: Systems Group 97, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


Any guesses as to how long it will be before people figure out how to
prevent TeleTicket use from public phones in high drug traffic areas?


[Moderator's Note: I think we are a few years away from that scenario.
Look how long it took people (relative to when pagers and cell phones
came into common use) to decide pagers (and the touch tone pad) on pay
phones could be used for the purpose of putting in calls to drug dealers.
The Talk Tickets *can* be used for a degree of relative anomynity in
calling from pay phones, but their main purpose is to provide convenience
in calling long distance without having to have a pocket full of coins;
wait for approval of third number charges; or carry a calling card you
may use only once every two years when you visit the USA, etc. As one
reader pointed out, you could examine the usage patterns on an expired
ticket and finding all or mostly all calls to one number make some
reasonable assumptions about the purchaser of the card, but assumptions
are not evidence or proof. Likewise, if you examined the coin-paid
traffic from a payphone and found it mostly going to one number, you
could make some assumptions about the person(s) using the payphone for
whatever good it would do legally.

My plan with the Talk Tickets is to stick them in an envelope however
the envelope is addressed and put them in the mail. If the purchaser
is going by a false name they don't have to necessarily tell me. I've
developed another technique where tickets can be sent out in the mail
anonymously to anyone **without it costing them anything except the
cost of the tickets**, without me knowing who they are at all. I will
elaborate on this later today.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 01:25:50 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Interesting Phone Call
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


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

> The phone went to dial tone a short time after that. Either the
> government is wiretapping my phone and doing a real poor job of it or
> there are just doing a bad job. I have know idea where SETI fits in
> with this but I was not expecting it when I heard that. He definitely
> said SETI. Anyone have any idea what is going on? I suppose if you
> actual do you can't tell me, then I'll take guesses instead.

  SETI : Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence

  OK, come clean, what planet are you *really* from ?


Jeff Sicherman

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold)
Subject: Re: 1.2 Watt Handheld Cellular Phone?
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 10:25:21 GMT


[e-mail] (Bob Longo) writes:

> handheld -- antenna next to your head and all.  The ad says: "With
> twice the power of any other portable cellular telephone available,
> the TC-132 gets through when others fail".
> Anyone have any information on this phone and how they got around the
> "rules" (whatever they are) on maximum wattage for handhelds?

Okay, the normal limit is 0.6 watts for a portable phone ... but you
can get around that by having it in a car kit, at which time it
becomes a mobile.  Thus, if it's plugged in (and thus hands free), you
can boost the power.  Generally it's upped to 1.2 watts.  If this is
what they're doing, this is really "questionable" advertising, as this
is hardly unique.  If not, I don't know what they're doing ...

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

Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 07:17:40 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Misdialled Numbers


I have a misdialled problem with my phone ((516)-281-XXYZ where the
intended party has XYYZ and I get these about once a month or so,
often repeatedly by the same person.

The best sequnce would be combinations of 1-3-5-7-9 and 2-4-6-8 with
zeroes thrown in for good measure.


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, 28 Apr 93 8:27:19 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Area Code Handbook


Comparing the following excerpts with what is now in
history.of.area.splits:

OLD NEW                     Effective     Permissive    Dialing
NPA NPA  State                Date           Date         End

416/905  Ontario            10-02-93       10-02-93      3-26-94
313/810  Michigan           12-01-93       N/A           N/A
215/610  Pennsylvania       1-94           N/A           N/A

I have 416/905 as 4 Oct. 1993, with full cutover 10 Jan. 1994; I have
seen a Bell leaflet with the 4 Oct. date.  I have 313/810 as 10 Aug.
1994, 8 months after what is listed above.  (No full cutover available
yet.)  I only have "1994" listed for 215/610 effective date.

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Piper)
Subject: Re: DTMF Universality?
Organization: Pinnacle Insurance Company Limited
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 09:56:42 +0000


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

> Does anyone know if the rest of the world generally uses the same DTMF
> frequencies (and button assignments) as are used in the US?  (I'm
> particularly interested in the UK.)

Well, I'm not sure of the actual frequencies, but my Panasonic phone I
bought in the USA last year works absolutely fine (American model).

Hope this helps.


Cheers


Tony Piper

Internet: [e-mail] * Voice: 081 953 4433
CIX     : [e-mail]  * Fax  : [phone]
pinnacle.demon.co.uk is not associated with any other sites
in the demon domain. All opinions are my own, not my boss's

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

From: Joe Markovic <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 20:00:00 -0400
Subject: Bell Canada Phases Out Rotary (Pulse) Dialing


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Andrew
M. Dunn) writes:

> Well, it had to happen!  After years of people complaining about being
> charged more for TouchTone (which actually costs less to provide),
> Bell Canada has solved the problem.  They've phased out rotary
> service.

That's only part of the story.  Bell may have initiated the filing to
phase out rotary service, but the CRTC decided to approve it.


ciao,

Joe

RoseReader 2.00a P003447
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario   416-629-7000/629-7044

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Gersh)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 12:56:47 GMT


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

> 6) Why do telephone poles extend far above the highest wire
>    or crosspiece?

This is something of a guess, but it seems fairly obvious:

    So that linefolks can work on the wires!

Think of how a repair person works on a pole: spikes on the boots
anchor the feet, and a strap attached to the belt goes around the
pole, leaving both hands free to do the work. If the crosspiece, and
therefore the wires, were at the top of the pole, where would the
strap go? You want to have the wires at waist level, or not much
higher, so that the work can be done without having to keep your arms
elevated, and enough pole above that level to let you climb up that
high and anchor your strap safely _above the crosspiece._


John Gersh    [e-mail]
The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
Johns Hopkins Rd., Laurel, MD 20723    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Wiz)
Subject: Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 08:35:47 -0600 (CDT)


I don't remember who provides phone service at the Grand Canyon but I
have hiked the canyon all the way to the bottom three times.

The last time I did this was in '83 and I was downright shocked that
there was a payphone at Phantom Ranch which is at the bottom of the
canyon.

I love high-tech and the ability to stay in touch but I think this is
going a bit too far.


Marc    [e-mail]  [phone]
Yes, that really is my last name.  I type only for myself.

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Wegeng)
Subject: Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Xerox Corp., Henrietta, NY
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 15:24:40 GMT


> Who provides phone service at the Grand Canyon?  I note that all
> service for hotel properties listed in the AAA book is from the
> 602-638 exchange.  This is true for both North and South Rim.

> Does anybody know: Is this an old step office?  Is there something
> interesting to see, telecom-wise?

I am not certain of this, but I believe that telephone service to the
north rim is provided via a feed from the south rim, using a buried
cable that runs along the Bright Angel Trail and the North Kaibab
Trail (spelling?).  The south rim water supply is fed from the north
rim along the same route (except in the opposite direction).  They
both cross the Colorado River on a suspension bridge near Phantom
Ranch, which is a hotel at the bottom of the canyon (accessible only
by foot or mule train).  As I recall there is a payphone at Phantom
Ranch, though I didn't use it when I was there two years ago.


Don Wegeng

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

From: [e-mail] (Marcus J Ranum)
Subject: Vocoders and Transmitters Mailing List
Date: 28 Apr 1993 15:49:56 GMT
Organization: Trusted Information Systems, Inc.


A bunch of us have started up a mailing list devoted to the discussion
of an implementation of inexpensive vocoders and transmitters for
Internet or modem use. Objectives of the list are to get together
people who are working on digital speech transmission hardware and
software, so that effort isn't wasted. NIST's announcement of Clipper
has spurred an upsurge of interest in this area of study. The mailing
list is NOT intended as a place for the discussion of the Clipper, or
related politics. While the type of hardware and software we're
discussing is applicable to building encrypting speech transmission
equipment, we're not specifically implementing privacy devices.  The
goal of the list is to identify one or more (and build one if we have
to) inexpensive means of digitally transmitting voice with assist from
some form of general purpose computer (laptop, desktop, whatever) for
use in internet talk radio, applications for the handicapped, internet
relay chat, and possibly privacy enhanced network telephony. This is
not a project for profit.

    If you're working in this area, or are interested in writing
software or building hardware, contact [e-mail].


mjr

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

From: Joe Markovic <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 20:00:00 -0400
Subject: Need: Coupler With Answer Supervision


> For an upcoming demo, I need to find a coupling device to which I can
> feed audio that will answer when the line "rings", supply the audio
> over the line, the hang up when the far end does.  Who might make such
> a device?

That sounds suspiciously like an answering machine.


ciao,

Joe
RoseReader 2.00a P003447
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario   416-629-7000/629-7044

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telecom Industry Role in Info Super Highways
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 22:26:22 +0000 (GMT)


Hello all,

My friend is doing a study on the telecom industry's role (or what is
going to be its role) in implementing Gore's information super highway
plan, as a part of his class project.  He wants to start a discussion
about this issue in this group.  He just needs different opinions
about the following issues.


1.  What role should the telecom industry play in implementing or designing
    the information super highways?

2.  What advantages does the telecom industry have over other industries
    competing (like CATV etc)? Technical? Equipment? Expertise?

3.  What are the pros/cons of the telecom industry playing a major role in
    building and operating them?

4.  What, as subscribers, will we gain/lose by the telecom industry
    being the major player?

Any input you can provide is appreciated.  I can forward any E-mail
replies to him.  He reads this newsgroup but can not post or send
E-mail.


Thanks in advance.

Sarat Vemuri   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #289
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04192;
          28 Apr 93 19:28 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32237
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 28 Apr 1993 16:45:37 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19407
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 28 Apr 1993 16:45:00 -0500
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 16:45:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #290

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 28 Apr 93 16:45:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 290

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: A Star is Born (Brad Hicks)
    Re: GTE NW Caller ID Offering in Seattle Area (John R. Levine)
    Re: Ignorance, Clipper and the FBI (Greg Andrews)
    Re: Satellite Services and Regulations (Bruce Taylor)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Jeff Hall)
    Re: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910) (Kenneth Herron)
    Re: V.35 Null Modem / Modem Eliminator (Andrew Robson)
    Re: Phone/Debit Cards and Rock Music? (Chris Turkstra)
    Re: Satellite Services and Regulations (Mark Chartrand)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Rob Levandowski)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 28 Apr 93 18:26:08 GMT
Subject: Re: A Star is Born


Thanks for the mention.  It's an excellent photo; the photographers
worked hard on it and did a great job.

If you'd like to mark up a copy, here are the errors and other points
that need clarification:

Paragraph 4: LanRover/L's are not interface cards, they're stand-alone
units about the size of the average modem.

Paragraph 5: MasterCard doesn't "control more than one-third of all
electronic credit card authorizations around the globe."  We do, on the
other hand, carry about that many as traffic on our network.  The member
banks authorize about 99% of the transactions, using MasterCard BankNet
X.25 to route the signals between each other.

Paragraph 7: Nonsense.  I wasn't even vaguely nervous, I do stuff like
this all the time.  Besides, MasterCard isn't at all a vicious
environment; no matter what I'd suggested, as long as I did my best, I
wouldn't be punished.  So why would I be nervouse?  The editor put words
in my mouth to make the story more dramatic.

Paragraph 9: BankNet's reliability is 99.9999%, not merely 99.99%.  Given
our transaction volume, the difference is significant.

Pargaraph 12: We don't have 500 programmers working on Project Omni.  We
only have about 500 programmers =period=.

Paragraph 13: Misleading.  Macintoshes don't connect to the Netway
terminal server over leased lines, they connect via AppleTalk over
PhoneNET.  The only leased lines involved are the wide area network
links between buildings.

Paragraph 14: No, we had DS1 lines most of the way, all we would have
needed was a T-1 connection from Southern Bell, probably from the
Miami office (Latin America headquarters).  I doubt it would have
taken 60 to 90 days, even if we had needed a long-haul DS1; AT&T gives
us much better service than that on circuits. (AT&T Mail is another
issue.)  I never said anything about circuit cost or delay getting
circuits installed; this is 100% invention on {InfoWorld}'s part.

Paragraphs 16-17: The editor cut a paragraph from the reporter's story
that makes this whole section make sense.  The last time I had to
connect a temporary office, we used a pair of Shiva NetModem V.32's.
The other building was local (in fact, just down the street).  The
problem I had was, the &!@#! NetModem V.32 won't redial after a
dropped connection, and the bloody SWBT line wouldn't stay up for more
than about a day at a time.

I ultimately wrote a hack using XCMDs in SuperCard to detect when the
remote office's zone disappeared from the Chooser, then kick off a
QuicKeys macro that would bring up the Shiva Config control panel and
redial.  That raised my reliability from about 70% (not 80%) to around
90%.

Paragraph 19: You don't install LanRover/L's "in" a PBX.  We have a bank
of four (was three at the time of the story).  Only the first one has an
inbound dial number; the rest are forwarded when busy.  And that's the
only thing our PBX has to do with the subject.

Also in paragraph 19: I should clarify that $325 is =our= price on the
Supra FaxModem V.32bis Mac Bundle, from Software Plus in St. Louis.
List price is considerably higher; Steve Wiggins at Software Plus
takes mucho good care of us; everyone in the St. Louis area knows that
Software Plus is the people you want to deal with.  (They did get this
right: I think the Supra is the coolest modem I know.  =Love= that
front-panel display.)

Last paragraph: Another invented quote.  Now that the Orlando office
is closed and the people who were working there are back in St. Louis,
all we're going to use those LanRover/L's for is evening support of
critical applications.  I'm working on Security to approve another
general category, namely people on sick, family, or maternity leave.

Sidebar: A few dropped paragraphs make this a little bit misleading.
The AppleTalk LAN doesn't go anywhere near BankNet, so even if
somebody =does= hack past our dial-back security and get AppleTalk
access, they can't threaten the world's credit card system. But we're
a big, famous target, so it's worth the effort to make it harder for
people to try.

Why did I go to the trouble of writing this all up for you folks on
TELECOM Digest?  So you'd see that even with Ms. LaPlante submitting
her second to last draft to me for corrections, once it passes through
an editor, there's no guarantee of any accuracy; in this case, there
were an even dozen errors or misrepresentations.  You should probably
assume that ALL articles in {InfoWorld}, or any other trade magazine,
are about this accurate.


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

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

Subject: Re: GTE NW Caller ID Offering in Seattle Area
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 28 Apr 93 11:53:47 EDT (Wed)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> ... The person I finally got [at GTE] said that *67 would NOT
> allow per line blocked customers to SEND their number on demand.  I
> THINK this means that most of the special features listed below will
> make it difficult for per line blocked customers to call users who
> have many of the special features listed below.  ...

Not at all.  A CLID blocked line still sends the calling number, but
adds a "no-display" control bit that tells the receiving exchange not
to send the number in the CLID message when the phone rings.  All of
the other features such as priority ring, call block, call return, and
call trace still work since the callee's exchange knows the calling
number even though the callee doesn't.

Or at least they're supposed to.  It's not inconceivable that GTE
screwed it up.

It has occurred to me in the past that in places like New Jersey that
have mandatory CLID there is no technical reason why they couldn't
display CLID on incoming calls regardless of the blocked bit.  "But it
would be wrong."


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Andrews)
Subject: Re: Ignorance, Clipper and the FBI
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 16:53:36 GMT


[e-mail] (Tom Gray) writes:

> In case anyone missed it in Denning's account of the Clipper system,
> one essential aspect of it is:

> The service provider will make the encrypted transmission avaiable to
> the FBI black box. In short the service provider must have the
> capability of isolating an individual's transmissions from all others.

> This is just the FBI Digital Network proposal in another form.  Aside
> from the fact that this proposal shows a complete ignorance of the
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> functioning of even today's network, it will severely hamper (even
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> cripple) current efforts to create a broadband network. The
> possibility of the US functioning in the BISDN multimedia market will
> become exceedingly remote.

Perhaps I'm not understanding you correctly, but if the service
provider doesn't have the ability to isolate my transmissions from all
the others that pass through their equipment, how are my transmissions
able to reach their intended destination?

Network "sniffer" devices that key on the source and destination
addresses and show the contents of the data packets have been around
on computer networks for years now.  They are an important part of the
arsenal of tools for debugging large networks.

The technical leap from a "sniffer" to a digital tap is a pretty small
one.  I don't see how this would be a difficult thing for the telco to
provide.


Greg Andrews  [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 13:46:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Bruce Taylor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Satellite Services and Regulations


Hugo,

  You might start by talking with VitaLink (or is it VitaCom?), the US
company who set up ITESM's compressed video satellite links (using
Compression Lab's 'Spectrum Saver' units).

  You might also try "IDB Communications" in the US, with offices in
New York, Los Angeles, and just about everywhere else.  They sell
everything from air-transportable uplinks thru satellite time, thru ...

  There are a myriad of companies that will sell "space segment time"
on a market basis (ie: it costs more if you want it right now, as
opposed to regularly buying two hours slots every day).

  I believe (but do not know for sure) that one is required to use
specified service providers to pass signals across borders -- but that
many folks just ignore that and use whatever bird has a useful
footprint for their uplink and downlink locations.

  Best wishes on your search, and please let us know about the
legalities of cross-border reception!


Bruce Taylor   ([e-mail])    [phone]
New Projects Coordinator, Telecommunications, Carnegie Mellon University

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

From: Jeff Hall <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Date: 28 Apr 93 17:44:00 GMT


This debate is interesting, however until it appears on credible
media, such as Larry King or other CNN newscasts, and if they can make
it understandable to the average Joe, the Congress will pass this
along without any hoopla.

I would think that if you are using your phone legitimately, then
having a Clipper Chip is another layer of protection from outsiders.
If you have something to say that you don't want ANYONE else to hear,
go see the guy in a crowded coffee shop and no one will notice.

Take the politics to a political forum.

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Herron)
Subject: Re: The War on the Word "Hello" (in 1910)
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 17:06:07 GMT


[e-mail] (DWT) writes:

> Substitute the single word "Murray's" or "Hobberlin's" when callers
> expect the single word "Hello" and of course the callers won't notice.
> Had their receptionists answered the phones with "You've reached W. A.
> Murray's.  How may I help you?" or "Good morning.  This is Hobberlin's
> Haberdashery," most callers would have noticed the difference and
> gotten the message.

In a previous life I worked for a local towing service, which included
radio dispatching.  Our radios used a repeater, so any time you hit
the transmit button the first 1/4 sec. or so of your transmission
wouldn't get heard.  On top of that, truck cabs are noisy places and
drivers had other things to think about; you couldn't just assume that
because you were talking you had everyone's attention, and if a driver
didn't think you were talking to him he would usually miss most of
what you said.

In this environment, I quickly decided that the best action was to
start each transmission with some non-important word.  If I wanted to
address a truck, I said "Unit twenty-five" instead of just "twenty-five."
Most other transmissions started with an "Uh" or similar.

This worked out very well; the extra delay this caused gave the
drivers time to realize the dispatcher was on the radio and to
mentally shift gears to listen to it.  I don't think anyone realized
just what my technique was, but several of the guys mentioned that I
was very easy to talk to over the radio.

Applying this to telephones, it makes sense that the first word said
into the mouthpiece should be something without information content;
whether we realize it or not, we as callers must at that point shift
from "waiting" to "listening" as well as identify a bunch of minor
things (man? woman? familiar voice? accent?) that the brain does
automatically when it hears a new voice.


Kenneth Herron   [e-mail]  University of Kentucky
[phone]  Dept. of Mathematics


[Moderator's Note: One of the reasons I never did like a voice-actuated
microphone on any of my radio equipment was the very thing you describe
in your article. I got tired of saying 'uh', or blowing a little air at
the microphone to avoid having the first word cut off. On the flip side,
if my hands were both busy (for example, typing) I hated to stop in
order to key up each time. My solution was to either use a microphone
which hung down from the ceiling on a swag-chain in front of my face a
few inches away, or one of those extendable, hinged, bend-at-any-angle
things which clamps on the side of your desk which typically has a light
on the end of it. Mine had a microphone. I also had a Plantronics tele-
phone operator's headset which had been modified through which I could
listen (in lieu of the larger speaker in the radio) or talk. I keyed all
of these from a foot pedal switch on the floor that I got from an old
Dictaphone unit and modified with one pair to key the microphone, one
pair to cut off the speaker (when using the Plantronics headset) and a
third pair to cut out the telephone ringer -- it was paralleled to a
beehive lamp -- when the microphone was keyed up. Thus, I could sit
there and tap my foot to transmit. There was also a problem with
ambient room noise with the vox-activated units from time to time,
causing the radio to start talking by itself sometimes. Then there was
the time I fell asleep with a cigarette burning; it melted through the
control wire and turned the microphone on. How did I find out? Well,
not from the Fire Department breaking my door down, but a good friend
calling on the phone to ask, "Pat, have you been keyed-up over there
for about twenty minutes now with dead air just throwing a carrier?"
Gawd, was that an embarassment!   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Robson)
Subject: Re: V.35 Null Modem / Modem Eliminator
Date: 28 Apr 93 17:33:18 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.


Lenny Jacobs ([e-mail]) wrote:

> We are trying to connect two V.35 DTE devices located about 15 feet
> from each other in the same room. Specifically these are an AT&T
> ... [equipment specifics omitted]

I have a similar need, though with different devices on the ends.

> data circuit via a DSU. We believe that we can do this without using a
> modem eliminator (about $500 from Black Box) by using some sort of

I don't believe it will work unless you can get clocking signals from
one of the ends.  Synchronous links need to agree on the time when
bits start and stop.  Usually the DCE end supplies the clocking and
you don't have a DCE.  The need to generate clock pulses is why that
box costs so muchi, it is not just a pricey cross connected plug.

 ... [pinout discussion omitted]

> proper wiring diagram.  (I think that we're pretty close with this
> one)

I would *love* to be proved wrong.  If you do succeed please post the
results!


Andy (N6VRP)   U S WEST NewVector Group   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Screwtape)
Subject: Re: Phone/Debit Cards and Rock Music?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Hope College
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 16:55:02 GMT


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

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

>> Perhaps in the near future these debit cards will be the hot "promo"
>> items of choice at conventions -- instead of handing out pens or
>> rulers, give out debit cards with your company's symbol?  Heck, you
>> could even go so far as to have your *business* cards be phone debit
>> cards.  Might encourage prospective clients to give you a call, if it
>> was "on you." :)

> "Hold my business card up to the handset, and squeeze the corner."

I remember about three or four years ago a computer company doing
exactly this with it's 800 support number.  Possibly Acer, but I'm not
positive.  It was a white plastic box about the size of a Zippo
lighter with holes for the speaker.  I remember it had a magnet
somwhere so you could stick it to the case of the computer.  Seems
these days it could be done much smaller ...


Chris Turkstra    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (mark chartrand)
Subject: Re: Satellite Services and Regulations
Date: 28 Apr 1993 14:39:51 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Ing. Hugo E. Garcia Torres) writes:

> I am looking for information regarding a catalog or a list of the
> service providers of satellite broadcast video transmission. I am
> looking for a satellite service provider with coverage over Canada,
> Mexico (northern part) and the USA. I know that many small companies
> offer the uplink service. What is the procedure to ask for satellite
> service? Do companies like GE or Hughes offer this kind of service?
> Who operates the satellites? How are they maintained?

> What if someone in Mexico want to use the service of an American or
> Canadian satellite? Is this possible? What are the regulations?  What
> if someone in the southern US received and repeated a signal from the
> Mexican satellites? Is this legal?

Your best reference is The 1993 World Satellite Directory, from
Phillips Business Information.  You can order by mail from them at
800-777-5005.  I think the cost is about $225.

For cross-border communications, you should check with your PTT.
There are some bi-lateral agreements, but not sure about Mexican ones.
You could also check with individual satellite system operators (e.g.,
Hughes, PanAmSat, Telsat Canada, etc.)  As for booking time, contact a
transponder broker or system operator.  COntactt info is in the WSD
mentioned above.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Levandowski)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Organization: Computer Interest Floor - University of Rochester, NY
Date: 28 Apr 93 19:03:19 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave Levenson) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Andy
> Behrens) writes:

>> Sorry, Pat, but that's the wrong answer.  Banks don't give this sort
>> of information out to anyone who happens to know an account number.

Pat adds (in part):

>> ... The float seldom will buy you more than a day or two now; it
>> used to be I could go to the store on Tuesday and write a check for
>> which funds would be deposited Friday and get by with it;

> Pat is correct here; the banks are transferring debit and credit
> information electronically (plug: some of them even use Westmark
> systems to accomplish this!) and very fast.  But before we get too
> upset over it, let's remember that it works both ways.  Pat, next time
> you deposit a check you have received from someone else, watch how
> fast you get credited!

I'd love to know what bank you go to; both Fleet Bank NA here in
Rochester New York, and Fleet Bank in Connecticut as well as Winsted
Savings Bank also in Connecticut -- all of whom I have recently done
business with -- take three to five banking days to make deposited
funds available. Longer if you make a large deposit. I've found they
like to play with my money, and it makes me leery of using the bank
unless I really really have to. :)

Not to mention the fact that an electronic fund transfer from my Dad's
Connecticut Fleet Bank account to my New York Fleet Bank account costs
him $15 to send the cash and me $10 to recieve it, meaning I get $75
out of the $100 he sends me. In this age of instant cheap telecom I'm
not sure what the reasoning behind that is ... besides screw the
customer. :)


Rob Levandowski    Computer Interest Floor / University of Rochester


[Moderator's Note: One thing about First National Bank here in Chicago
is I have been with them at the same branch for many years. When my
own financial condition started going downhill several months ago as a
result of a poor business judgment on my part, one of the first people
I talked to was the manager of the branch. They've never lost a nickle
on me, and I think when the bank knows that they'll go along with an
old time customer 'for the duration'. They've expedited cashing checks
for me when it was an emergency, etc. The 'duration' has been a lot
longer than I would like this time around, but I'll rebound sometime. PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #290
******************************










Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29002;
          29 Apr 93 8:30 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15145
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 29 Apr 1993 03:48:55 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16776
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 29 Apr 1993 03:48:11 -0500
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 03:48:11 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #291

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 29 Apr 93 03:01:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 291

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Alpha Pager Questions (Craig R. Watkins)
    Re: Telecom Industry Role in Info Super Highways (David Ohsie)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Mark Walsh)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Ed Gehringer)
    Re: Canadian Reseller Uses Door-to-Door Salespeople (Mark Fraser)
    They Didn't Name it After a 19th Century Ship For No Reason (Tom Gray)
    Bay Area Cell Carrier (Laurence Chiu)
    Supra Modem / Caller-ID (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: AT&T Area Code Handbook (Ed Gehringer)
    Number Creep (David Leslie)
    Anonymous Purchase of Talk Tickets (TELECOM Moderator)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: Craig R. Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Questions
Date: 28 Apr 93 20:16:35 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
(David Singer) writes:

> I also have a Motorola Advisor pager (with a PageNet logo); in general, I
> agree with Brad Hicks' comments, but I have one warning -- there seems to
> be no way to disable the "low cell" warning on the pager.  So, if you keep
> your pager on your bedside table, and one night at 2am the voltage gets
> a little low, be prepared to be awakened by very loud, very annoying beeping.

> I now turn my pager off at night because of this.

It can be disabled via a programmer which attaches to the contacts on
the left side of your pager.  See your paging company or a Motorala
service provider.  Tell them you want to disable "Low Battery Alert."


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

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

From: [e-mail] (David Ohsie)
Subject: Re: Telecom Industry Role in Info Super Highways
Organization: Columbia University Department of Computer Science
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 02:04:47 GMT


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

> 1.  What role should the telecom industry play in implementing or designing
> the information super highways?

> 2.  What advantages does the telecom industry have over other industries
> competing (like CATV etc)? Technical? Equipment? Expertise?

> 3.  What are the pros/cons of the telecom industry playing a major role in
> building and operating them?

> 4.  What, as subscribers, will we gain/lose by the telecom industry
> being the major player?

Perhaps it would be more relevant to ask these questions with the
words "federal government" in place of the words "telecom industry"?


david alan ohsie    internet: [e-mail]
usenet: ...!rutgers!columbia!ohsie   bitnet: ohsie%cs.columbia.edu@cuvmb

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Walsh)
Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers
Date: 28 Apr 93 19:22:36 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA


 From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Steve
Forrette):

> A couple of years ago, I had the number 841-7249.  With great
> frequency, when I gave the number to someone, they would transpose the
> 2 and the 4, and say 841-7429 when they read it back to me to verify.

About ten years ago, I had 457-5611.  The nearby church that did Bingo
on Wednesday nights was 457-6511.  Man, did I get some funny calls!
"Hi, this is Mytrle, did you want the brownies with or without
nuts ..."

P.S.  Pat, we hope all is well.  It's high time you gave us an update!


Mark Walsh (walsh@optilink) -- UUCP: uunet!optilink!walsh
Amateur Radio: KM6XU@WX3K -- AOL: [e-mail] -- USCF: L10861


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for your postscript of concern. Things are
glued together ... barely ... nothing that isn't in danger of getting
cut off is being paid yet, and I have a very deep hole to climb out
of.  I don't think I'll know for sure if my little company is going to
be solvent or not for another month or two; but there comes a time for
many people -- myself included -- when they stick their middle finger
in the air at 'society' and say to hell with your nine to five jobs; I
am going to do my own thing. I'll survive, and rebound a little -- I
always have before. A very bad error in judgment on my part several
months ago led to my present predicament. When I first gave -- as the
late humorist Robert Benchley would phrase it -- The Treasurer's Report
a few weeks ago, a few stalwart denizens of the 'net' gpt so unhinged
and angry at my temerity and bald-faced message I decided to say noth-
ing more about it. But too many people like yourself kept sending notes
of sympathy and asking for updates. I felt like I had to say something,
namely thanks to everyone who is concerned and cares.  To paraphrase
the Reverend Bob Dobbs of the Hour of Slack Radio Ministry regarding
the few others, "F--k 'em if they can't deal with it."   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 19:08:29 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System


>> Dorothy Denning is quite notorious in the crypt community as an
>> apologist for giving the govenment the right to read your mail ...

> I don't know how many people read her articles in the {Communications
> of the ACM} about crypto stuff, but it seemed just a tiny bit (okay,
> *very*) biased inasmuch as they gave her final say.  In formal debate,
> the proponent of a proposition usually has to defend it, with
> gainsayers rebutting after each defense.

Well, as a former intercollegiate debater who had Dorothy Denning on
his Ph.D. committee a few years later, I can tell you that in most
formal debate formats, the proponents of change get both the first
word and the last word, with the opponents getting more time during
the give-and-take in between.  My argumentation text said something
like, "There are good theoretical reasons for this."  But it did not
quote them.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Fraser)
Subject: Re: Canadian Reseller Uses Door-to-Door Salespeople
Organization: Wimsey Information Services
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 03:53:16 GMT


Well, not exactly at my front door, but would you believe at a Flea
Market in North Vancouver.  Along with the tacky 1950's coffee table
glassware and old coffee pots, was a (dot matrix) computer-generated
banner advertizing a U.S. reseller's service.  The tabletop operator
approched customers very politely, and gave his pitch while the
customers were eyeing the electric can openers ...


[Moderator's Note: Orange Communications sent me some very nice,
professional looking graphics to use if I decided to do the Flea
Market circuit.  Now that all the Digest readers interested got first
crack at it, the enrollment fee has gone up to $12, by the way ...
but Canada and international calling should be added soon.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Gray)
Subject: They Didn't Name it After a 19th Century Ship For No Reason
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 14:44:16 -0400
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


Ever wonder how the Clipper proposal would handle a simple thing like
a multi-party conference call?  Ever wonder how Clipper can fit into
a modern network? Well ..

The proposal doesn't handle conference calls. This is just another
indication of the complete ignorance of the network demonstrated in
this proposal.

Another question, how does the telco handle conferencing compressed
voice on leased line trunks. Answer: The telco service provider
doesn't.  It is up to the owner of the private network to be able to
confenrence proprietary compression algorithms.

The service provider cannot handle conferencing, the service provider
cannot handle isolation. The Clipper proposal is just another
indication of the ignorance demonstrated in the FBI Digital Network
proposal.  The FBI has difficulty bugging calls on even today's
network as demonstrated by the conference example given above. The FBI
will find it impossible to bug the multimedia broadband network.

The FBI's solution -- legislate the broadband network out of existence
with regulations that make it uneconmic. Keep the North American
telecommunications market firmly in the 1970's while Japan and Europe
produce a 21st century network.

The US can make its choice but Clinton wants to encourage
telecomunications as a strategic technology while at the same time he
allows some gum shoe Luddites to prevent new development.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Bay Area Cell Carriers
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access System: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 02:39:31 GMT


I am thinking of getting cell phone service in the Bay Area. Around
here there appear to be two carriers, Cellular One and GTE Mobilnet. I
will be using the service for personal use, primarily so that I can be
reached while commuting etc. I know I can call each carrier or their
agents and get their information on the service, but I would be
interested in the comments/experiences of any Bay Area readers of the
Digest. I don't plan to do much roaming expcept perhaps to LA
occasionally. Good service in the Caldecott is important.  Both
carriers are offering about three hours of free peak air time at the
moment which is slight incentive I guess.


Thanks,

Laurence Chiu    Walnut Creek, CA

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

Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 22:55:32 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Supra Modem / Caller-ID


When I get a good product, I like to plug it and the SUPRA is one of
them.  I bought mine from Computability in Wisconsin (800.558.0003)
that used to be the only mail-order source though this month's
Computer Shopper lists a couple more. The prices for the external are
$279 without software or $299 with Windows or DOS software (also have
MAC but do not remember price).

Apparently to get the Caller-ID function you have to buy upgrade ROMs
from Supra -- they were $19.95 extra when I bought mine. Since then I
wrote a Caller-ID .ASP for ProComm + that works with them and provides
a table lookup to decide whether to answer the phone. I sent it to the
Supra BBS [phone] but do not know if they posted it.

Incidently, some time ago CS did a comparison study on modems, since
then Supra apparently had an upgrade since mine will renegotiate back
up in speed and has MNP-10 (cellular) capability.

One other thing: while the manual is a bit skimpy on the FAX protocols
(uses a subset of the AT commands e.g. AT+FCLASS=? will return classes
supported - 1 & 2) the BBS has one of the best and most complete
descriptions I have seen in a pair of ASCII text files.

A final note -- I have yet to find anything it would not connect to
though on occasion I have had to turn off the ECC and/or compression.
In one case a complaint revealed a ROM problem -- in the modem on the
other end which was not a Supra -- the solution was to tell it to use
MNP and not v.42 protocols.

Note: I have no connection with Supra, I just really like the one I
bought.

I sure hope this will satisfy the requests; I have gotten a flood of
requests for information. It is best used with 16550A chips.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 23:54:05 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: AT&T Area Code Handbook


Actually, Carl, I think 919 and 910 are the worst of all, because it
is easy to confuse a hastily written 0 with a 9.  USPS has adjacent
zipcodes adjacent in area, but never, as far as I know, is any zipcode
with a 9 near a zipcode with a 0 in its place.  This problem was
obvious; given that the N10 ACs started being assigned with the lower
numbers (310, 510, 410) and that the NC split happens before the
313/810 split in MI, I can't understand why NC wasn't given 810
instead of 910.

Not only that, but 919/910 is the only case of off-by-one-click area
code ever created by an AC split.  Finally, it is the only case where
an AC split has ever been effected by changing only a single digit in
an area code.  This is important, because people may think they "know"
an AC for some city and mentally "correct" it to the old value.  All
these factors point to the most confusion ever caused by an AC split,
coming this fall to NC.


Ed

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

From: [e-mail] (David)
Subject: Number Creep
Organization: Netcom Institute for the Incorrigible (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 20:51:26 GMT


I remember when I was about 14, and my Dad got MCI long distance
service for his business. At the time (around 1984), it struck me how
strange it was to have to dial all those digits to complete a simple
phone call.  Oh well, if it saved $.005, it must be worth it. :) To
make a short story long, I was visiting friends when I decided to
check my voice mail. As I was dialing away, I realized that we were
all victims of 'number creep', that meaning: being forced to punch
alot of buttons to compete a call.  ;) This is a hypothetical example
of a modern phone call. Not too different from what I dial regularly.

 3 + 3 +  5  +    11     +      14      +    8   +    10    = 54 digits
*67 *70 10288 03105569230 55555555555555 55555555 3105555555
kill Caller ID
    kill call waiting
        switch to AT&T
              Pac-bell message center
                          AT&T calling card #
                                         voicemail Pswd
                          home # confirm


The scary thing is how natural it feels to to dial all that.


David Leslie    [e-mail]   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The first time you did it with another area code,
did you feel it was wrong? Did you feel guilty about it afterward, and
consider it unnatural?  Did you decide to try it after watching Phil
Donahue interview someone on his show who admitted before a natioal
audience of halfwits that he had called into voicemail using his
calling card from another area code on a phone which did not default
to AT&T, and that he had to take extra steps to avoid the embarassment
of premature disconnection and invasion of his privacy?  Have you ever
had fantasies about there being at least a dozen messages waiting and
you were forced against your will to punch at least twenty more keys
before you were allowed to disconnect yourself?  Some of us, you know,
were around before the Age of Enlightenment -- before the federal
judge enlightened us, was gracious unto us and saved us from
ourselves.  There was a time when one came home from work, or school,
or play and simply picked up the receiver. On hearing the "Voice With
a Smile Behind the Dial" (*) -- but this was long before dials -- he'd
say, "Is that you, Myrtle? Say Myrt, were there any calls for me while
I was out this afternoon?"

(*) An AT&T advertising slogan in the 1950's, the smiling, grandmoth-
erly operator was intended to convince the public that despite the
rapid post-war conversion from manual to dial service which was
underway, "Myrtle" would still be there to serve them. More important
than the public perception however was getting the Union to shut up
and quit spreading the rumors about 'all the operators being fired en
masse' once an exchange was cut over. One of the big strikes, or work-
stoppages at 'the phone company' in the 1950's was based on operators
protesting the automation, fearful about their job security. That
strike did more than anything else to convince Mother to hurry on with
the task at hand.

No one lost their job after automation; in those days a very bloated
Mother kept everyone on the payroll forever unless you were
loose-lipped with her secrets, washed her bed linens where the public
could see it, or got caught stealing from her fat, overstuffed
purse. You stayed employed with the phone company until the day you
had a heart attack standing in the cafeteria line at lunch. Literally ...
several years ago I was talking to a directory assistance operator who
suffered a cerebral hemmorage -- a stroke -- while she was helping me.
She was talking to me; there was silence in mid-sentence; I kept
repeating 'hello' for about a half a minute. I was able to hear noise
in the background and some confusion. Presently a different operator
took over my call, looked up the number I was requesting and told me
candidly what had happened to the other lady: she had fallen from the
chair where she was sitting; she was laying on the floor and 'the
other girls' were trying to make her comfortable; the company medical
department had been called and told to come immediatly.  :( PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1993 16:43:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Anonymous Use of Talk Tickets


Some people have written to say the Talk Ticket program still leaves a
limited audit trail -- I think of dubious value legally -- since a
post-use audit of the calls made would permit drawing certain
conclusions about the person who owned/used the ticket. Presumably
with this knowledge, one could then approach the seller of the ticket
to learn the identity of the purchaser if same was known (that is,
via mail order or a check being used to make the purchase, etc.

Not yet being in a position to take the cards around to drugstores,
magazine and newspaper stands, etc where they can be sold for cash to
a person who walks up to buy one (although Chicago area people can get
them from my office with cash in hand by appointment), I chatted with
my contact at US Fibercom to see what could be done to cloud the
purchaser of the ticket(s) if that was their desire. Bear in mind most
users won't find this necessary, but for those who have no easy way to
*receive* mail at an address removed from themselves, I am now
authorized to add another method of ticket delivery: email via an
anonymous email service.

Since you do not actually put the ticket in the phone, you do not
actually need to be in possession of the ticket(s). All you need are
the instructions for calling and the ticket serial numbers. So, use
this routine:

    Send mail to me via an anonymous server. Note whatever anonymous
    net-address it gives you, and keep that for the later retrieval
    of email. Picture it sort of like you are writing to one of the
    alt.sex.unusual.behavior groups.

    Send a money order for the number of tickets desired ($2 each
    or 10 for $15) and reference the anonymous email address.

    You will get back a help file explaining what number to call
    and other things you need to know, and the ticket serial numbers
    will be included in the email.

 For testing purposes, try it a couple dollars at a time if that is
your preference.  As stated earlier, most people will not need this
extra layer in the process, but if you feel that you do, then use it.

Order from:

Telecom Digest
2241 West Howard Street #208
Chicago, IL 60645
Phone: [phone]   Fax: [phone]

Email advices to: [e-mail]


Pat

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #291
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20591;
          29 Apr 93 19:35 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20608
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 29 Apr 1993 16:45:53 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12383
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 29 Apr 1993 16:45:11 -0500
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 16:45:11 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #292

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 29 Apr 93 16:45:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 292

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Markey Panel to Explore Issues of Privacy, Security (Carl Malamud)
    Repost: CFV: Newsgroup: comp.std.wireless (Wesley S. Jones)
    Deregulation Of Telcos In Texas ([e-mail])
    Card Calling From Public Phone (Richard Cox)
    How I Answer The Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello") (Nigel Allen)
    Re: AT&T Sent Me $75 (Robert J. Woodhead)
    Re: Germany to Offer Custom Calling Features (Marko Ruokonen)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Chas Hoequist)
    Re: 1.2 Watt Handheld Cellular Phone? (Bill Bailey)
    Re: AT&T Area Code Handbook (Carl Moore)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 01:06:10 EDT
From: Carl Malamud <[e-mail]>
Subject: Markey Panel to Explore Issues of Privacy, Security


The following hearings will be broadcast on the Multicast Backbone
(MBONE) and will be rebroadcast on Internet Talk Radio.  The
Subcommittee staff requested that this notice be distributed on the
network so the Internet community is aware of these important
hearings.


                  U.S. House of Representatives
       Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance of the
                 Committee on Energy and Commerce

                   Edward J. Markey, Chairman
        David H. Moulton, Chief Counsel and Staff Director

        ===================================================

        Markey Panel To Explore Issues of Privacy, Computer
       Hacking, Cellular Eavesdropping, and Data Encryption

Washington -- U.S. Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Chairman of the House
Telecommunications and Finance Subcommittee, will hold an oversight
hearing today on the rights and responsibilities of individuals and
organizations in cyberspace.  A high tech presentation highlighting
issues such as encryption, electronic invasions of privacy, fraud,
civil liberties and computer crime, will precede a panel discussion.

"The rapid technological convergence of telecommunications, computers
and digital technology creates a synergy that can empower people,"
Markey said, "yet the same technology can imperil its users by
facilitating invasions of people's privacy or 'electronic wilding.'"

"As the nation considers upgrading the national telecommunications
'infostructure,' we must not overlook issues such as personal privacy
or electronic fraud, that may pervert our hopes for a national network
that promotes community, freedom and empowerment," Markey added.

The "high tech-in-the-round" demonstration will be presented by Mr.
John B. Gage, Director, Science Office of Sun Microsystems, Inc.  The
demonstration will include "reprogramming" an ordinary cellular phone
to become a radio scanner, making it capable of eavesdropping on other
people's cellular conversations; a recorded view of a electronic
break- in from Amsterdam to the Pacific Fleet Command in California;
and demonstrations of other new telecommunications technologies and
how they affect data security and privacy.

The panel will consist of Raymond Kammer, Acting Director of NIST
(National Institute of Standards and Technology), who will provide
testimony on technology standard setting issues including the
government-endorsed "Clipper Chip" encryption technology;

Mr. Bruce Sterling, noted science fiction writer on cyberspace and
also author of the non-fiction book, "The Hacker Crackdown: Law and
Disorder on the Electronic Frontier," which discusses computer crime
and civil liberties;

Mr. John Lucich, State Investigator with the New Jersey Division of
Criminal Justice.  Mr. Lucich combats computer and electronic fraud
crimes by electronically infiltrating the underground computer
bulletin boards of the "hacker" and "phone phreak" community; and

Mr. Joel Reidenberg, Professor of Law at Fordham University Law
School, who has studied how personal privacy is affected by
telecommunications and computer technologies and the various privacy
protections afforded citizens of different countries.

The hearing will begin at 9:30 a.m. on April 29 in room 2133 of the
Rayburn House Office Building in Washington, D.C.

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

From: [e-mail] (Wesley S. Jones)
Subject: Repost: CFV: Newsgroup: comp.std.wireless
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 16:14:55 GMT


               C A L L   F O R   V O T E S
               ---------------------------


This is a formal Call For Votes (CFV) for the creation of a moderated
newsgroup to discuss communication techniques, protocols and standards
for wireless computer networks.

PROPOSED NEWSGROUP:

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.

Acceptable Postings:

Any questions, comments, results, or suggestions which are
related to any of the existing committees discussing wireless
technologies.  This can include, but is not limited to,
current research, development or general applications of
wireless networks.


JUSTIFICATION OF UNIQUENESS:

The proposed newsgroup, comp.std.wireless, would ease communication
between people around the world who are specifying or will be affected
by wireless network standards.  Currently, there is a not a newsgroup
dedicated to supporting communications between wireless network
standards groups.


VOTING PERIOD:

Voting will conclude on WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1993 23:59 EST


HOW TO VOTE:

All votes must be mailed to: '[e-mail]'.  The votes will
be counted as "yes" or "no" votes according to their subject line
and/or message body.

Please use the following format:

Subject (If Applicable): [Yes/No]
I  vote ["Yes"/"No"] for the creation of "comp.std.wireless"
[Last Name], [First Name] [(E-mail Address)] : [Yes/No]


VOTING RULES:

-Only one vote per user (Two different people cannot vote under the
 same user name).
-Any votes which are received after the voting period
 will be discarded.
-Anyone who wants to change their previous vote may do so by voting
 again.  They must indicate that they have previously voted and are
 changing their mind in a footnote.  A changed vote will discard your
 previous vote.


AMBIGUOUS VOTES:

Ambiguous votes -- those who do not follow the specified format, or do
not make clear the voter's intent, will, where possible, be returned
to their senders for clarification.  Ambiguous votes which cannot be
returned to their senders or for which no clarification is provided
will be identified in vote mass acknowledgements and in the final vote
tally.

Thank you for your participation in the CFV effort.


John McKown & Wesley S. Jones
Motorola, Inc.    Paging and Wireless Data Group

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Deregulation Of Telcos In Texas
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 07:42:13 -0600


According to the {Austin American Statesman} business section for
Tuesday, the Texas senate has deferred changes in phone regulation.

The article is somewhat unclear, as any report on the Texas
legislature must necessarily be. :-8  Apparently Texas Public Utility
Commission procedures have been streamlined.  Lt. Governor Bob
Bullock, who is opposed to deregulation, tried to broker a compromise
and found the issue too complicated to deal with in this session.  He
has proposed deferring action until after a two year study.  (The
Texas legislature meets for 140 days every two years, so this session
is growing short.  Two years would be the next regular session.  I
prefer two days every 140 years.)

The Texas Telephone Association says they will continue their efforts
in the house of representatives.  Something could happen in a senate -
house conference commitee.

A great quote from the article attributed to Sen. Carl Parker D-Port
Arthur, "lengthy hearings cost the consumers money."

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

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 13:17 GMT0BST-1
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Card Calling From Public Phone
Reply-To: [e-mail]


> It's been pointed out that the German and French stored value cards
> (the kind that are read by the phone) do have serial numbers and they
> do pass it to the switch during call setup.  I doubt that the British
> (BT) ones are smart enough to do it though.

British (BT) cards (and cardphones) are made by Landis and Gyr, and
the same system is used in a number of countries: I've used it myself
in Belgium.  The "value" appears to be stored physically, in something
like a hologram, and there is no other data transferrable from the
card to the phone.

There are other payphones in the UK ... COCOTs are becoming more
common in high usage areas, but the most common type of cardphone
apart from BT's, are the Mercury cardphones.  These use a magnetic
strip to hold the credit -- and the card serial number is read by the
phone and stored, to help detect and prevent clone-card fraud.  This
information is NOT passed to the Central Office as we know it, becuase
some Mercury phones are connected to BT local exchanges!  However,
every eight or so "transactions", the phone "calls in" to its control
centre, and downloads all the waiting call data.  So I guess that this
*could* be used to trace the usage on individual cards although it
wouldn't bother me if it was.  Mercury is part of the Cable & Wireless
group.


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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 03:31:54 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


While telephone companies have been able to persuade companies to
answer their phone lines with their company names, most individuals in
Canada and the United States answer their phones with "Hello" (or the
equivalent in their own language).

However, you will find a handful of people -- politicians and their
families, people with home-based businesses, eccentrics like me --
answering their home phone lines with their name.

When I shared a house on Major Street in Toronto with some other
people, I would answer the shared house phone with the words "Sixteen
Major". (For my own sanity, I had a phone line of my own, and I
answered calls on that line with my name.) The house at 16 Major
Street was owned by Doctors Hospital, incidentally, which wasn't a
very nice landlord.

People show much more creativity in their answering machine messages
than in their "answering phrase" for answering the phone live.
However, I really don't like excessively cute answering machine
messages, particularly when I'm calling long distance. A functional
answering machine message is just fine for me: "Hello. This is Nigel
David Allen. Please leave a message at the tone."


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: AT&T Sent Me $75
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 13:07:26 GMT


[e-mail] (Gary Segal) writes:

> Even with the %25 discount, the cost per minute was 10.5 cents.  With
> MCI, I pay 10 cents a minute and then get a 20% Friends & Family
> discount.  So I decided to stay with MCI and let them give me a $75
> credit.

Which shows you what idiots MCI are.  AT&T basically screwed them out
of $75 for the price of a stamp and some paper.  If the folks at MCI
Marketing had any brains, they'd say "Thanks for calling; by all
means, cash the cheque, use the prefix to dial for a month, and we'll
put a note in the computer to change you back after that and credit
your account $25."

End result: MCI screws AT&T out of $75 for only $25, keeps loyal
customer for 1/3 the price.


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]
AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): [e-mail]

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

Date: 29 Apr 93 09:46:20 EDT
From: Marko Ruokonen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Germany to Offer Custom Calling Features


> TELEKOM, the German telecommunications operator, will offer starting
> this fall such *exciting* :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) features like:

> - itemised billig (pending government approval);
> - call waiting;
> - call forwarding;
> - conference (three-way) calls;
> - call barring (outgoing calls);
> - user controlled identification (of POTS lines on ISDN phones).

I called TELEKOM Customer Service yesterday and they were glad to send
an article covering the new features.

The article mentions the functions:

 - call Waiting ("Anklopfen"),
 - start a second call ("Rueckfragen"),
 - call forwarding ("Rufumleitung"),
 - call barring (Long Distance, out-of-country and different
   continents)
 - three-way-calling

A line has to be connected to a digital switch to use these functions
starting in fall 1993. Naturally, they need DTMF to access them.

As mentioned in the text, billing will be on a per-month-basis:

Call waiting, three-way-calling and call forwarding should each cost
DM 5/mo, second conversation DM 3/mo, call barring DM 7/mo.  The
all-in-one package should cost DM 19/mo.

There was no information if there would be any setup charges, but I
bet TELEKOM always collects bucks for something.  Nowadays, a change
to the setup costs DM 65. :-(

Starting a second call and three-way-calling look quite similiar to
me. Neverthelsess, it seems that I would have to pay DM 10/mo just to
have both on my line. :-(( I could get all the stuff for DM 19/mo ...
Hmm. TELEKOM certainly aims at selling the all-in-one-package.

If somebody has more information on the plans (e.g. full list of
supported features, how it all works) I would be anxious to hear about
it.


Marko Ruokonen
e-Mail adress: [e-mail]
Phone/Fax: [phone]

Disclaimer: I only speak for myself.

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

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 09:51:00 +0000
From: Charles (C.A.) Hoequist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Secure Phone System


No comment has appeared in the Digest on the following part of the
original panicky Clipper-chip post, so I guess it's my turn:

> The NSA has spent several $billions on terabyte disk archives;

The NSA is willing to spend $billions to get a few *terabytes*?  Let
me be the salesman! This beats selling the Brooklyn Bridge!

> they can search telephone calls recorded on these archives
> at their leisure with more $billions worth of high-speed computers.

Search? With what? fgrep? These aren't text archives. Is the poster
claiming that the NSA (or anybody) can do reliable speech recognition
on arbitrary speakers, continuous speech, toll-quality recordings?
This chestnut doesn't crop up as often as the modem tax, but it's a
lot sillier. Some very sharp folks at AT&T and elsewhere have been
working on this for years, and for all their progress, searching
telephone archives is a long way off. (Search for what, by the way?
Subversive callers saying, 'hi, here's my subversive plan'?)

Wait, I just figured it out. The $billions are for big mainframe false
fronts hiding lots of stenographers transcribing all the conversations.
Yeah!


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

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

From: [e-mail] (- -)
Subject: Re: 1.2 Watt Handheld Cellular Phone?
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston IL
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 05:04:17 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bob
Longo) writes:

> With all of the concern recently about cellular telephones causing
> cancer, I'm curious about an ad I saw yesterday.  It seems that there
> is a handheld cellular phone available that boasts 1.2 watts.  The
                                                     ^^^^^^^^^

I recently worked for a Cellular + PDN company in the Czech Republic.
Their phones (Nokia 450) in addition to resembleing a boat anchor put
out something like 10-15 watts!!!


Bill   [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 11:03:43 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Area Code Handbook


[e-mail] writes:

> NC [919/910] split happens before the 313/810 split in MI

This agrees with what was posted just recently regarding the area
code handbook from AT&T:

919/910  North Carolina     11-14-93       11-14-93      2-13-94
313/810  Michigan           12-01-93       N/A           N/A

But the history.of.area.splits , which I update from time to time,
has:

919/910 North Carolina, 14 Nov 1993 (full cutover 13 Feb 1994)
313/810 Michigan, 10 Aug 1994

So does anybody in Michigan know what is going on?  Could that August
1994 date actually be the full cutover?

My earlier concern was seeing 610 and 910 being announced for Pa. and
NC respectively at around the same time.  I know about the area code
shortage, but, given that 215 and 919 needed to be split, why wasn't
910 used for Pa.  and 610 for NC?  (200,300,400,500 -- and now not
600? -- can be used for area codes if any more new ones are needed
before 1995.)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #292
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15364;
          30 Apr 93 8:53 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11041
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 30 Apr 1993 06:26:51 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08088
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 30 Apr 1993 06:26:10 -0500
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 06:26:10 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #293

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 30 Apr 93 06:26:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 293

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Jeff Kenton)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (M. Cheeseman)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in Phone System (Craig Nordin)
    Re: White House Encryption Proposal (Charlie Mingo)
    Re: Clipper Chip, et al. (Laird Broadfield)
    Re: Alpha Pager Questions (Marc Unangst)
    Re: Alpha Pager Questions (Dub Dublin)
    Re: Alpha Pager Questions (Steven Warner)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Telecom Industry Role in Info Super Highways (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service (David W. Barts)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Kenton)
Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers
Organization: Kenton Systems Corporation, Weston MA
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 17:59:06 GMT


[e-mail] (Mark Walsh) writes:

> From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail]
> (Steve Forrette):

>> A couple of years ago, I had the number 841-7249.  With great
>> frequency, when I gave the number to someone, they would transpose the
>> 2 and the 4, and say 841-7429 when they read it back to me to verify.

> About ten years ago, I had 457-5611.  The nearby church that did Bingo
> on Wednesday nights was 457-6511.  Man, did I get some funny calls!
> "Hi, this is Mytrle, did you want the brownies with or without
> nuts ..."

Along a similar line, the phone I have for my computer has the number
894-4510.  The local courthouse is 894-4500, which the recorded voice
of information gives as eight nine four, four five hundred.  There are
many people who dial this as 894-45 100.  Hey, what's an extra digit!


        Jeff Kenton    [phone]
            [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Misdialed numbers
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access System: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 04:43:58 GMT


In an article in comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] had the
following to say about Re: Misdialed numbers

> I'm personally favored numbers that repeat a digit so I can keep a
> finger on that button and dial quite rapidly as I rock my fingers back
> and forth.  555-1212 is fast and easy to dial.  So are numbers that
> form a pattern on the keypad, such as across a row or column, or the
> corners (think of Tic Tac Toe or bingo patterns).  Numbers such as
> 5456 are fast to dial if you start with your little finger on the 5
> and type as on a calculator.

Which leads me to ask a related if somewhat trivial question. What are
telephone keypads laid out in a different orientation that calculators
or even the numeric keypads on PC's or terminals (the 123 row is at
the top while it's at the bottom for calculators and keypads). I find
this quite annoying at times. Weren't at least calculators and/or
terminals with keypads around before the advent of pushbutton
telephones?


Laurence Chiu    Walnut Creek, CA

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

From: Mark Cheeseman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Organization: Your Computer Magazine, Sydney, Australia
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 10:43:02 GMT


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

>> In a similar vein, here's another plug for {Wired} (no, I'm not

> Anyone know who's backing these guys?  It must take some up front cash
> to produce a glossy like that *and* get it on the streets in Britain ...

And Australia. Pretty good distribution for a first issue!


Mark Cheeseman, Your Computer. Phn: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail] [e-mail]  Fido: 3:712/412.0
AMPRNet:  [e-mail] [44.136.8.70]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 18:56:35 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Hierophant <[e-mail].
nd.edu> writes:

> Gee, and *I* thought "Clipper" was a database language developed by
> Nantucket in 1986. Silly me :)

Some of us are old enough to remember Pan American World Airways, the
original owner of the Clipper trade mark!


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] (Craig Nordin)
Subject: Re: Warning: AT&T Putting NSA Wiretap Chips in "Secure" Phone System
Organization: U.S. D.O.L - Occupational Safety & Health Admin.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 22:43:59 GMT


I speak only for myself ...

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

> I would think that if you are using your phone legitimately, then
> having a Clipper Chip is another layer of protection from outsiders.
> If you have something to say that you don't want ANYONE else to hear,
> go see the guy in a crowded coffee shop and no one will notice.

> Take the politics to a political forum.

But it is mixed.

Here is the problem: The combination of a few lesser changes in law
and technology may give our government *unprecedented* levels of
control over private citizens' communication.  Each of the lesser
changes is rather weak, but put together -- they make a monster.

NOTE THESE PIECES:

The White House statement insinuates that no U.S. Citizen has a right
to a strong encryption scheme.

The White House may very well start legislation that will outlaw
non-Clipper encryption schemes.  You may be forced to use only
Clipper.

The Justice Department needs no warrant to record your Clipper-encrypted
packets -- it only needs the warrant to read them.

Each Clipper-encrypted packet has sender and destination ID on it.
The Police will be able to set filters in any packet stream they want
to troll for your id (WITHOUT WARRANT!).  They could save it for years
and then decide to get the warrant and read it.

The announcement was vague about the institutions that would archive
the "split" keys.  This does not engender trust or faith.

This Clipper algorithm may be impressive, but I wonder how long it
will last with tens of thousands of hackers concentrating only on it.
Then who will have access?

Each day all of us depend more and more on electronic communications.
We conduct more and more of our lives over the networks.  In ten or
twenty years e-mail will be like breathing for a very large (and the
most powerful?) segment of the population.

It may become hard to take a breath on the Net without being monitored.


US Department of Labor      Craig Nordin          [e-mail]
OSHA OMDS FSDB #N3661                  uunet!osh1.osha.gov!osh3!craig
200 Constitution Ave. NW Phone (FTS/202) v:219-7788 x57  fax:[phone]
Washington D.C. 20210    Standard, Complete, and Constant Disclaimers

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

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 18:22:43
Subject: Re: White House Encryption Proposal


[e-mail] (Brent Capps) writes on 20 Apr 93:

> [e-mail] (Dream Weaver) writes:

>> There also seems to be a consensus that to make this workable ALL
>> other private cryptology and nonregistered keys will be outlawed.

> I seriously doubt whether a prohibition like this would stand
> up to a court challenge. This would be tantamount to the government
> setting up an official approval process for certain kinds of
> speech (encrypted) which it is clearly forbidden to do under
> the First Amendment.

The First Amendment does not prohibit the government from any sort of
regulation of speech.  To simplify a bit, it prohibits the government
from regulating speech on the basis of _viewpoint_, while leaving it
free to impose "reasonable time, place and manner restrictions."
Thus, the government can require parade permits or can prohibit (say)
noisy activities in residental neighborhoods at night, so long as it
does so without regard to the viewpoint of the persons regulated.

It seems to me that the use of encryption relates more to the _manner_
of conveying a message, rather than to the viewpoint being expressed.

You might argue that regulation of encryption was actually designed to
burden the speech of those who were most likely to use encryption (be
they drug smugglers or EFF members), but the courts have not been too
sympathetic to such arguments in the past, unless it could be shown
that prohibiting encryption other than the Clipper Chip would
effectively _prevent_ some group of people from communicating.  This
it does not do.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Clipper Chip, et al.
Date: 29 Apr 93 22:11:23 GMT


Followup to a RISKS article ...

In digest <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
com writes:

> I'm wondering how the Clipper Chip (actually, the entire genre of encrypted
> telephone technology) impacts the rules of evidence presented in a court of
> law.  I believe that current rules of evidence require that, when a phone is
> being tapped, that a person be listening in on the phone at the time that it
> is being recorded (tapped).  A tape recording by itself is not admissible;
> there must be a person who will testify that he (she), indeed, listened in on
> the phone line and that the tape recording is an accurate representation of
> what was said.

> With encrypted (digital) telephony and POST-HOC decryption, it is not
> possible to have a human listen in on the live conversation in order
> to testify to the authenticity of the tape.  The only way for this to
> work is to get the keys in advance and decrypt the conversation in
> real time.

Okay, try this out: would it be possible to transmit both a "genuine"
encrypted data stream *and* a "spoof" Clipper stream on a single line,
where the spoof stream contains only boring traffic (local radio
station, for example?)  When the authority first listened to the line,
they would see a Clipper-stream (and some other stuff), get the ID,
get the keys, and presto, they've got the greatest hits playing, with
some static in the background (the real data stream)?

Just a thought; not sure what it gains (other than royally irritating
the investigators.)


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Questions
Date: 29 Apr 1993 00:15:47 -0400
Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI


<[e-mail]> (David Singer) wrote:

> So, if you keep your pager on your bedside table, and one night at
> 2am the voltage gets a little low, be prepared to be awakened by very
> loud, very annoying beeping.

I wish my pager did that.  I have a Motorola Bravo Plus pager
(numeric-only), and it doesn't beep or vibrate when it goes to LO CELL
mode.  It doesn't beep for OUT OF RANGE, either, another feature that
I find annoying.  A couple nights ago, I went to sleep and
accidentally left the pager in vibe mode.  When I woke up, the
batteries were dead.  Apparently I had gotten a page sometime
overnight, and the pager had completely run down the batteries by
vibrating every two minutes all night long.  Of course, I lost the
page.  It would be awfully nice if the pager would go into "low-power"
mode when it displays LO CELL; perhaps turning off the constant clock
display, going to a faster backlight timeout, and just flashing the
light when in "silent alert" mode instead of vibrating.

I also wonder why Motorola chose to use incandescent lamps for the
alert light and the LCD backlight.  They suck much more power than
LEDs for the equivalent illumination, and LEDs are smaller to boot.  A
red LED also doesn't kill your nightvision, like a white incandescent
lamp does.

>I now turn my pager off at night because of this.

Unfortunately, that's not an option for me -- one of the bigger reasons
I have a pager in the first place is so that people can contact me at
any time without disturbing the other people that I share my main
phone line with.


Marc Unangst, N8VRH    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dub Dublin)
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Questions
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Chevron
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 20:10:04 GMT


I looked at both an NEC and the Motorola Advisor before selecting the
Advisor.  We didn't even bother to test the NEC though, because its
display was only 4 lines x 16 chars as opposed to Motorola's 4 lines x
20 chars.  When the display is already small, this makes a BIG
difference.  NEC may have a new model by now, but they have a tough
sell against my experience with Motorola's quality and durability.

Contrary to what one poster has said, I get great (actually, damn near
amazing) battery life from my Advisor -- a battery lasts me about two
or three weeks (I don't bother to turn it off when I get home -- this
seems to _extend_ the battery life!)  I also almost never use the
vibrator, though - if you insist on the good vibes, you'll pay in
AAA's.  (Hint: I've found that the most comfortable way to carry the
thing is to clip it sideways through a belt loop, which makes the
vibrator mode pretty useless, but makes sitting much more
comfortable.)  In all I get nearly the same battery life from the AAA
battery in the Advisor that I got from the AA battery in the Bravo I
had before.  Also, although the Advisor is bigger than a Bravo, it's
about the same weight.

I will be posting a summary of what I've learned about Alpha paging
programs for DOS, Windoze, Macs, and UNIX by Monday (I hope.)


Dub Dublin                   Chevron Information Technology Company
email: [e-mail]     phone: [phone]     PROFS: never again...

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

From: Steven Warner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Questions
Organization: RTFM / beachSystems, Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 21:41:49 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
(David Singer) writes:

> be no way to disable the "low cell" warning on the pager.  So, if you keep
> your pager on your bedside table, and one night at 2am the voltage gets
> a little low, be prepared to be awakened by very loud, very annoying beeping.

This is a programmable feature. The low cell warning can be made
silent.  Motorola will change any programming options (there are
hundreds) for $10, if you send it to them.


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

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

Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 29 Apr 93 16:02:33 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
rochester.edu (Rob Levandowski) writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave Levenson) writes:

>> Pat is correct here; the banks are transferring debit and credit
>> information electronically (plug: some of them even use Westmark
>> systems to accomplish this!) and very fast.  But before we get too
>> upset over it, let's remember that it works both ways.  Pat, next time
>> you deposit a check you have received from someone else, watch how
>> fast you get credited!

> I'd love to know what bank you go to; both Fleet Bank NA here in
> Rochester New York, and Fleet Bank in Connecticut as well as Winsted
> Savings Bank also in Connecticut -- all of whom I have recently done
> business with -- take three to five banking days to make deposited
> funds available. Longer if you make a large deposit. I've found they
> like to play with my money, and it makes me leery of using the bank
> unless I really really have to. :)

I believe most (US) banks have set their default "hold" period on
deposits to the maximum allowed by Federal law; the first $100 is
immediate; the next $5000 within 5 business days, and the rest within
10 business days.  However, if you are a good regular customer, (as
Pat notes in his moderator's note, which I unfortunately deleted), the
bank might give you some leeway.  In addition, even if you aren't a
good customer, the banks I've used here (Security Pacific (now gone)
and First Interstate Bank) will, after 3 days, on specific request,
call the issueing bank to ask them if the check has cleared there, and
release the hold.  Telecom question: why not a data link?  Hmmmmm.


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] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: Telecom Industry Role in Info Super Highways
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 17:31:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David
Ohsie) writes:

> [original questions omitted; see the referenced article]

> Perhaps it would be more relevant to ask these questions with the
> words "federal government" in place of the words "telecom industry"?

And while we're at it, "cable television industry", too.

(I have always strongly believed that the ONLY business either Telcos
or cable companies should be permitted to engage in is provision of
the pipe -- no origination of any "services" or "programming".  I
imagine just this once I'll find a sympathetic audience out in lelecom
land ... unfortunately, it doesn't look like things will end up this
way.)


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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 10:29:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: David W. Barts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service


[e-mail] (Don Wegeng) writes:

> I am not certain of this, but I believe that telephone service to the
> north rim is provided via a feed from the south rim, using a buried
> cable that runs along the Bright Angel Trail and the North Kaibab
> Trail (spelling?).  The south rim water supply is fed from the north
> rim along the same route (except in the opposite direction).  They
> both cross the Colorado River on a suspension bridge near Phantom
> Ranch, which is a hotel at the bottom of the canyon (accessible only
> by foot or mule train).  As I recall there is a payphone at Phantom
> Ranch, though I didn't use it when I was there two years ago.

Egad!  Talk about your high-pressure pipelines!  A little back-of-the-
envelope calculating gives me a rough estimate of a water pressure of
2800 psi at the bottom of the canyon.

I remarked in private E-mail to the original poster that perhaps there
was no phone service at the North Rim and the number was that of an
answering service in someplace like Flagstaff, but it looks like my
guess was wrong.

My guess was based on how guest lodges in Stehekin, WA handle their
reservations.  Stehekin is in a valley in the North Cascades at the
far end of a 50-mile long lake.  There are no roads connecting it to
the rest of the world; access is by hiking trails, float plane, or a
boat ride up the lake from Chelan, WA.  There are also no phone or
electric lines serving Stehekin from the outside -- there once was
phone service but the lines would get knocked out each winter by
avalanches and it was simply too expensive to keep repairing it.  The
community has its own small hydroelectric plant, and phone service is
limited to a few (possibly only 1) radiotelephone channels.

Guest lodges have phone numbers listed, but these all go to an
answering service in Chelan, and are relayed up the lake by radiotelephone
or mail.


David Barts  N5JRN        UW Civil Engineering, FX-10
[e-mail]  Seattle, WA  98195

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #293
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24576;
          30 Apr 93 13:51 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06024
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 30 Apr 1993 09:16:47 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16135
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 30 Apr 1993 09:16:04 -0500
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 09:16:04 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #294

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 30 Apr 93 09:16:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 294

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    DCR Adds 11 Music Channels (Brad Hicks)
    InfoWorld Accuracy (was A Star is Born) (Tad Cook)
    Fax Machines in P.R. China (Bob F. Howard)
    Tapping the Line (Brian Zimmerman)
    411 - Automatically Transfers? (Andy Chan)
    Interact 93, Interactive Services Conference, July 18-21 (Nigel Allen)
    NPA 905 and Mexico (Tony Harminc)
    Cordless Always Transmitting? (Steve L. Edwards)
    Help Available For Users of Franklin Datacom Equipment (Micheal Parkhurst)
    Re: DTMF Universality?  (Brent Capps)
    Re: US West Says I Can't Use 301+ on Voice Line (Michael Bender)
    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Hamish Moffatt)
    Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello") (David Tamkin)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 29 Apr 93 19:44:45 GMT
Subject: DCR Adds 11 Music Channels


I just got a notice that on Monday, May 3rd, Digital Cable Radio (not
to be confused with Digital Music Express) will be expanding their
offerings from 19 channels to 30 channels.

For those of you who missed the previous discussion, DCR and DMX are
rival services that offer 24 hours daily, seven days per week music
service to cable companies, who resell it to you.  The music is
shipped in digital form, sample sample size and rate as compact disks,
in the bandwidth left over from unused TV channels.  Your monthly
rental fee typically includes a converter box (which plugs into your
stereo) and a remote control.  DCR has a toll free number which will
tell you the artist, song, and album names for the last three songs on
any channel; DMX displays this info on the remote control.

I slapped together a table comparing DCR's old offerings to their new
offerings. To Pat's would-be delight, they're adding a third classical
channel. They're also expanding from one country channel to three,
from seven rock channels to ten (adding rap, dance, and reggae), from
two jazz channels to three (plus moving New Age from the second jazz
channel to one of its own), and splitting each of the following single
channels into two: alternative, Latino, and Big Band/Nostalgia.  As
before, every other form of music is shoe-horned into scheduled hours
on the last channel, renamed "Spectrum America."

They didn't say =when= on Monday they're going to make the
change-over. It could matter; if, for example, you leave your DCR
tuned to channel 18 when you go to bed Sunday night because you sleep
better with Christian music, you might get blasted awake at midnight
if that's when channel 18 changes to rap. Or you could go to sleep to
Solid Gold Oldies and wake up disoriented by "space music" on the New
Age channel. Or you could drift off to sleep to a gentle flow of Easy
Listening and be blasted awake by Bruce Springstein when that channel
switches over to Classic Rock.  You get the picture.

This reviewer says: a good deal gets better.

 Old Channel                     New Channel
  8 Classical Favorites          1 Classical Favorites
  9 Classical II                 2 Classics in Concert
                                 3 Classical Adventures
                                 4 New Age
 10 Easy Listening               5 Easy Listening
 12 Love Songs                   6 Love Songs
  7 Contemp. Jazz/New Age        7 Contemporary Jazz
 14 Jazz                         8 Jazz
                                 9 Blues
  6 Classic Rock                10 Classic Rock
  4 Sold Gold Oldies            11 Solid Gold Oldies
  1 Soft Rock                   12 Soft Rock
                                13 Modern Acoustic Alternative
 16 Modern Rock                 14 Modern Rock
 17 Hard & Heavy Rock           15 Hard & Heavy Rock
  2 Hit List                    16 Hit List
                                17 Dance
                                18 Rap
  5 Urban Beat                  19 Urban Beat
                                20 Reggae
 15 Musica Latina               21 Latin Pop
                                22 Latin Tropical Rhythms
 18 Contemp. Christian/Gospel   23 Contemporary Christian
  3 Country                     24 New Country
                                25 Classic Country
                                26 Country Gold
 11 Big Band/Nostalgia          27 Big Band/Swing
                                28 Show Tunes
 13 For Kids Only               29 For Kids Only
 19 Spectrum                    30 Spectrum America


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

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

Subject: InfoWorld Accuracy (was A Star is Born)
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 12:27:47 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)


(J. Brad Hicks)  mc![e-mail] writes:

> Why did I go to the trouble of writing this all up for you folks on
> TELECOM Digest?  So you'd see that even with Ms. LaPlante submitting
> her second to last draft to me for corrections, once it passes through
> an editor, there's no guarantee of any accuracy; in this case, there
> were an even dozen errors or misrepresentations.  You should probably
> assume that ALL articles in {InfoWorld}, or any other trade magazine,
> are about this accurate.

 This reminds me of a bizarre article I saw in {InfoWorld} a couple of
years ago.

This was then the government was starting to talk about a major
reassignment of VHF radio frequency allocations that were not being
used by the military and federal government.  Of course the spectrum
could be allocated for many different modes and users, but I think the
reporter or editor got some buzzwords confused.  Wherever the article
(and the headline) used the word SPECTRUM, referring to the frequency
allocations, they used the expression SPREAD SPECTRUM.  So reading the
article, it sounded like this major reallocation was being made for
just ONE of many possible transmission modes, spread spectrum!  In
other issues around the same time there was lots of talk about using
spread spectrum modes for the various license free LAN linkup schemes
at 902 Mhz, so perhaps this is where they got their words confused.

I sent both an e-mail message and eventually a follow-up fax to the
reporter asking for clarification, since reallocation of this huge
expanse of RF spectrum to only ONE type of use should be a major news
story and a major shift in government policy, but I never received an
answer, nor did {InfoWorld} ever print a correction.

Oh by the way, that WAS a great picture of Brad in {InfoWorld}!

>From his posts here, I never quite pictured him looking like that,
but then people that I only talk to on the phone or email with never
do.  Geeze ... he looks like me in the late '60s!


[e-mail]  (if it bounces, use [e-mail])
Tad Cook     |  Packet Amateur Radio:  |  Home Phone:
Seattle, WA  |  KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA |  206-527-4089

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob F. Howard)
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 11:53:18 -0800
Subject: Fax Machines in P.R. China


I have several friends that took personal fax machines to China but
they did not work. Murata's and Minolota's model not known. They all
have t/p swtiches and power adpaters have been used for 220V. Any
reason why they don't work? I suspect the China side may be using 10
pps on the pulse so it is slower than the built-in 20pps pulse. That
may be the problem. Now, I have heard there is a particular brand and
model that does work, in fact a cheaper low end model ... thing is the
guy who told me could not name the brand model.

Note, that currently personal faxes are not allowed in China. Having a
fax machine access thru state run firms and joint investment firms are
a precious connection there to get anything done. Heavy fines and jail
penalties can occur.

Any input on this subject would be appreicated.


 -< Asia America Bulletin Board Service  [phone]  Fido 1:102/774 >-
 * Origin: Asia America (1:102/774)  ** calcom.socal.com **

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Zimmerman)
Subject: Tapping the Line
Date: 29 Apr 1993 12:45:12 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


In a "Next-Generation DLC", one simple message on the EOC can set up
an undetectable tap of any channel.  The switch must allocate the
DS0(s) as necessary, but the RDT (at least) can add the duplicate
DS0(s) as well as the actual DS0(s) back to the switch.  The worst is
that it doubles the bandwidth used on the link.

There is no *electrical* way of detecting the duplication.  Only a
query to the Time Slot Interchange unit can reply as to the presence
of a tap.  As Greg Andrews points out, it is just a sniffer.  Once the
FBI black box receives the DS0s, only a scrambler at the handset could
protect a conversation, or an encrypter to protect the data.

Now, if I can do that easily at the RDT, why can't the switch do the
same thing *without* wasting the bandwidth to the RDT?

You should be *very* concerned about the wide range of mis-use that
can occur.  Anything that hits the network can be tapped within
seconds.  Will that create a large market for handset scramblers (and
black box de-scramblers)?


Brian Zimmerman [[e-mail]]   Pulse Communications Inc., a division
of Hubbell (not the telescope)       All opinions are my own, none other

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Chan)
Subject: 411 - Automatically Transfers?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 20:03:32 GMT


Ok, how come there's no option to have the phone number be automatically
dialed when I call 411?

For example:
Operator: "What City?"
Me: "San Jose"
Operator: "place?"
Me: "Towne Theatre."
Operator: "here you go ..."
Machine: "the number is xxx-xxxx ..."
Machine: "press 1 to have this number dialed for you ..."
Machine: "you will be charged xx cents for this."

Whatddayathink?


Andy


[Moderator's Note: What you describe is common in many areas, and has
been available for a couple of years for people who want to spend the
additional money. Some telcos (apparently yours as well) have not yet
implemented it; I suspect all will before too long.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 20:01:20 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Interact 93, Interactive Services Association conference, July 18-21
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Interact 93, Toronto, July 18-21, 1993 will be the 8th Annual
Conference of the Interactive Services Association, formerly the
Videotex Industry Association.  The ISA is an 11-year-old North
American association serving companies that provide network-based
interactive services.

For more information about attending the conference or joining the
association, contact:

Interactive Services Association
8403 Colesville Road, Suite 865
Silver Spring, MD 20910 U.S.A.
telephone [phone]    fax [phone]


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 20:09:19 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: NPA 905 and Mexico


I thought the biggest problem with the upcoming 416/905 split for the
Toronto suburbs was that 905 borders 705.  But I recently received a
FAX from a Mexico City company that listed their FAX number on the
cover page as (905) xxx-xxxx!  Dialing Mexico City using 905 hasn't
worked for a least a year now, but if people *there* still think
that's the way to dial them, I suspect more than a few people in the
new 905 are going to be getting wrong numbers starting in October.

And I note that the AT&T "International Telephone Guide" found in a
California hotel room recently (dated 3/92) still says "if
International Direct Dialing (sic) is not available in your area ..."
and lists 905 and 706 for places in Mexico.  Sigh ...


Tony Harminc

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

From: [e-mail] (steve l edwards)
Subject: Cordless Always Transmitting?
Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 07:45:04 GMT


I have a Cobra cordless telephone. I noticed there is no switch hook.
Does this imply that the base unit is always transmitting even if the
cordless unit is sitting unused in the cradle?


Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (Micheal Scott Parkhurst)
Subject: Help Available For Users of Franklin Datacom Equipment
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 13:44:24 -0800
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Franklin Datacom, Inc. (SoCal)


Hello all,

    Please respond via email, not posting!

    I would like to ask anyone who is using Franklin Datacom
equipment to please send me a short note discribing your installation.
Things like what protocols (SNA, X.25, UTS, Burroughs Poll Select,
ect..), what kind of card (icp9,icp188,icp186, ect..), how many
cards/ports in use, and lastly what version of software (MPP, NCC,
EM3274, ect ...).

    We have been making equipment since 1986 and some of you out
there have not bothered to upgrade since your first purchase. Notices
about our new products will be posted from time to time. If there are
enough responses Franklin will establish a news group of our own for
responses to new products and technical support.

    Again, please respond via email, not posting!


Thank you,

Mike Parkhurst   Tech. Supp. Manager

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: DTMF Universality?
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 15:51:36 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> Does anyone know if the rest of the world generally uses the same DTMF
> frequencies (and button assignments) as are used in the US?  (I'm
> particularly interested in the UK.)

The DTMF *frequencies* are the same throughout the world, however
watch out for the minimum digit duration, interdigit timeout, return
loss, and twist which vary from country to country.  Also some don't
implement *, #, ABCD.  Unlike North America and most of the rest of
Europe, the UK has no required minimum digit duration or interdigit
pause time for manual DTMF senders, but it is recommended that the
digit duration be at least 40ms.  Automatic senders are required to
have 68ms minimum digit duration and interdigit pause.  DTMF receivers
homologated for use in North America will occasionally miss DTMF
digits if used in the UK.

As for pushbutton keypad assignments around the world, there was a
long thread on this subject a couple of months ago, it should be in
the archives.  Be aware that DTMF is generally called MFPB
(multifrequency push button) in many parts of the world.


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

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

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 14:33:14 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Duke of Canterbury)
Subject: Re: US West Says I Can't Use 301+ on Voice Line
Organization: SPARK's R US
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> He: If we find them running 14.4's on voice lines, we'll disconnect
>     them. They are lucky to be getting good transfers at that rate anyhow.

> Me: Really?  Why?

> He: They interfere with voice communication.  The only baud that will work
>     over voice lines effectively is 300 and below lines.  2400 is WAY too
>     fast to be transmitting.  If we get calls about problems and they are
>     traced to your modem, we'll disconnect you too.

So, how does US West reconcile this with AT&T offering their videophone
that runs at speeds "greater than 300 baud" (around 14.4K I think)?

Sure sounds like a case of one hand doesn't know what the other is
doing.  Maybe it's because neither hand is attached to the body :-).


mike bender  DOD# 007           415-863-8913 (home)
1991 FJ1200   [e-mail]    415-336-6353 (work)


[Moderator's Note: Maybe what is needed is a press release to the
major media along with telecom industry publications stating that 'US
West acknowledges lines and facilities not compatible with AT&T
Videophones ... Company says high speed modem users not allowed on
network due to antiquated lines and switching equipment.' Quote
extensively by name the fellow who was out there to correct the
original problem who claimed things could not be fixed to work any
better, and how the company policy was to disconnect service to people
with modems, etc.  Let *him* explain to his superiors why he would
have made such statements.  That happened one time with NY Tel a
number of years ago when they sent out someone to 'repair' the lines
of a reporter for the {New York Herald-Tribune}.  The repair person
did not know the customer was telecom saavy and a newspaper reporter
to boot. The repair guy gave the customer a crock about 'company
policies' ... the reporter quoted him verbatim, "according to Mr. XX,
an employee of NY Tel ... etc." The manure *did* hit the fan!  :)  PAT]

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

Date: 29 Apr 1993 16:56:53 +1000
From: [e-mail] (Hamish Moffatt)
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries
Organization: Cloud Nine BBS, Melbourne, Australia.


[e-mail] (Dale Farmer) writes:

> Any special handling of a number costs extra.  not listed, not
> published, multiple names per number, whatever ...

Actually, down here in Australia, not published is free. (Not listed /
silent incurs a $2.50/month charge, though). In fact since your number
is not published, you are saving the phone company space in the phone
book, and if enough people have unpublished numbers, they can save
paper and publishing costs. In fact, perhaps the phone company should
pay US to for unpublished numbers. :-)


hamish

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

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 23:12 CDT
Subject: Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DWT)
Organization: Contributor Account at MCS, Chicago, Illinois  60657
From: [e-mail] (DWT)


Nigel Allen wrote in <[e-mail]> in comp.dcom.telecom:

> While telephone companies have been able to persuade companies to
> answer their phone lines with their company names, most individuals in
> Canada and the United States answer their phones with "Hello" (or the
> equivalent in their own language).

> However, you will find a handful of people -- politicians and their
> families, people with home-based businesses, eccentrics like me --
> answering their home phone lines with their name.

Businesses welcome calls from the public and the notion that using the
company name is the professional thing to do has spread to businesses
that cater only to others within their industry.

People at home aren't glad to receive just any phone call from anyone
at all.  "Hello?" is intoned as a question because it is: on a call to
a residence it's up to the caller to identify himself or herself be-
fore the callee does.  I lost count of how many times in my childhood
some futz friend of my late father would call, get angry that I and
not my father had answered the phone, and demand of me, "Who's this?"
I'd say, "You dialed our number.  You know who I am.  But our phone
sounds the same no matter who calls us [before Multi-Ring and Dis-
tinctive Ringing].  *I* don't know who *you* are."

More so, I don't want someone who may have dialed my home number at
random or by mistake to learn the phone number that reached me and
certainly not to learn my address.  Maybe if I shared a phone line
with several non-relatives as Nigel did at 16 Major I'd have to make
other choices, but then I'd feel less vulnerable because people found
at home would be unlikely to be alone.  Still, if I'd been there with
him I'd have suggested that we name the residence and answer the phone
with its name rather than its address.

I'm not even keen on offering my name (though I must in my answering
machine greeting so that people know they've reached me and (1) can
hang up if they wanted someone else and (2) can feel free to say
something intended for my ears only; nothing is worse than those
canned celebrity impersonation greetings that leave you not knowing
whose machine you've reached but still have the gall to ask you for
your name and number) until I know who has called my home phone.


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


[Moderator's Note: It is worth noting there are still a few business
places which answer the phone saying 'hello' also, to add still another
twist to this.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #294
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13162;
          30 Apr 93 22:58 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08825
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 30 Apr 1993 19:36:37 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12370
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 30 Apr 1993 19:36:00 -0500
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 19:36:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #295

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 30 Apr 93 19:36:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 295

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    LA. PSC Cracks Down on Long-Distance Slamming (Wm. Bryant Faust)
    Help!! Roommate Runs $2100 900 Tab! (Jerry Stubbs)
    Toronto Area Freenet Meeting Report (Rick Zwiep)
    Telephone Line Impedence (Thomas Chen)
    Baltimore Clipper (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Secretive Areas (Justin Leavens)
    Cellular Systems in Various Countries (How do They Differ)? (Farooq Butt)
    E-Mail/Modem Connections Between USA and Mexico (E. Drew Einhorn)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Carl Moore)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Larry Jones)
    Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on "Hello") (Matt Simpson)
    Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on "Hello") (Roger Theriault)
    Debit Calling Cards (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Anonymous Use of Talk Tickets (Jack Powers)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. ***DO NOT*** cross post the
articles here to any other Usenet/alt newsgroup or vice-versa. Send
tithes to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 13:43 CDT
From: Wm. Bryant Faust, IV <[e-mail]>
Subject: LA PSC Cracks Down on Long-Distance Slamming

 From the April 30, 1993 {Times-Picayune}

PSC CRACKS DOWN ON LONG DISTANCE SLAMMING

     Long distance telephone companies wanting to sign up new
customers in Louisiana will have to get the customers to sign on the
dotted line.

     The Public Service Commission Tuesday orders universal use of a
form signed by customers as a way of preventing "slamming," the
practice of switching customers long-distance service without their
knowledge.

     The order follows hudreds of complaints by people against two
companies, Cherry Communications Inc. of Chicago and Heartline
Communications Inc. of Houston.

     The commission also agreed to let Heartline resume marketing its
services in the state, after the firm agreed to abide by the new
ruling.  Heartline will continue to market their services by
distributing coupons at restaurants and other public places that say
two percent of long-distance charges will be given to children's
charities, or that the person filling out the form might win a pickup
truck.

     But the form now clearly says -- in large letters -- that it is
an application to switch long-distance services.

     And company officials will follow up the form with a written
confirmation letter.

     The commission held off on allowing Cherry Communications to
begin signing up customers again, after Assistant Attorney General
Tammy Velasquez said an investigation into consumer fraud allegations
involving the company isn't complete.  Velasquez said the company had
attempted to refund switching charges to a number of customers who
complained of being slammed, but said several of the $12 checks
bounced.

Attorney Edmund Reggie, who represents the company, said that the
bounced checks resulted when the company accidentally closed the
account on which the checks were drawn.  Reggie said new checks were
sent out as soon as the mistake was discovered, but Valasquez said
several of those who complained to her office were afraid to cash them
for fear of being charged bounced check fees by their banks a second
time.

     Edward Callegos, an administrative law judge for the commission,
said the company hasn't provided evidence that its promises to
customers of bills 10 percent less than other carriers was true.


Wm. Bryant Faust, IV     La. State Univ. Medical Center
[e-mail]

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

From: Jerry Stubbs <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help!! Roommate Runs $2100 900 Tab!
Organization: University of Kansas Computer Science Dept
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 19:56:34 GMT


A friend of mine's roommate ran up a big 900 bill over a three month
period and has split. I guess the phone company will bump off one
month of it but they want the rest.  What can this guy do? The
scoundrel hid the phone bills until they shut off the service.

I'll check mail and this group again today. If anyone knows of any
good legal recourse it will be much appreciated.


[Moderator's Note: There is legal recourse, but it is against the
former roomate, and would involve skip-tracing him from what you say.
Neither telco or the 900 carrier -- as sleazy as most of them are --
can be held responsible.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: Macintosh Awareness Group In Canada
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 22:25:39 EST
Subject: Toronto Area Freenet Meeting Report


Just back from the {2nd?} public meeting of the Toronto Area Free-Net.

Over 150 (my count) attended -- they turned people away from the
Palmerston Library meeting room.

Dave Sutherland from Carlton gave a demo and background on the
National Capital Free-Net, which went "public" on Feb 1.They have 40 x
2400bps links for some 4000 enrolled {free} members, with 50-100 apps
a day coming in (some with donation cheques!  {Mark, take note - they
have raised $20K this way already!}.

The current Toronto Steering Cttee.  consists of 6 folks:

Allan Earle 597-6947
Judson Newell    391-5480    [e-mail]
Laine Ruus    978-5365    [e-mail]
Sam Sternberg 636-3354
David Tallan 944-3782 [e-mail]
Peter Tindall 620-3113 [e-mail]

The first meeting of the Hardware/Software committee will be Thur
April 22 at 5:00pm in room 4049 at Robarts Library (UofT -- St.
George/Harbord) for anyone interested in helping spec out the
operational setup of the free-net.

This is a tremendous opportunity for anyone wanting to get involved at
the grassroots level, right from the beginning, with a community
information and communications service.  {kind of nets out to being
MAGIC for the masses}.

Will post more details tommorrow, as my time is up today.

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Chen)
Subject: Telephone Line Impedence
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 19:24:54 GMT
Organization: Hughes Network Systems Inc.


Does anyone out there know what the line impedence can be before the
line become unusable?


Tom

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

Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 11:06:09 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. PADGETT PETERSON)
Subject: Baltimore Clipper


Actually, long before the Boeing or Martin "Clippers", there were the
"Baltimore Clippers". As near as I can tell the term came into use
right around the war of 1812 to describe an exceptionally speedy ship
and most were designed to be able to run blockades.

The term "China Clipper" referred to those used for the opium trade
with China, again being very fast and able to outrun government ships.
Interesting heritage wot?

Re: "listening in" requirement for wiretaps. Again if what the law
enforcement department was issued on receipt of a warrent was a
"receive only" duplicate Clipper chip. This would be easily
satisfiable, however with one important difference -- a court *might*
be able to admit a pre-recorded tape on the grounds that a Clipper
code could not be forged. Interesting thought.

This comes closer to what I think the real intent of Clipper is: not
necessarily to enforce privacy but to provide a legal defense for
doctors, hospitals, lawyers, etc., etc. who have a legal requirement
to protect information from disclosure but no inexpensive way to do so
electronically.

In short, protected information is still going to be protected and
there will still be a need for secure information transmittal. Clipper
does not provide this but what it does do is allow *reasonable*
protection for day to day information that is not now protected but
should be. At the same time is will provide a cloak that will make it
difficult to tell which information is *only* Clipper protected and
which has other layers.

Telecommuting data for the most part does not require KG-class
encryption but it does need authentication and it must be shielded
from routine evesdropping or companies will not permit it on a large
scale, something which the current administration seems to be
committed to.

Clipper can provide both, a *good enough* shield for routine commerce
while also providing effective authentication that can be far more
secure than just passwords or PINs. *By the fact that two or more
parties can communicate, they will authenticate each other.* And far
better than the simple dial-up mechanisms that we use today.

Further, it is designed to be cheap -- $30 chip price should add less
than $100 to the price of a cell phone or a modem.

This then is what I expect from Clipper, not a "perfectly secure"
answer but one that is "good enough" to protect routine
telecommunications from interception and fraud. I would be very
surprised to find out that it could not do this.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 08:46:54 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Secretive Areas


   Taken from the {LA Times}, 4/30/93:

   Nine of the ten regions with the highest percentage of unlisted
phone numbers are in California, according to Survey Sampling Inc. of
Fairfield, Conn.

   Don't bother with the sociological theories about the Golden State.
Pac Bell has one of the cheapest rates for concealing one's phone
number. The charge is about 30 cents a month in California, compared
to $1.88 in New York and $4 in Idaho.

   The ten regions most likely to have unpublished phone numbers:
    1- Las Vegas (64.6% unlisted)
    2- Fresno (63.1%)
    3- L.A.-Long Beach (61.7%)
    4- Oakland (61.6%)
    5- San Jose (60.2%)
    6- Sacramento (59.8%)
    7- Riverside-San Bernadino (57.7%)
    8- Anaheim-Santa Ana (57.1%)
    9- San Diego (56.5%)
    10-Bakersfield (55.2%)

(Now, why so many people in Bakersfield wish to remain anonymous, I'll
never know - JL)


Justin Leavens : Microcomputer Specialist : University of Southern California
    [e-mail]    My opinion is that my opinions are my opinions

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

From: [e-mail] (Farooq M. Butt)
Subject: Cellular Systems in Various Countries (How Do They Differ)?
Organization: Motorola RISC Software, Austin, TX
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 20:42:09 GMT


Please enlighten this dcom.neophyte :-)

We all know that one can purchase a regular phone in the USA and take
it say to South East Asia and have it work fine using the pulse mode.
My question: what's involved with taking a **cellular** phone, say a
Motorola MicroTac II to Asia? Are the cellular systems there totally
different and incompatible? Is there *any* hope of coaxing (no pun
intended) a cellular phone purchased in the USA to work anywhere else
or is this purposely disabled?  If there are incompatible/compatible
systems worldwide, could someone let me know which systems are
compatible with the USA's?

Finally, IF cellular systems are completely different, exactly how
much effort is involved in getting a stateside phone to work
elsewhere? Does one need PROMS or does the whole phone have to be
reworked?  I am thinking of taking one to Hong Kong and China was
wondering whether the hitches I'll run into will be technical or
administrative (i.e.  whether I'll be told "sir there's no way in hell
we CAN get your USA MicroTac to work here" OR "sir there's no way in
hell we WILL let you use your MicroTac here")?

Sorry for the beginner-type questions, but I am blissfully ignorant
about the implementations of cellular systems.  Any advice and
opinions will be GREATLY appreciated!

Please email and I will summarize if there's interest,


Thanks,

fmb

These are MY Opinions NOT my employer's.

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

From: [e-mail] (E. Drew Einhorn)
Subject: E-Mail/Modem Connections Between USA and Mexico
Date: 30 Apr 1993 11:08 MST
Organization: Albuquerque Public Schools - Career Enrichment Center


At work I need to establish an E-Mail connection between our
Albuquerque, NM office and our office in Mexico City.  We are running
Lotus' cc:mail system in our American offices.  The simplest approach
would seem to be: send them a copy of cc:mail and a garden variety
modem.  Will a modem designed for domestic USA use work on a Mexican
phone line?  Are there other technical issues? Are there regulatory
issues with state or national governments on either side of the border
with the export/import/use of the hardware/software?

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

Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 10:40:25 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers


At the 278 prefix in Aberdeen, Md. (previously in 301, now in 410),
on various extensions, I got calls for:

Paterson, NJ (apparently 201-278, and Aberdeen was in 301);
Providence, RI (401-278, and Aberdeen was in 301;

I am not yet aware of calls coming to 410-278 intended for area 401)
North East, MD (287 prefix, same area code as Aberdeen) Baltimore, MD
(728 prefix, same area code as Aberdeen) Beverly Hills, CA (310-278,
during the 301/410 permissive dialing; therefore, I had to say this
was 301 or 410)

And last but not least were calls to a gynecology clinic elsewhere on
the Aberdeen 278 prefix; this turned out to be a case of two digits
transposed.

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

From: [e-mail] (Larry Jones)
Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers
Date: 30 Apr 93 21:32:24 GMT


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

> Which leads me to ask a related if somewhat trivial question. What are
> telephone keypads laid out in a different orientation that calculators
> or even the numeric keypads on PC's or terminals (the 123 row is at
> the top while it's at the bottom for calculators and keypads). I find
> this quite annoying at times. Weren't at least calculators and/or
> terminals with keypads around before the advent of pushbutton
> telephones?

They were around, but only a miniscule fraction of the telephone-using
population had ever used one.  Most calculators went by the name
"adding machine" and were used by accountants.  Electric adding
machines where most common, electronic adding machines were just
starting to become available.  Terminals were rare -- most computer
users were still using punched cards and magnetic tape.  Bell Labs did
an extensive time and motion study of various button arrangements with
random telephone users and picked the current arrangement as having
the best combination of speed and accuracy.


Larry Jones, SDRC, 2000 Eastman Dr., Milford, OH  45150-2789  513-576-2070
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Simpson)
Subject: Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 09:32:04 GMT


It seems incredibly rude to me to say "Who is this?" when calling
someone.  If I'm not sure the person who answered is the one I wanted,
I ask to speak to So-and-So. When I answer and hear "Who is this?"
from the other end, I almost never give my name; partly because I
think the caller is a rude jerk, and partly for the reasons mentioned
by others of being reluctant to give their name to someone unknown to
them.

If I'm feeling fairly polite, my normal response to "Who is this?" is
"Who did you want?" If I'm feeling a little less polite, my response
is "Who wants to know?" Occasionally I respond, with first name only,
"This is Matt? Who are you?"  Sometimes I just say "Wrong number" and
hang up ... nobody I want to talk to says "Who is this?"

The answering machine question is a little tougher. My outgoing
message has no identifying information (name or phone number) .. I
figure my friends know who I am. Of course, that doesn't help people
who dial my number by mistake, and don't know me, and aren't sure if
I'm who they want. I do occasionally get messages for someone else.

I know a lot of people's OGMs have their number, but not their name.
This is helpful to people who know what number they wanted, but must
mis-dialed it, as long as they're alert enough to catch the number
when they hear it. It still doesn't help those who correctly dialed
the wrong number.

An OGM with first name only would be a good solution for those who
want to help the caller determine if s/he has the right number, but
not give their full name to every random caller.

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

From: theriaul@mmddvan (Roger Theriault)
Subject: Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 19:34:31 GMT


DWT ([e-mail]) wrote:

> People at home aren't glad to receive just any phone call from anyone
> at all.  "Hello?" is intoned as a question because it is: on a call to
> a residence it's up to the caller to identify himself or herself be-
> fore the callee does.  I lost count of how many times in my childhood

And just the other day I received at home, Yet Another Stupid Wrong
Number.  I prefer to know who is calling first, before becoming more
sociable, and thus always answer just "Hello?". Most people, even
those calling regarding my ski club, pick up on the intonation and
either say "Hi this is so-and-so how's it going?", or if they don't
recognize my voice, "Is this so-and-so?" or "Is this the Pacific Ski
Club?"

My answering machine just says "This is Roger and Carmen's phone ...
if you're calling the Pacific Ski Club, the 24-hour info line is
877-1422. Please leave a message and we'll get back to you!"  If they
dialed incorrectly they have no idea what my last name is and thus
can't figure out where I live, and they can't call again unless they
have redial or a display phone.

So this clown, sounding like he was calling from rather far away,
responds to my "Hello?" query with one of his own ... the rather
annoying conversation went something like this ...

(me)    "Hello?"
(him)    three second pause, then "Hello?"
(me)    "Hello!?"
(him)    three second pause, then "Yes, hello?"
(me)    [loudly] "Who is calling?"
(him)    "Hello?"
(me)    "Who is this!"
(him)    "Is this gdsgjag [indecipherable]?"
(me)    "I'm sorry ... who are you calling for?"
(him)    "Is Sam there? It's [indecipherable mumble]"
(me)     "Sorry, you must have the wrong number..."
(him)    (click)

This happens a lot, and I bet it happens to everyone ... but I refuse
to tell some stranger anything just because they managed to get me to
answer my phone!

(Another variation goes ... "Is Mary there?" "No, I'm sorry, there is
no 'Mary' here..." "Are you sure?")  8-|



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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Debit Calling Cards
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access System: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 04:44:30 GMT


Much has been written lately about telephone debit cards (or value
stored cards) and how they are a good way to avoid telephone credit
card fraud, etc. I have always had quite strong opinions about these
cards and wonder if Digest readers would like to comment.

In New Zealand, the majority of pay phones are now card phones where
you can ONLY use a stored value card or a calling card.(As was noted
by a Telecom NZ staffer in a recent article, calling card calls are
always charged at peak time rates on top of the calling card
surcharge). Coins are just not an option. So one is forced to carry
around a debit card in case one needs to make a call from a pay phone.
(As an aside, I remember a couple of years ago some friends from the
US came to visit me when I lived in NZ and decided to surprise me.
They tried to call me and found the phones only took these cards and
had no idea where to buy them from -- it was late at night. How
convenient!).

My question is, I am sure Telecom NZ wants you to use these phones and
wants you to carry the cards. So given that cards can be bought at
stationery stores, convenience stores etc. there must be a large
number of these cards in circulation. This must be wonderful for
Telecom since it gives them effectively a free float of the value of
money in the cards.  It's rather like Karl Malden exhorting you to
keep your Amex traveller's cheques in the drawer for the next trip
rather than cashing them in. Amex love having the float available for
investment, interest etc. I heard Amex's float was around the $2B
mark. I am quite sure Telecom's float would not be that high but it
would be useful.

An an aside, I am sure this situation exists everywhere stored value
cards are used. The UK comes to mind since this is where I first
encountered them many years ago. In fact the phones in NZ look very
similar to the UK ones -- perhaps they were manufactured there.


Laurence Chiu   Walnut Creek, CA

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Powers)
Subject: Re: Anonymous Use of Talk Tickets
Organization: Netsys Inc.
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 05:51:09 GMT


PAT (Revered Moderator):

I am gratified to see such support for anonymous telecom, and I'm not
kidding. I am a registered Libertarian and *really* believe such
options should be available to anyone.

My puzzlement is that such things seem a bit out of character for my
mental picture of someone who who seems to yearn for the Old Days of a
monolithic Ma Bell. Am I drawing bad conclusions from tenuous data, or
are you getting more -- er, cough, "LIBsomething"?

Normally, I would avoid political matters in a group like this, but I
respectfully submit that Moderators have considerable influence, and
should acknowledge whatever viewpoints they can.

In any case, keep up the good work. Yours is the only group I ALWAYS read.


Jack Powers


[Moderator's Note: I have some 'small /l/' libertarian leanings for
the most part. I do not belong to the Libertarian Party; there are
several things about the organized Libertarian movement which I
dislike and/or find unrealistic.  I still support Ma Bell in large
part. Just because you are big does not make you of necessity evil or
bad. The Talk Tickets being demonstrated here at the moment are in
fact the re-sale of AT&T via US Fibercom, AT&T's largest aggregator/
reseller to the best of my knowledge. I've always tried to cover as
many points of view here as I can, but the constant backlog of stuff
waiting gets hard to handle sometimes. Thanks for your note.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #295
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16424;
          3 May 93 1:04 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09523
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 May 1993 22:46:37 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06118
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 May 1993 22:46:01 -0500
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 22:46:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #296

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 May 93 22:46:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 296

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Steve Forrette)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (John R. Levine)
    Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network) (Justin Leavens)
    Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on "Hello") (Mark Petersen)
    Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on "Hello") (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on "Hello") (Gordon Hlavenka)
    Re: Cordless Always Transmitting? (John Gilbert)
    Re: Cordless Always Transmitting? (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service (Carl Moore)
    Re: Need: Coupler With Answer Supervision (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Anonymous Use of Talk Tickets (Bram Smits)
    Re: E-Mail/Modem Connections Between USA and Mexico (Tarl Neustaedter)
    Re: Ignorance, Clipper and the FBI (Tom Gray)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)
Date: 2 May 1993 08:38:05 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) writes:

>> I'd love to know what bank you go to; both Fleet Bank NA here in
>> Rochester New York, and Fleet Bank in Connecticut as well as Winsted
>> Savings Bank also in Connecticut -- all of whom I have recently done
>> business with -- take three to five banking days to make deposited
>> funds available.

> I believe most (US) banks have set their default "hold" period on
> deposits to the maximum allowed by Federal law; the first $100 is
> immediate; the next $5000 within 5 business days, and the rest within
> 10 business days.

I've heard a lot of people make similar complaints about this problem.
Consumer pressure was one of the main reasons for the new laws
concerning "hold" times that went into effect a few years ago.  I've
always wondered what kind of banks these people are dealing with.
Every bank I've dealt with has always given me same-day availability
on just about any check I deposit.  I haven't had to request this
service specifically, or had a special type of account -- that's just
the way these banks did business.  I know that before the recent
changes, many credit unions would automatically place holds on all
check deposits, sometimes up to 14 days.  Not only did you not get to
take out the money, but you didn't earn interest until the hold was
over.  That's one of the ways that the credit unions were able to
quote you a higher interest rate on deposit accounts -- they got to
loan out your money during the hold period and not pay you for it.  I
don't think that it is hard to find a bank with a reasonable hold
policy - just go to a major bank in your region, and I'm sure you'll
be fine.  I stay away from savings banks and credit unions, and don't
have these problems.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Subject: Banks and funds Availability
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 2 May 93 12:56:11 EDT (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> I believe most (US) banks have set their default "hold" period on
> deposits to the maximum allowed by Federal law; the first $100 is
> immediate; the next $5000 within 5 business days, and the rest within
> 10 business days.

It depends where you are.  My bank, Bank of Boston which is a largish
international commercial bank, gives you all of your money overnight
except for a small and reasonable set of exceptions such as accounts
with a history of bouncy deposits.  I don't know of any bank in this
area that holds funds for more than three days.  California banking is
dominated by a few large banks so banking is much less competitive
than here and banks there can get away with higher prices and worse
service.  Some small banks here still offer no-minimum no-charge
checking, something that's disappeared most places.

But back to Telecom.  As others have noted, banks are minimizing float
wherever they can.  My bank sent me a nearly indecipherable
"modification to the deposit agreement" a few months ago, the gist of
which was that they can now debit my account as soon as they get
electronic advice that a check of mine was paid by some other bank,
even though the physical check may not arrive for a few days.  One
local bank offers as an option to send you a statement with pictures
of your checks on it rather than the actual checks, sort of like an
American Express statement.  They charge an extra $1/month for the
privilege of not getting your actual checks, so I doubt it's become
very popular.

If people accept pictures of checks (or, as is standard in some
countries, just the line items on the statement) the stage after that
is "check retention", in which the bank where the check was cashed
physically retains the check and sends only an electronic confirmation
to the payor's bank.  This is quite popular among large businesses,
because banks are willing to give them a large break on check fees if
they waive getting the physical checks, and a business that writes
10,000 checks per month would rather get their statement in electronic
form anyway.

I don't know whether the extra data for check retention is passed over
the same wires as other checking info (like your automatic Checkfree
check-like-things are) or whether banks have to make their own
networking arrangements.  The latter isn't at all unlikely -- large
banks already quite commonly have their own private arrangements to
exchange cancelled checks, so similar arrangments to exchange retained
check data would be an obvious follow-on.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Sun, 02 May 1993 09:17:20 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: SCAN (Shared Check Authorization Network)


In Volume 13, Issue 293, Message 11 of 13, Arthur Rubin writes:

> I believe most (US) banks have set their default "hold" period on
> deposits to the maximum allowed by Federal law; the first $100 is
> immediate; the next $5000 within 5 business days, and the rest within
> 10 business days....Telecom question: why not a data link?  Hmmmmm.

I would tend to believe (though I have no educational fact to base
this on) that this current practice would allow banks a little float
with your money while they wait their time to give it to you. Of
course, I don't trust banks to begin with.

I had a $70 check written to me and deposited in the same branch as it
had been written from, saw the money credited to my account, and ten
business days later saw the check bounce. On the other hand, I've
never really noticed any hold on my deposits in the last few years (as
in, I deposit one day, funds available the next). Go figure.


Justin Leavens : Microcomputer Specialist
University of Southern California
[e-mail]    My opinion is that my opinions are my opinions

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Petersen)
Subject: Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")
Date: 2 May 93 16:18:20 GMT
Organization: Alpha Science Computer Networks, Denver, Co.


Let's not forget that some telemarketing machines are programmed to
recognize the word "Hello."

I answer the business line with the business name.  When it's a
machine on the other end, I usually hear nothing.  I'll then repeat
the company name, and still hear nothing.  I'll say "Hello?" -- then,
<click><whirr><tape hiss> and the recording starts.

At which point I hang up quickly.  Grr.


     Mark C. Petersen       [e-mail]
  Loch Ness Productions       CompuServe: 76702,1062

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sun, 02 May 1993 05:58:37 GMT


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

> People show much more creativity in their answering machine messages
> than in their "answering phrase" for answering the phone live.
> However, I really don't like excessively cute answering machine
> messages, particularly when I'm calling long distance. A functional
> answering machine message is just fine for me: "Hello. This is Nigel
> David Allen. Please leave a message at the tone."

    Some of the creativity in answering machine out-going messages
is pretty good!  A local radio station ran an "answering machine
olympics" where people sent in their phone numbers.  The station then
called the machines, recorded the messages, aired a bunch of them,
then chose who had the most creative message.  Last year, my former
wife won with a song she wrote.  She now has a new answering machine!

    I understand that some machines let callers who are familiar
with your out-going message hit a DTMF key to skip it and leave their
message immediately.  Nice feature.


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] (gordon hlavenka)
Subject: Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 02:46:53 GMT


> People show much more creativity in their answering machine messages
> than in their "answering phrase" for answering the phone live.

At the office where I work we have a phone used primarily for outbound
calls; the number is only given to friends etc.  It happens that the
number is xxx-0911, the phone is bright red, and my first name is
Gordon.  So I always answer it "Batphone, Comissioner Gordon
speaking."  Occasionally it's a telemarketer or wrong number ...

My father often answers his phone as "Archie da Manager" from Duffy's
Tavern.  I won't repeat the spiel here -- if you don't know it it
wouldn't be funny to you anyway.


Gordon S. Hlavenka           [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Cordless Always Transmitting?
Organization: Motorola, LMPS
Date: Sun, 02 May 1993 18:33:58 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (steve l
edwards) writes:

> I have a Cobra cordless telephone. I noticed there is no switch hook.
> Does this imply that the base unit is always transmitting even if the
> cordless unit is sitting unused in the cradle?

It could use a magnet and a reed relay or a hall effect sensor.


John Gilbert    KA4JMC   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Cordless Always Transmitting?
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 01:25:04 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (steve l edwards)
writes:

> I have a Cobra cordless telephone. I noticed there is no switch hook.
> Does this imply that the base unit is always transmitting even if the
> cordless unit is sitting unused in the cradle?

Many telephones that appear to lack a switch hook actually have one in
the form of a magnet and reed switch.  The handset has the magnet and
the cradle has a reed switch that detects it.

With such handsets it is wise to keep clear of floppy disks, charge
card magstripes, etc.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza    New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 02 May 93 10:45:50 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service


At least one of you mentioned 602-638 prefix.  I have it as GRAND
CANYON, which is a postal name (zip code 86023, with post office in
Coconino County, same county as Flagstaff).

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Need: Coupler With Answer Supervision
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sun, 02 May 1993 20:28:09 GMT


>> For an upcoming demo, I need to find a coupling device to which I can
>> feed audio that will answer when the line "rings", supply the audio
>> over the line, the hang up when the far end does.  Who might make such
>> a device?

    A couple companies come to mind.  Try Henry Engineering, phone
818 355 3656 and Telos Systems at 216 241 7225.


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]
Subject: Re: Anonymous Use of Talk Tickets
Date: Sun, 02 May 19:03:00 93 GMT
Organization: Fangorn Systems


TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]> writes:

> Some people have written to say the Talk Ticket program still leaves a
> limited audit trail -- I think of dubious value legally -- since a
    ---cut--->
> authorized to add another method of ticket delivery: email via an
> anonymous email service.

Sounds nice ... maybe faster, too? Hmm, if I ever get to the US I
might decide to buy a few tickets.

Do you also support PGP encryption, for security (that not someone en
route reads the number and start using it ...)?


Bram 'mouser' Smits
All views expressed herein are my own, etc, etc.  [e-mail]
All disclaimers apply.   Fangorn Systems    Heerlen, The Netherlands


[Moderator's Note: I don't really think I need to get into encryption
of ticket numbers. That is a bit much for a two dollar ticket, or even
a couple dozen two dollar tickets.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tarl Neustaedter)
Subject: Re: E-Mail/Modem Connections Between USA and Mexico
Date: 2 May 1993 03:44:18 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (E.
Drew Einhorn) writes:

> At work I need to establish an E-Mail connection between our
> Albuquerque, NM office and our office in Mexico City.
> [...] Will a modem designed for domestic USA use work on a Mexican
> phone line?  Are there other technical issues?

My mother lives in Mexico City and has periodically used a standard
Apple modem to dial into various computer services in the U.S.  It
works, but some random features won't -- modems which recognize
ringing and busy will not understand Telefonos de Mexico signals. This
means that you can establish a connection but won't have the normal
hints when things fail.

The other thing you'll have to deal with is the terrible phone
service.  When Telefonos was privatized, they took the entire repair
staff and set them to work installing new phones. It's the same
incompetent staff as before, same anti-work union, the same
management, and the same creaky obsolete phone switches. If your phone
lines go bust, they will stay that way for a long time. I also suspect
that you won't be able to use anything better than 1200 baud.

You might consider trying to get on the internet. I know that both the
national university (UNAM) and the Technologico de Monterrey (ITESM)
are reachable via email, so presumably it should be possible to get a
connect (with suitable application of funds).

You'll also do better if you have your counterparts in mexico
investigate - anyone involved in telecom in mexico is likely to have
dealt with the specific case of U.S.-Mexico connections.


Tarl Neustaedter              [e-mail]
SS7 Networks,  Stratus Computer,   Marlboro, Mass.
Disclaimer: My employer is not responsible for my opinions.

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Gray)
Subject: Re: Ignorance, Clipper and the FBI
Date: Sun, 02 May 1993 15:59:17 -0400
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Greg
Andrews) writes:

> [e-mail] (Tom Gray) writes:

>> The service provider will make the encrypted transmission avaiable to
>> the FBI black box. In short the service provider must have the
>> capability of isolating an individual's transmissions from all others.

>> This is just the FBI Digital Network proposal in another form.  Aside
>> from the fact that this proposal shows a complete ignorance of the
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> functioning of even today's network, it will severely hamper (even
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> cripple) current efforts to create a broadband network. The
>> possibility of the US functioning in the BISDN multimedia market will
>> become exceedingly remote.

> Perhaps I'm not understanding you correctly, but if the service
> provider doesn't have the ability to isolate my transmissions from all
> the others that pass through their equipment, how are my transmissions
>able to reach their intended destination?

One of the key parts of today's and tomorrow's network will be the
private network. A company will lease a portion of bandwidth from one
of many (or several of them) service providers and then multiplex its
own transmissions onto this bandwidth. The service provider is only
responsible for providing a clear path on this link, it will have no
knowledge of the switching, multiplexing, addressing, compressing,
encrypting, etc which the client will use on it.

Now if the telco cannot isolate criminal transmissions since they are
hidden in the normal stream, who is going to do it? Suppose a crooked
bank is laundering money for some drug dealers. They will just
communicate over their private network with their own addressing and
multiplexing. Now is the FBI and Dorothy Denning going to ask this
bank to send all criminal transmissions off to some black box in
Washington?

Clipper is unworkable to tap organized criminality. However Clipper as
a means of enforcing the FBI Digital Network Proposal is ingenious.
The3 FBI has trouble tapping private networks. The FBI sees that BISDN
networks will become even more diffcult (if not impossible) to tap.
The solution is simple. Make such networks uneconomic by imposing
impossible regulations.

Keep the North American network firmly entrenched in the 1970's. The
Europeans and the Japanese will gladly develop the next generation
network for us.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #296
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22225;
          3 May 93 3:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28276
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 3 May 1993 01:19:39 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27120
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 3 May 1993 01:19:00 -0500
Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 01:19:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #298

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 3 May 93 01:19:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 298

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    The Bearable Heaviness of Data - USA NPA/NXX List (Paul Robinson)
    FAIL Telecom of Bay Springs, MS (Lubos Elias)
    Modem Certification Process - Europe (John Murray)
    Can an Unlisted Number in US be Found? (Yoav Weiss)
    Wanted: Hints and Tips on Setting up a Faxmodem (Ramon F. Herrera)
    What You're Really Buying is Downtime (Steve Forrette)
    Unit to Disconnect Answering Machine When I Pick up Phone (Povl Pedersen)
    Is Residential ISDN Pricing as Expensive Internationally? (Dan Sahlin)
    Caller ID Information to a PC (Wilf Rosenbaum)
    DTMF Detection (Benjamin Chigier)
    Telecommunications Cost Estimate Needed (Dr. Laurence Leff)
    Voice Phone Wanted (Bryan Hains)
    IXC Echo Cancellers (Bill Garfield)
    Manual Wanted For Fax Switch (Tad Cook)
    Keypad Layouts (Andrew Cowie)
    Cordless and Always Transmitting (Les Reeves)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross post the
Digest articles to other Usenet or alt newsgroups! Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 15:44:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Bearable Heaviness of Data - USA NPA/NXX List
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


There was a play that I've never seen called "The Unbearable Lightness
of Being", and it provides an interesting pun to an issue that comes
up every so often.

Every so often someone wants to get a copy or find a copy of the
complete list of all Area Code and Prefix combinations in the U.S.
(Known as NPA/NXX in the trade.) Moderator Pat Townson points out this
would be a heavy amount of data.  Since data has no physical existence
other than as changes of electrical state on magnetic media, the above
title provides an odd pun.

Pat Townson is correct of course, because I have this information from
an older release.  At least two companies have released the
cross-reference of Zip Code* to NPA/NXX data on diskette.  I have an
older release which uses older data.  It takes up slightly under 700K
in compressed packed decimal and would probably use about one meg if
uncompressed.

A couple of years ago I got the Postal Service to send me the USA Zip
Code to city cross reference tape, which contains some 70,000 Zip
Codes.  This file, in DBASE III* format, is about five meg.  Therefore
a complete list of city and state to NPA/NXX would use probably six
meg.  If in a compressed form such as my tokenized compression form
for ZIP archives, might use three meg, but could be looked up
randomly.  If kept in a printable text file, it would probably be
about 65,000 lines of text, or a listing of about 1100 pages, a stack
of computer paper two feet thick, or 1/4 mile long.

Plus the NPA/NXX correlations I have are old -- about three years old.
If someone can send me the new data or the information from the
previous release, I could create one.  If someone isn't that
interested in it being all that current, I could create one from the
data I have, but it would be about three years old.


* "Zip Code" is a Registered Trademark of the U.S. Postal Service
   DBASE III is a trademark of Borland International


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: FAIL Telecom, Bay Springs, Mississippi
Date: 2 May 93 11:06:23 +0100
Organization: Institute of Automation and Communication


Hi,

I would be glad to have anybody's opinion on FAIL Telecom, Bay
Springs, Mississippi. They want to invest in East Europe and provide
telecom systems covering switching systems, CATV, data comm, paging,
cellular systems ... for small cities up to 100,000 inhabitants.


Thanks for any information,

Lubos Elias    Inst. of Automation and Communication
Slovak Republic  [e-mail]
(or [e-mail] if your system is not configured for new top level
domain .sk)

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

From: [e-mail] (John Murray)
Subject: Modem Certification Process - Europe
Date: 2 May 1993 23:36:29 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor


I've been asked by a colleague who doesn't have Usenet access to post
this request.  Replies to me are okay; I'll be happy to pass them
along.

Does anybody know of companies or organizations which handle the PTT
certification procedures for modems in Europe? Germany and France are
of particular interest, as well as the United Kingdom, Sweden, and
Italy. I don't think there's an EC-wide certification process, but if
one does exist, then any contacts who deals with that would also be
much appreciated.

Apologies if this sort of information is common knowledge in these
newsgroups; I'm not on my home turf in this arena!


Regards,

John Murray

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

From: [e-mail] (Yoav Weiss (Mack))
Subject: Can an Unlisted Number in US be Found?
Organization: DataServe Information Services LTD.
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 23:58:57 GMT


Hi,

When I order an UNLISTED NUMBER in the US, can it possible be found?
(Legally/illegally) ... if so, how do I prevent it?  How can anyone
find it?


Yoav Weiss (MACK), Israel   [e-mail] (mail me at this address)


[Moderator's Note: Your non-pub/unlisted number is secure with the
local telco and other telephone companies/carriers which may obtain it
for billing purposes only. Exceptions exist if a telco employee is
corrupt or dishonest; but this is not too common a method of getting
such a number. If someone calls the operator or business office and
claims that an emergency exists requiring contact with the non-pub,
heretofore presumably unknown number, then the caller will generally
speak with a supervisory or management person at telco who has the
authority to obtain these numbers on a 'need to know' basis. That
person will listen to the caller's description of the emergency,
remind them that under the law in many places, persons who make
false claims about emergencies in an effort to influence (or deny)
the use of the telephone by another is a misdemeanor crime.

The telco person will call the non-pub number, tell the subscriber the
name and phone number of the caller, and ask if they wish to have
their number relayed in turn to the inquirer or not. In either case,
they will call back to either advise the inquirer of the subscriber's
number *or* advise them that 'the party you were attempting to reach
has been told about your attempts to reach them ...'. Police, fire and
emergency response units of the various governments have a contact
within telco to deal with as needed. It is to no avail to call
directory assistance and claim to be a police officer relaying news of
a car accident, etc ... if you were, and there had been, your
department would have a procedure in place with telco which does not
involve calling the Directory Assistance operator or supervisor.

What is more likely the reason people learn the non-pub numbers of
others is they check a 'criss cross' book, a listing by street address
of telephone subscribers **compiled by private firms** who use not
only the phone book listings, but information from a variety of other
*public records*. Did you list your phone number on the form you filled
in for a (a) driver's license; (b) library card; (c) business license;
or on privately owned (but frequently sold) documents such as a
(a) application for credit; (b) a check written in a store to induce
the merchant to accept it; (c) a credit card telephone order for mer-
chandise, etc?  All those are fair game. You cannot prevent the spread
of public information about yourself, nor really, any private infor-
mation you choose to give out (such as in the check cashing example,
or the credit card application example). All you can do is list the
phone under the name of a 'roomate'; calls asking about this person
will at least give you an advance tip off that someone has been snooping
around in telco records (if that is the only place you've invoked your
roomate alias).  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ramon F Herrera)
Subject: Wanted: Hints and Tips on Setting up a Faxmodem
Date: 2 May 1993 02:05:27 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology


I have been thinking about setting up a fax modem to be used from a
Unix host.  More specifically:

 - the modem is a Telebit WorldBlazer
 - the computers is an IBM RS/6000
 - there is a Xylogics Annex involved (via rtelnet and a faked /dev/tty)
 - the fax software would be GNU's which requires GhostScript

Now the questions, of course:

 Is there anyone out there that can share tips and hints on setting
 up GhosScript on an AIX machine?  How hard is it?

 Ditto for GNU fax 3.2.

 How compatible are the different kinds of faxmodems?

 How compatible are fax machines, for that matter?  Will I be
 able to fax to _any_ fax machine?  Will they be able to fax to me?

 Any recommendations on extra software to be used for things
 such as converting the raw images to TIFF, PS, GIF?

 Hey, as long as I am getting ambitious, is there any PD OCR software
 out there?


Thanks for your assistance,

Ramon Herrera

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

Date: Sun, 2 May 93 02:39:21 -0700
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: What You're Really Buying is Downtime


Last week, I called in to my US West Cellular voicemail account to
check for messages.  It was around 11:30pm on Friday night.  I
repeatedly got a recording telling me that "All circuits are busy."  I
called customer service and was told that the voicemail system would
be down until 6am the next morning for maintenance.  I told them what
I thought of a telecom service being down for seven hours for
maintenance.  They said that they had sent out a broadcast message
that day telling everyone of the upcoming outage.  I responded that
nobody had every told me that checking for messages daily was a
prerequisite for getting reliable service.

It turns out that it was down until almost 6pm the next day, meaning a
full day of no voicemail service.  Fortunately, I don't use this
mailbox very much, but this is yet another example on my long list of
experiences which show that the cellular carriers in general don't
know how to provide reliable service, and don't understand the
commitment to reliability and availability that the telcos in the US
have traditionally provided.  The RBOC side of US West is able to cut
a #5 crossbar over to a 5ESS with less than 30 seconds of downtime,
but the cellular side can't "upgrade" a voicemail system without
losing a full day of service.  And the worst part of it is they don't
seem to understand why this is not acceptable.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Ameritech works on their voicemail once every
couple months or so. They always send out two or three broadcast
messages during the week before, and they do their work during the
hours of 2 AM through 8 AM Sunday morning, and if more time is needed,
then the same hours on Monday morning.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Povl H. Pedersen)
Subject: Unit to Disconnect Answering Machine When I Pick up Phone
Organization: UNI-C, Danish Computing Centre for Research and Education
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 14:50:17 GMT


My answering machine does not hang-up when I pick up the phone and the
answering machine has started playing its message. Can I build a unit
that will do this for me ? My answering machine is in parallel to my
phone, both connected to the same wall outlet.


Povl H. Pedersen   -   Macintosh specialist. Knows some DOS and UNIX too.
[e-mail]    -   [e-mail]
--- Finger me at [e-mail] for PGP Public Key ---


[Moderator's Note: Check out the file on this in the Telecom Archives. PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Sahlin)
Subject: Is Residential ISDN Pricing as Expensive Internationally?
Organization: SICS, Swedish Inst. of Computer Science
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 13:59:19 GMT


Swedish Televerket has just announced a residential ISDN service.  The
basic service "2B+D" has an installation fee of USD 775 and a quarter-
ly fee of USD 185.

I believe these prices are far to high to attract individuals.

Is residential ISDN pricing as expensive internationally?

Please send me information how much residential ISDN costs where you
live.  I will later summarize the information I receive.

Next week I will meet people at the ISDN department of Televerket and
it would be very nice to confront them with some hard facts.


Dan Sahlin, SICS, Sweden   email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wilf Rosenbaum)
Subject: Caller ID Information to a PC
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 16:17:40 GMT


Hi there,

I'm looking for a way to translate incoming caller ID information into
a form that can be read by a PC. What I would like to set up is a
situation like the following:

When the phone rings, the phone number of the caller is forwarded to
the PC, where it is checked against a list of previous callers. If
found, some information about the caller would be displayed on the
screen, otherwise some "Register New Caller" screen would be
displayed. The phone would be answered by a person in either event.

I believe the ZyLex and Supra modems with caller ID may be useful
here, but seem like overkill since there is no need for data
communications or fax; I just need to get the incoming phone number
into the computer with no operator intervention.  Some kind of
programmer interface for the device would be useful as well.

Any information or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for
reading this far.


Wilf Rosenbaum   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin Chigier)
Subject: DTMF Detection
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 16:08:13 GMT
Organization: ISS


I am looking for something and was wondering if anyone has seen this
or something like it?

I would like to buy a box which has on one side a telephone line jack,
and on the other side a line level input/output and something like a
rs232 connection. Through the rs232 connection I would like to be able
to do things like DTMF dialing and detection as well as on/off hook.

Any info or pointers to info would be greatly appreciated.


Thanks,

Ben

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

Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 01:30:38 -0500
From: Dr. Laurence Leff <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecommunications Cost Estimate Needed


I am in need of the following information, or better yet, a reference
for same:

An upper bound estimate of the cost per mile per gigabit for
information transmission over high-speed communication lines (T1, D1,
etc.)

This needs to only be approximate.  Certainly, the exact costs would
vary depending upon precisely where one might go.

I am using this for a journal/conference paper I am writing on the
cost benefits and policy implication of large-scale networks for
financial transactions.  A generous and conservative upper bound
estimate of this figure is all I need for my calculations.

I figured out how much bytes transmission I need, and the average
miles each byte travels.  I need to multiply this by a cost of
transmitting one byte for one mile to get a total transmission cost.

I got a rough-guess figure from MCI.  I want a more scholarly
reference, that (MCI, personal communication). The telecommunication
costs are much less than other costs (basically terminal equipment).
Thus, I can afford to have a sloppy estimate, as long as I can
convince my readers that if I am off, the costs are less than I am
claiming.

Thank you for your help in this minor matter.


Dr. Laurence Leff  Western Illinois University, Macomb IL 61455 [phone]
Stipes 447 Assistant Prof. of Computer Science ||Pager: 837-5909 FAX: [phone]
Moderator:  Symbolic Math List, Technical Reports List||[e-mail]
alt.binaries.pictures.fine-art hierarchy        ||BITNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 13:43 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Voice Phone Wanted


Greetings:

Has anyone seen these telephones that you speak the (pre recorded)
name of the individual who you want to call and the phone dials the
number for you?  You have to record the name and nnumber beforehand
but the phone has some voice recognition circuitry to detect what you
speak and dials it.  Where might I pick one of these up?  Thanks for
the tips!


Bryan Hains    [e-mail]

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

Subject: IXC Echo Cancellers
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Sun, 2 May 93 17:10:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


I recall there being a previous discussion in one of the newsgroups
relating to high speed modem use and problems with echo cancellation
circuitry on some of the various long distance carriers.  Would anyone
care to give me a refresher on the topic?  Was there any one specific
carrier where the problem persisted?  How was the matter dealt with?
Is the carrier at fault?  Is there a good workaround besides
prepending 10xxx to your dialing string to bypass the problem?  What
are the symptoms of dysfunctional echo cancellers? Details appreciated

Thanks in advance.


Bill Garfield <[e-mail]>
Ye Olde Bailey BBS   713-520-1569 (V.32bis) 713-520-9566 (V.32bis)
  Houston,Texas          yob.sccsi.com       Home of alt.cosuard

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

Subject: Manual Wanted for Fax Switch
Date: Sun, 2 May 93 20:08:41 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)


Does anyone have a manual for a fax line switch made by Technology
Concepts?  It is model number FLM-103.  A friend needs the manual
because it appears to have some programmable features, and he has no
clue as to how to program it.


[e-mail]  (if it bounces, use [e-mail])
Tad Cook     |  Packet Amateur Radio:  |  Home Phone:
Seattle, WA  |  KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA |  206-527-4089

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

Date: Sun, 2 May 93 17:59 GMT0BST-1
From: Andrew Cowie <[e-mail]>
Subject: Keypad Layouts
Reply-To: [e-mail]


AFAIK, the two alternative layouts (123 at the top for phones, at the
bottom for PCs, etc) are both standard; one is an ISO standard and the
other is CCITT. I am not certain which is which, but I think the PC
layout is ISO.

It's a real pain for my employer, who has a large number of staff
using PC keyboards and phone keypads all the time, and who have to
enter (the same) phone numbers numbers into both. Mis-dials are fairly
rare, but mis-keys on the PC are rife!


Andrew

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 02 May 93 20:31:52 GMT
Subject: Re: Cordless and Always Transmitting?


I am not sure about all Cobra cordless phones, but mine (like most)
transmits only during ring or conversation.  However, in the 1992
Radio Shack catalog, They have what looks like an overweight Trimline
(the ET-385 cordless trim-fone).  This thing requires continuous
carrier, regardless of hook status.  Fortunately they discontinued it
the same year.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #298
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23439;
          3 May 93 4:29 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27718
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 May 1993 23:47:45 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02255
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 May 1993 23:47:02 -0500
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 23:47:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #297

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 May 93 23:47:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 297

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries (Patton Turner)
    Re: Digital Cellular Service (D.J. Molny)
    Re: Telecom Industry Role in Info Super Highways (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: 411 - Automatically Transfers? (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: Help!! Roommate Runs $2100 900 Tab! (Eli Mantel)
    Re: AT&T Area Code Handbook (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: US West Says I Can't Use 301+ on Voice Line (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Cellular Phone Compatibility (Jan Richert)
    Re: Scandal!! Germany: How to Tap Into Another Phone Line (Povl Pedersen)
    Re: Alpha Pager Questions (Steven Warner)
    Re: Canadian Reseller Uses Door-to-Door Salespeople (Jeffrey Groves)
    Touch Dial Layout (John R. Levine)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Joe George)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Mark Brader)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. Reprinting encouraged, but
credit the Digest and the author, and send us a copy. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 2 May 93 10:04 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Author Queries: Phone Mysteries


James Gleick asks:

> 6) Why do telephone poles extend far above the highest wire or crosspiece?

Unless you are looking at some really old plant that used open wire
(bare copperweld conductors), TELEPHONE POLES DON'T HAVE CROSSARMS.
Power poles do have crossarms for power line conductors.  The telco
cables are located at least 40" below the line conductors.  If the
pole has power lines on it, 99.9% of the time it is owned by the power
co, even if it was errected by the telco.

A less smartass response to your question would involve cutting the
gains (mortise for the crossarm) below the top for two reasons: 1) As
the pole ages you don't want the crossarm to be near the end of the
pole which my decay first. and 2) if the crossarm must be replaced,
the linemans safety strap can't be near the top of the pole, lest it
slip off.

FWIW, telco line types some times refer to the power companies as
elcos.

> 7) Where do utilities get telephone poles? Are they from special logs? Are
> there particular specifications?

Big utilities buy them with a contract, smaller companies can buy them
as needed from a line supply dealer, such as Hughes Line Supply in
Orlando.  Here in the SE, they are mostly pine, in other areas they
may be doug fir, or maybe larch or cedar.  The poles are treated with
cresote, CCA, or Penta to preserve them.

Yes there are specs for poles.  While Bellcore has its requirements,
it's ANSI that does the ratings.  Poles are rated by class, with given
6' above butt and top diameters depending on length.  For example, a
class 6 pole 40' in length has a minimum tip dia of 8.6" and a 6'
above butt dia of 9.1 ".  A complete chart is in {The Lineman and
Cableman's Handbook}.

If you want to know more, email me.  I have a degree in Ag
Engineering, have done outside plant contracting, run a sawmill, and
sold timber.  I know a whole lot more about this than ATM. :-)


Patton Turner   KB4GRZ   FAA Telecommunications   [e-mail]
Not the opinions of the FAA.

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

From: [e-mail] (DJ Molny)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Service
Date: Sun, 02 May 1993 15:14:14 GMT
Organization: Evolving Systems, Inc.


[e-mail] (Tom Holodnik) writes:

> I've heard several references made to cellular digital service, where
> data is carried over the cellular spectrum.  Can any one provide me
> with more details?

> - what companies provide this?
> - is it ubiquitous?
> - what market projections are they making?
> - does this include "follow me roaming?"

> Is anything like this approaching standard form?

There is an emerging standard called Cellular Digital Packet Data
(CDPD) which co-exists with the existing Advanced Mobile Phone Service
(AMPS) radio spectrum.  CDPD utilizes gaps in voice conversations to
transmit and receive data.  To help maintain a steady data stream and
to avoid interference with voice traffic, CDPD conversations "hop"
between channels.

The CDPD network will route IP and/or CLNP (OSI connectionless)
packets to and from "subscriber units" (basically CDPD modems) without
regard to the current physical location of the subscriber.  This
entails substantial changes to conventional notions of network routing
and topology, since existing standards assume fixed end points.

Every U.S. cellular carrier is looking at providing CDPD service, and
some have announced firm plans to do so.  If widely deployed, CDPD
availability could be equal to that of cellular voice service, making
it nearly ubiquitous.

A consortium of cellular service providers is driving the CDPD spec
toward completion; it is presently at a 0.9 release level, with the
1.0 release due around the end of May.  The current pace could best be
described as "feverish".

I hope this information answers your questions.  I would be happy to
discuss CDPD in more depth via E-mail.  It's exciting technology, and
it's right around the corner.


DJ Molny   [e-mail]    Evolving Systems, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Telecom Industry Role in Info Super Highways
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sun, 02 May 1993 20:08:34 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Garrett Wollman) writes:

> (I have always strongly believed that the ONLY business either Telcos
> or cable companies should be permitted to engage in is provision of
> the pipe -- no origination of any "services" or "programming".  I
> imagine just this once I'll find a sympathetic audience out in lelecom
> land ... unfortunately, it doesn't look like things will end up this
> way.)

    A while back I read an analogy to having the telco in the
programming business.  Imagine you were in the pizza biz and you had
to rely on Dominoe's for delivery.

    The question as to whether a CATV company is a common carrier
or a publisher is an interesting one... and currently in the courts,
regarding must-carry for broadcast stations.


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] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: 411 - Automatically Transfers?
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 21:13:37 GMT


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

> Ok, how come there's no option to have the phone number be automatically
> dialed when I call 411?

> [Moderator's Note: What you describe is common in many areas, and has
> been available for a couple of years for people who want to spend the
> additional money. Some telcos (apparently yours as well) have not yet
> implemented it; I suspect all will before too long.   PAT]

New York Tel (or maybe NJ Bell) just filed the tariff on this. It's
something like 35 cents to have the call conected after your directory
assistance talkthrough ...

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

From: [e-mail] (Eli Mantel)
Subject: Re: Help!! Roommate Runs $2100 900 Tab!
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 02:15:31 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Jerry Stubbs <stubbs@cs.
ukans.edu> writes:

> A friend of mine's roommate ran up a big 900 bill over a three month
> period and has split. ...
> [Moderator's Note: There is legal recourse, but it is against the
> former roomate, and would involve skip-tracing him from what you say.

Let's make sure there's no confusion here.

These charges are imposed by information providers (IPs), not the
phone company, which is merely acting as a collection agency for the
IPs.  The FCC has explicitly declared that the local phone company
cannot disconnect service for non-payment of such charges.

So as far as your friend and the local phone company go, there can be
no problem, except for the fact that the phone company may continue to
list the 900 charges for a while.  Your friend might want to include a
note with each payment (mailed to some address other than the standard
bill payment address) that none of the payment is to be applied
towards 900 charges and that he disputes the 900 charges.

The phone company's removal of one month of charges is of no real
consequence, since the IPs will simply attempt to collect directly
from your friend, who will begin to get bills from the IPs themselves.
So he will wind up having to disclam any responsibility for these
charges to each IP individiually.


Eli Mantel ([e-mail])

   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80


[Moderator's Note: What you say is true, however my assumption was the
original writer was looking for a final conclusion the matter, not
just getting them taken off his phone bill at some inconvenience to
himself and the loss of his own ability to dial 900/976 in the future
since telco nearly always insists on a block on the line against future
calls in the process of removing charges on the bill presently. Yes,
telco will remove the charges, and the IP will try to collect from him
then eventually place him with an agency. He'll have to argue with the
agency for awhile, finally they will start looking for the other guy,
maybe, or maybe the IP/collection agency will still regard our writer
as the deadbeat and write him off unfairly. The final solution is to
find the bird who made the calls and sue him, but as the writer noted,
he flew the nest and can't be found. If he were locatable, then our
writer could have gone to him, squeezed hard in a couple places,
gotten the money to pay the bill, paid it and reached a fair conclusion
for all concerned. As it stands, it is not fair to our writer to have
to go to the hassle of speaking with telco ==> IP ==> collection
agency several times with dubious end results, nor is it fair to ask
the IP to take the loss.  PAT]

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

From: Terry Kennedy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Area Code Handbook
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Date: 2 May 93 23:09:07 EDT
Organization: St. Peter's College, US


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

> The Area Code Handbook is not free; the price was $2 a couple years
> ago and it may be $3 now (haven't called to inquire in awhile). When
> you call, ask for Select Code 999-600-111.   PAT]

  The current one is Issue 14, 70 pages, US $2.95. The Select Code
remains the same.

  If our Moderator is interested, I could post interesting selections
from the AT&T Customer Information Center's offerings on a monthly (or
so) basis.  These can be both technical (switch information) and
interesting/amusing (1993 Moscow Yellow Pages, Select Code UR001, US
$45.00; 5ESS Hologram Desk Display [a holographic view of the 5ESS
mounted in a lucite frame], Select Code 3859H, US $16.33), all from
AT&T CIC, 800-432-6600 (USA), 800-255-1242 (Canada), or +1 317 322
6557 elsewhere.


Terry Kennedy        Operations Manager, Academic Computing
[e-mail]    St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
[e-mail]    [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Sure, give us some interesting titles and an
occassional review when you can. Be sure and do it up like a big time
commercial message for AT&T -- the kind they show on the idiot box --
so my critics won't be disappointed. The cowboys need something new to
talk about; their messages have gotten altogether too repititious and
boring lately.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: US West Says I Can't Use 301+ on Voice Line
Date: 2 May 1993 09:06:56 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

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

>> He: If we find them running 14.4's on voice lines, we'll disconnect
>>     them. They are lucky to be getting good transfers at that rate anyhow.

>> Me: Really?  Why?

>> He: They interfere with voice communication.  The only baud that will work
>>     over voice lines effectively is 300 and below lines.  2400 is WAY too
>>     fast to be transmitting.  If we get calls about problems and they are
>>     traced to your modem, we'll disconnect you too.

Here's the tack I would take: Inform them that your modem is a Part 68
registered device, and is certified to meet all FCC requirements for
connection to a regular telephone line.  As long as your modem is
functioning properly, then by definition any interference with others'
lines is the telco's problem, as you are using only certified
equipment.  Explain to them that they are going to have a hard time
justifying the disconnection of service to someone using a
properly-functioning Part 68 approved device.

This bunk as to modems over 300, 1200, 2400, etc., needing "leased
data lines" just does not make sense.  Many, if not most, of these
modems are designed to exclusively work over regular analog switched
lines, and will not work over leased facilities.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Richert)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Compatibility
Organization: Krefcom UUCP Server, FRG
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 10:28:41 GMT


[e-mail] (Yuan Jiang) writes:

> I want to buy a cellular phone in the US or Europe, which can be used
> in Hong Kong.  A cellular phone in Hong Kong costs twice as much as in
> the US.  But a regular cellular phone from the US market does not work
> in Hong Kong.  Here are my questions.
> 1) Are there any venders who sell cellular phones that is compatible
> with those in Hong Kong?
> 2) Are cellular phones in Europe compatible with those in Hong Kong?
> Is it just the frequency difference between phones in the US and HK?

The Motorola GSM cellular phones sold in the US do work fine with the
German GSM networks without modifications. There is just one
difference: The US version of the Motorola phones do not have a slot
for your SIM-card. Instead of this there is an ID burned into the
phone. So you have to find a service provider in Germany who accepts
this (we found one).


Greets,

Jan Richert (NIC-ID: JR482)   | Internet:   [e-mail]
Sindelfingen, FRG             | Datex-J:    02151399843-0001
Voice & FAX: [phone]  | IRC-Nick:   jrichert

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

From: [e-mail] (Povl H. Pedersen)
Subject: Re: Scandal!! Germany: How to Tap Into Another Phone Line
Organization: UNI-C, Danish Computing Centre for Research and Education
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 15:03:38 GMT


Many PBXs sold here in Denmark also have a testing mode. You can call
it from the outside, and then enter a code to get a new clean line out
of the PBX. It was quite popular for some time here in Denmark.

One of the better known examples is the PBX at the police HQ in the
3rd largest city in Denmark. Here somebody used it to call 900 numbers
for phone-sex :-)


Povl H. Pedersen   -   Macintosh specialist. Knows some DOS and UNIX too.
[e-mail]    -   [e-mail]
--- Finger me at [e-mail] for PGP Public Key ---

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven Warner)
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Questions
Organization: RTFM / beachSystems, Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 03 May 1993 01:11:40 GMT


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

> In all I get nearly the same battery life from the AAA
> battery in the Advisor that I got from the AA battery in the Bravo I
> had before.

Rumor has it that Motorola is coming out with an updated ADVISOR that
uses an AA battery (longer life) and has more memory.

Their synthesized (programmable) receiver is long over due too.

> I will be posting a summary of what I've learned about Alpha paging
> programs for DOS, Windoze, Macs, and UNIX by Monday (I hope.)

I know if a few too.


Steven Warner   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Canadian Reseller Uses Door-to-Door Salespeople
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 02 May 93 13:43:29 EDT
Organization: Groves BBS


Nigel Allen <[e-mail]> writes:

> Apparently the company is using both students and full-time employees
> for its door-to-door program.

> Has anyone in the U.S. encountered a representative of a long-
> distance company at their front door?

I haven't seen any door-to-door salespersons here in Atlanta, Georgia
selling long distance service, but I do know that the "pyramid scheme"
people sell a lot of long distance service, and they as annoying as
door-to-door salesperson.


Jeffrey Groves    [phone]
[e-mail]
Alternate addresses: [e-mail]   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: One of the complaints I have with the growing
number of small businesses getting into the resale of long distance
and/or prepaid debit cards, etc is the number of pyramid and multi-
level marketing schemes going on in the process. One of the reasons I
resisted (and still resist) talking to the Amerivox people about their
debit phone card is because of how deeply entrenched in MLM the whole
thing is. Amerivox kept talking to me about sales people recruiting
other sales people, sales people 'winning prizes' for recruiting
others, etc. It seemed like MLM was more what they were into rather
than the sale of long distance. Then, you could collect 'points' and
take a vacation somewhere at only 110% of the price others had to pay
for the trip, etc. I selected the programs I did because they are
intended to sell phone service rather than use the telecom industry as
the newest gimmick in an MLM or pyramiding scheme, etc. Nothing is
wrong with telemarketing or door-to-door sales per se; if the sales
people are trained to be polite, unintrusive and helpful -- and to go
away without resistance if requested -- they can be useful. A lot of
Americans buy things when solicited on the phone or at their door, and
many prefer to do business that way.   PAT]

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

Subject: Touch Dial Layout
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 2 May 93 11:29:23 EDT (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> Weren't at least calculators and/or terminals with keypads around before
> the advent of pushbutton telephones?

Not really.  Back in 1960 your typical calculator had hundreds of
moving parts and the keypad was a large array with a full set of
digits per adder column, and cost so much that only bookkeepers and
accountants used them.  And a terminal was a model 15 Teletype.  Or
maybe a Flexowriter, with a moving carriage.

AT&T did the usual exhaustive human factors study and found that the
layout they used was the least error prone of those they tried.  I
have no idea why the modern calculator layout is different.

Touch-tone dialing was introduced at the 1964 World's Fair (a friend
got touch service real early because he happened to be on the same CO
as the fair.)


Regards,

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

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

Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 2 May 1993 19:50:01 EST
Organization: The Waffle Whiffer, Atlanta, GA


In comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] writes:

> [e-mail] (Mark Walsh) writes:

> Along a similar line, the phone I have for my computer has the number
> 894-4510.  The local courthouse is 894-4500, which the recorded voice
> of information gives as eight nine four, four five hundred.  There are
> many people who dial this as 894-45 100.  Hey, what's an extra digit!

When I was a child in Chicago, my home phone number was 339-3930 (very
easy to misdial by itself). However, what made life tragic was that
339-9330 was the 24-hour customer inquiry line for Northern Illinois
Gas Company. We would get calls at all hours of the night from people
complaining about bills, or asking why we'd shut off their gas, etc.
My father, back when he still had a sense of humor, would invariably
answer the phone after about 9pm with "Northern Illinois Gas Company,
'We give you gas', may I help you?"


Joe George ([e-mail], emory!dragon!whiffer!jgeorge)
begin 644 foo K0V]G:71O(&5R9V\@<W!U9"X@2      #include
2!T:&EN:RP@=&AE<F5F;W)E($D@>6%M+F%M` end       <disclaimer.h>

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Sun, 2 May 93 22:56:55 GMT


> Bell Labs did an extensive time and motion study of various button
> arrangements with random telephone users and picked the current
> arrangement as having the best combination of speed and accuracy.

However, a reference given in this forum in the past suggests that the
"calculator keypad" was not one of the arrangements tested.

Note that the study or studies took place in the era when telephone
numbers in North America were still commonly quoted with letters in
them, e.g. BE9-4801.  If the calculator keypad had been adopted, the
alphabet would have appeared in the order

    PRS TUV WXY
    GHI JKL MNO
        ABC DEF

and perhaps this was considered stupid enough to rule out out of hand.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #297
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01773;
          3 May 93 21:39 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17314
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 3 May 1993 18:18:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04617
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 3 May 1993 18:18:00 -0500
Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 18:18:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #299

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 3 May 93 18:18:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 299

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Finnish ATM Pilot Network in Operation (Uusitalo Mika)
    Wanted: Information on Fiber Optics (Gerald Kong)
    Overcharging the Battery (Yilmaz Cengeloglu)
    Modem Certification Process - Europe (Richard Cox)
    Setting Up For Large Incoming Call Volume (Ike Brenner)
    Where is "Whooz Calling"? (Chris Norloff)
    Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service (William H. Glass)
    Re: Baltimore Clipper (Paul Houle)
    Re: Modem to Mexico (Tom Tengdin)
    Re: US West Says I Can't Use 301+ on Voice Line (Brett Person)
    Re: Help!! Roommate Runs $2100 900 Tab! (Alan Boritz)
    Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on "Hello") (Monty Solomon)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. *DO NOT* cross post articles
to/from other Usenet or alt newsgroups or compile mailing lists based
on the net-addresses of people whose articles appear here. Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Uusitalo Mika)
Subject: Finnish ATM Pilot Network in Operation
Date: 3 May 1993 16:17:35 +0300
Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Computing Centre


Europe moves to broadband -

Tampere Finland May 3, 1993. Telecom Finland, Tampere University of
Technology and Finnish University and Research Network, FUNET, today
put the Finnish ATM pilot network into operational use. The network
initially interconnects ATM LANs of the participants in Tampere and
Helsinki metropolitan areas, the
 distance being about 200km.

The pilot network provides a living testbed for ATM service provision
and a development platform for the next generation computer
applications, where the use of visual information is playing the key
role.

The driving force behind the Finnish ATM R&D project is the rapidly
increasing use of voice and video in various computer applications,
such as workstation based video conferencing. These applications not
only require high network bandwidth, but also low and predictable
delays. ATM satisfies the requirements by transferring data extremely
fast in small, fixed length packets, called cells.

In early 1994, the Finnish ATM pilot network will be connected to the
European wide ATM pilot network by 13 European Telecommunications
operators giving the participants an international ATM access.

Telecom Finland announces the first commercial ATM pilot service in
the world -

The wide area portion of the ATM pilot network is provided by Telecom
Finland as part of its simultaneously announced ATM pilot service. In
developing ATM technology Telecom Finland is preparing for the future
needs of its customers in multimedia environments and high speed LAN
interconnection.

"The ATM pilot network gives Telecom Finland an excellent opportunity
to develop ATM into a high-capacity platform for high-quality network
services," said Dr. Juha Heinanen, Telecom Finland's director for
advanced network technologies. "The experience gained from the pilot
network will guarantee that the use of ATM in a production environment
in early 1994 will fully match the needs of our extremely
sophisticated customer base," added Juha Heinanen.

Finnish research tackles multimedia networking and ATM technology -

The Finnish research behind the pilot network is organized by FASTER
program at Tampere University of Technology in co-operation with
several Finnish telecommunication companies, teleoperators and
research centers. The FASTER task force includes telecommunication
researchers, mathematicians and specialists in digital signal
processing, electronics and software engineering.  Tampere University
of Technology implemented ATM campus network and interfaces to wide
area portion as part of the Finnish pilot. "For us the pilot network
is a platform where we can test new ATM related concepts and
applications in practise", said Research Scientist Mr. Mika Uusitalo
from Tampere University of Technology.

The experimental applications of the FASTER program have special focus
on multimedia. They include applications such as realtime audio visual
communication, distributed design and medical imaging. Finland's
fastest supercomputer located at Tampere University of Technology will
also be connected with high-speed ATM link in June.

According to Mika Uusitalo, "We already have advanced knowledge and
practical experience in ATM. The Finnish companies now have a real
competitive edge in developing new ATM related products, applications
and services".

ATM will implement  "Meta-Computer Finland" -

FUNET provides research network services to all Finnish universities.
In participating in the ATM pilot network FUNET wants to gather
invaluable information and experience about ATM, a promising candidate
for the high bandwith and real-time compliment network of the next
generation.

"By means of the ATM network it is possible to implement a "Meta-
Computer Finland", a concept of equal and consistent computational
services all over the country and independent of physical location of
computers", said Mr.  Markus Sadeniemi, director of FUNET.

"High-speed data communication facilities are today vital to the
research community. ATM provides the researchers with much needed
bandwidth and allows them to exploit visualization in computer
applications no matter where data sources are located."

Netcomm provides switches -

According to Netcomm's International Business Manager David Wells,
"This application, demonstrates the potential of ATM in the wide area
as well as the local area environment. In the current Finnish pilot
configuration, all switches have plenty of room for expansion. I
believe this illustrates the flexibility and efficacy of Netcomm's DV2
Switch in a situation where ATM is being implemented to supplement the
service available through existing LAN and WAN technologies".

For further information:

Juha Heinanen,     Director of Advanced Network Technologies, Telecom Finland,
    Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone],
Mika Uusitalo,     Research Scientist, Tampere University of Technology,
    Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]
Markus Sadeniemi, Director, FUNET,
    Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]
David Wells,    International Business Manager Netcomm Limited,
    Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]

Editor's note:

Telecom Finland is Europe's leading public data communications operator. It
pioneered the multiprotocol routing service and was the first European
operator to deliver a Frame Relay service in 1991. Telecom Finland is
a member of the ATM Forum.

Tampere University of Technology has been a pioneer in researching and
using new communication network technologies in Finland. For example
the first European FDDI network was build in the campus area already
in 1989.  The research on telecommunication is mainly focused on
signal processing and software systems applied on digital networks and
multimedia.

FUNET is a non-profit public organization sponsored by the Ministry of
Education and providing domestic and international network services
for it's members consisting of universities and research institutions.
Today FUNET connects over 20,000 computers.

Netcomm is UK manufacturer of high performance X.25/Frame Relay
Switches, Network Management Systems and ATM switches.


Mika Uusitalo, Tampere Univ. of Tech., Computer Center, Finland
mail: [e-mail] voice: 358-31-162429 fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Wanted: Information on Fiber Optics
Date: 3 May 93 23:22:05 ACST
Organization: Economics, University of Adelaide


Hi there fellow netters,

    I am but a poor ol' uni student who is doing a research on
Telecom Australia's use of fibre optics in its telecommunications line
linking the capital cities in Australia. What I would like to know is:

      i) are the telephone lines really fibre optical?
     ii) the disadvantages and advantages of these fibre optics in linking
             the capital cities of Australia;
    iii) Does Telecom use AUS-SAT or any other form of telecommunication
         when someone calls STD?

    I am not very familiar with the set up of Telecom Australia's
system so I do not know a lot (that's why I am a COMMERCE student).
Any further information will be accepted with open arms. If you can
help, please post the info to:

    [e-mail]   or
    [e-mail]

Many thanks in advance,


Gerald Kong   Dep't of COMMERCE   Faculty of ECO & COMM
E- Mail : [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Yilmaz Cengeloglu)
Subject: Overcharging the Battery
Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 12:46:54 GMT
Organization: Martin Marietta, Simulation & Automated Systems


Hi,

Although I do not need a cellular phone, I could not stop myself from
buying a Novatel PTR825 hendheld phone with charger for only $38.
(McDuff Electric Stores)

I do have question that I could not find an answer for in the manual.

1-) Charging the battery takes eight hours. What would happen if the
battery stays more than eight hours on the charger? Would it do any
damage?

2-) It lasts for 11 hours standby, one hour of talking.  What does
standby mean?


Thanks in advance,

Yilmaz


[Moderator's Note: The battery can stay in the charger longer than
eight hours. A day or two at a time does not hurt. I would not just
leave the unit in the charger all the time. Another good thing to
remember is the battery occassionally needs to be run down very low,
to the point the phone won't operate, *then* recharge it. This will
make the rechargeable battery last longer in the long run. "Standby"
refers to the times the phone is turned on, monitoring the airwaves
for a signal, but not actually talking. In other words, according to
your documentation, you can have the phone turned on, waiting for an
incoming call for up to eleven hours. A good rule of thumb is that
five minutes of talking uses about the same power as one hour of
standby, meaning if you spend 30 minutes per day talking on the phone,
you will have about four or five additional hours the battery will
last with the phone monitoring the airwaves for a call intended for
it. If you spend 45 minutes talking, you may have an additional hour
or two of standby time. Spend five minutes per day talking, you have
about 9-10 hours of standby time remaining. If you are not expecting
to receive any calls, then of course the phone can be kept turned off
except when you wish to place a call; this will get you the full hour
of talk time, maybe even a couple minutes longer. Every hour the phone
is 'standing by' waiting for a call, you should assume five minutes
less of talk time before the battery runs down. In my experience with
my phone, I can be gone all day carrying the phone turned on; make or
recieve a couple of calls lasting five or ten minutes each and still
have enough standby battery time to last the rest of the day. When I
return several hours later, I put it in the charger where it stays
overnight or until the next time I go out a few hours later, etc.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 3 May 93 11:51 GMT0BST-1
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Modem Certification Process - Europe
Reply-To: [e-mail]


John Murray [[e-mail]} asked:

>  Does anybody know of companies or organizations which handle
>  the PTT certification procedures for modems in Europe?

In the UK the authority is the British Approvals Board for
Telecommunications phone: [phone]; but they do not physically
do the testing, as that is handled by several independant testing
houses.  One such testing house is: Kingston Telecommunications
Laboratories, in Hull, UK.  Contact: Andrew Ombier at Newlands Science
Park, Inglemire Lane, HULL, North Humberside, HU6 7TQ, United Kingdom
[Phone [phone], Fax [phone]]


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] (Ike Brenner)
Subject: Setting up For Large Incoming Call Volume
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Welch Medical Library
Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 15:32:53 GMT


Could someone point me to information on setting up an operator
assisted environment to handle a large incoming call volume? I'm also
interested in being able to obtain information on the caller. Pointers
to that information would be great. Thanks.


 L8r,

Ike   E-mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 3 May 93 11:23:35 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Where is "Whooz Calling"?


Somebody earlier mentioned an Atlanta company that makes/made a unit
called "Whooz Calling" that hooked a computer with database to your
phone line(s), and only let through numbers in the database.

Anybody have more information on this company?


Thanks,

Chris Norloff  [e-mail]

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

From: William H. Glass <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service
Date: 3 May 93 01:04:59 CDT
Organization: Management Graphics, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Marc
Wiz) writes:

> The last time I did this was in '83 and I was downright shocked that
> there was a payphone at Phantom Ranch which is at the bottom of the
> canyon.

Yep, there's one there.  You can only use a credit card -- no coins.
How would you like the job of collecting the coins and carrying them
back up?  BTW, the phone number is [phone] (according to my
credit card billing).  Give 'em a call and ask for the wise guy who
ordered the Domino's pizza.


Bill Glass

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Houle)
Subject: Re: Baltimore Clipper
Organization: Electrical Eng. Dept. - New Mexico Tech
Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 06:09:15 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(A. PADGETT PETERSON) writes:

> Telecommuting data for the most part does not require KG-class
> encryption but it does need authentication and it must be shielded
> from routine evesdropping or companies will not permit it on a large
> scale, something which the current administration seems to be
> committed to.

> Clipper can provide both, a *good enough* shield for routine commerce
> while also providing effective authentication that can be far more
> secure than just passwords or PINs. *By the fact that two or more
> parties can communicate, they will authenticate each other.* And far
> better than the simple dial-up mechanisms that we use today.

    Yes, but if it is never put in the light of public review,
many of the best people in the cryptography world will never get a
chance to attack it before it is in common circulation.  This seems
especially a problem since the published descriptions of clipper seem
to indicate that it is crippled to have a limited keyspace.

    "Secure" microchips are not secure against people who have the
right resources.  With a small CNC milling machine (don't really need
the CNC, but it is going to take a while to mill off the covering in
layers) and a Scanning Electron or Scanning Probe Microscope, the
design of the chip can be read and the algorithims discovered.  One
would hope that this would be done by a bunch of kids with time on
their hands, and the information published in {Phrack}, but the
problem is that it will be done by others.  Domestic and Foreign
companies that want to get a jump on their rivals; Foreign
intellegence agencies.  Security through Obscurity just doesn't work.

    The problem is that the average American doesn't know this;
most people don't know anything about the modern science of
cryptography or computer security.  They'll think that keeping the
algorithm secret is a great idea, just like many of them don't see
anything wrong with the government having a 'legitimate means' of
tapping communications -- after all, most of them think that No Knock
searches are justified against drug dealers until some cop busts in
their door and kills their relatives.

    If Clipper gets adopted, like any standard, it is going to be
with us for a long, long time -- look at the history of video
standards; we develop a crippled color video standard (NTSC) that is
compatible with the old black+white standard, and now we're trying to
pack HDTV signals in the same bandwidth that a NTSC signal takes; some
of the attempts to make analogue HDTV systems compatible with NTSC
were pathetic.  If Clipper turns out to be weak, we'll be stuck with
it for a long time.  If we get hacked clipper chips that can provide
fake authentication, it will provide a royal road for hackers.

    Since we are starting from scratch, we have a great
opportunity to build a very powerful cryptosystem.  We probably need
both a good public key system and a good conventional cypher.  RSA is
good, but the rights to it are restricted (When does that patent run
out?)  LUC and several other algorithms look good and probably will be
more publically availible.  DES is strong if used in a feedback mode
(And various information I've gotten from people who've put a great
deal of effort into breaking DES seems to indicate that the NSA knew
about some very sophisticated attacks that have only appeared in the
literature recently), and IDEA looks excellent, as well as being less
restricted.

    Using the best algorithms, we can design a system that can
work in both centralized and decentralized organizations.  Such a
standard can give individuals and industry the tools they need for
real security.

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

From: bluewtr![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Modem to Mexico
Date: Sun May  2 22:38:54 1993


I did an email link to a site in Russia that had terrible phone lines.
I used the Telebit PEP protocol and had better luck than anyone over
there imagined.

If you are expecting bad phone lines I would say the Tbit PEP protocol
is the right choice.


Tom Tengdin    Former Alvin Pilot and Worlds Deepest UNIX Programmer.

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

From: [e-mail] (Brett Person)
Subject: Re: US West Says I Can't Use 301+ on Voice Line
Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 07:25:47 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network


I wonder where US West gets these people!  I recently witnessed such
an occurence with a friend's line.  Telephone Man(r) told him that he
had mumble mumble mumble ... wrong with his line and went through a few
months of excuses why it couldn't/wouldn't be fixed.  Said friend
complained loudly to another friend who worked for US West, and
somehow, got the problem resolved that way.  I've no idea where they
get some of these guys, but sometimes it's scary.


Brett Person  Guest Account
North Dakota State University [e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

Date: 03 May 93 07:36:54 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help!! Roommate Runs $2100 900 Tab!


In an article written Sun, 2 May 1993, [e-mail]
writes:

 >> A friend of mine's roommate ran up a big 900 bill over a three month
 >> period and has split. ...
 >> [Moderator's Note: There is legal recourse, but it is against the
 >> former roomate, and would involve skip-tracing him from what you say.

 > So as far as your friend and the local phone company go, there can be
 > no problem, except for the fact that the phone company may continue to
 > list the 900 charges for a while.

"A while," until telco turns off service and sues his friend.  If the
telephone account is in his name, then HE is solely responsible for
the telephone's use and account payment.  Telco doesn't HAVE to know
about the deadbeat roommate, since the phone is not in the deadbeat's
name.  The deadbeat is only directly responsible to the original
writer's friend, not the local telco or the IP.


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, I used to think the tariff requirements
making 'the subscriber responsible for the use of the instruments'
also applied to premium services such as 900/976, but a few writers
here have said the tariff only pertains to services actually sold by
telco (that is, phone calls) and not the premium stuff they simply
bill for. So, it appears to be kind of a gray area if telco can turn
off service or not based on unpaid charges from a 900 outfit. I know
telco can't disconnect based on unpaid Yellow Pages advertising.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 07:04:46 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")


> This happens a lot, and I bet it happens to everyone ... but I refuse
> to tell some stranger anything just because they managed to get me to
> answer my phone!

On a few occasions I have reached an incorrect long distance number
and tried to ascertain the number that I reached from the party that
answered the phone so that I could get credit for the call or to make
sure that I correctly dialed the call.

The called party seems to think that their number is a big secret and
refuses to divulge it which is quite silly since it will appear on my
phone bill.


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Apparently some carriers no longer need this
information to issue a credit *if you call and tell the operator right
away*.  I've had the same thing happen you described, and I immediatly
dialed the AT&T operator who punched it up on the tube and said 'you
called xxx, what number did you intend to call?' I told her, she said
okay and put through the credit.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #299
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12266;
          4 May 93 2:14 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26083
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 3 May 1993 23:24:01 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09607
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 3 May 1993 23:23:02 -0500
Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 23:23:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #300

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 3 May 93 23:23:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 300

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    History of Mark and Space (DECUServe Journal via Jonathan Welch)
    Answering Machine OGMs (was How I Answer the Phone) (Gregory M. Paris)
    Want Digital Voice Recorder and Panel Phones (Paul Cook)
    Supra Modem Does Not Have MNP 10 (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on "Hello") (Marc A. Runkel)
    Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on "Hello") (Andrew Funk)
    Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on "Hello") (Rebecca Snyder)
    Re: Canadian Reseller Uses Door-to-Door (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Touch Dial Layout (R. Kevin Oberman)
    Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service (Jerry Glomph Black)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

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

From: Jonathan_Welch <[e-mail]>
Subject: History of Mark and Space
Date: 3 May 93 10:24:18 GMT


Pat, I thought the following article might be worth reposting in
TELECOM Digest.  The original message was posted into a notes
conference on a vax DECUS members may subscribe to.  Once a month
tidbits from various notes conferences are reposted to the outside
world.


Jonathan Welch  VAX Systems Manager  Umass/Amherst  [e-mail]

                              -----------
DECUServe Journal, May, 1993   Beginning at page 15
(09/22/90 Harvey:  Mark and Space)

    "Mark" and "space" are curious terms to find in a hardware topic
discussing data communication.  They seem more appropriate for the
Windows conference.  But they are truly electrical communication
terminology and have many related forms, such as "steady mark",
"continuous spacing" and a seemingly unrelated term: "running open".

   I thought their origin might be of interest and along the way,
we'll discover where that curious "break" key came from that many of
us have on our keyboards and these days often use to get the attention
of the terminal server.

    These terms are very old and originated with an early graphical
device.  People never think of the telegraph as graphical
communication, but that's the way it was originally conceived.  Our
impression of the telegraph comes largely from movie stories of times
a century ago, when telegraph operators listened to the strange ticks,
tocks and rattles from the telegraph sounder and converted them into
urgent messages that pushed the plot forward.

    Morse didn't invent it that way.  His original device was an
electromagnet that pulled a pen (possibly a quill) against a moving
strip of paper.  When current flowed through the electromagnet, the
pen touched the moving paper and made a mark.  When the current was
off, a spring retracted the pen and there was a space on the paper.
Short marks were called dots.  Long marks were called dashes.

    Now this explanation is so simple and pat, it just has to be
largely legend and over-simplification.  There were many different
schemes, such as keeping the pen in contact with the paper and moving
it sideways by the electromagnet.  But the mark/space concept seems to
have stuck, because it appears in very early communication literature.

    This graphical device was actually used in production communi-
cation for a while. Some of the operators of the machines found that
they could recognize the "call letters" of their telegraph office when
the electromagnet and pen started tapping out a message on the strip
of paper.

    If the message was for another office, they didn't need to get up
to see if the message was for them.  Soon, they were able to just
write the message down on the telegraph form as it came in without
needing to "read" the tape.  When the operators were able to fully
"read" Morse code with their ears, they could stop putting ink in the
pen.  The telegraph sounder was born.

   You couldn't see the marks and the spaces between them anymore, but
they were still there in the minds of the engineers designing
telegraph systems.

   For good electrical engineering reasons, telegraph offices were
wired in series.  At one end of the railroad (for example) there was a
powerful battery with one pole connected to a rail and the other
connected to a wire that ran on posts for the length of the railway,
where it was also connected to the rail.  This constituted a simple
series circuit with the battery current flowing through the wire, into
the rail at the far end, and back through the rail to the battery.

   At each telegraph office along the line, the wire was cut, brought
into the office, sent through the coil of the electromagnet of the
sounder, then through the telegraph key, then back up to the pole and
on down the line to the next office.

    But you may have noticed a problem.  The telegraph key is normally
an open circuit.  When the operator pressed down on the key, the
circuit was closed and the current flowed.  How, then, did the current
flow when everything was hooked in series and all those keys were open
circuits?

    If you've ever looked closely at a real telegraph key, you may
have noticedthat it has a knife switch build into it, and that switch
is arranged to short the contacts of the key.  When the operator was
not actually sending a message, he or she (many early telegraph
operators were women) would close the knife switch so that the key
contacts were shorted and the whole series circuit was unbroken.

    Thus the normal idle telegraph line was in a "steady mark"
condition - a current flowed through all the sounders which if the pen
was still there would have caused a mark to be made on the moving
strip of paper.  The knife switch on each telegraph key was perhaps
the first "push to talk" button.  The operator had to "open" the knife
and break the circuit so the key could turn the current on and off and
send a message.

   Not surprisingly, this knife was called the break switch. When an
operator opened the knife the current stopped flowing in all the
sounder electromagnets and they went tock.  Everyone up and down the
line knew someone was about to start sending a message. The break
switch alerted them.

    When the Indians cut the telegraph wire, the circuit was open and
all the sounders went tock.  "Open" meant trouble.

    The graphical device didn't disappear, however.  The interest in
having the message automatically recorded on paper that could be read
without having to learn the arcane art of "reading" Morse code by ear
remained.  The inventors worked to improve on the simple marks
separated by spaces and actually make letters and figures appear.

    One early attempt was the telautograph.  It attempted to servo the
up/down and sideways movements of a pen being used to write a message
in longhand to a remote pen reproducing the motion and hence
re-creating the longhand.  It worked well for very short distances but
they didn't have the technology to send the control signals useful
distances.  There were other schemes using many wires.  Expensive.

    The big winner was the stock ticker.  It was the ancestor of all
the various asynchronous communication gadgets we have today.  It was
a triumph of mechanical ingenuity that enabled an ordinary telegraph
wire (and there were many) to be converted to actually print a message
in letters and figures on that moving strip of paper.  You didn't need
an expensive telegraph operator hanging around to "read" Morse and you
didn't have to puzzle out the strange patterns of marks and spaces.
But the communication technology was telegraph and the marks and
spaces were still there in the minds of the engineers.

    The stock ticker used the same series circuit technology of the
telegraph.  The wire ran from the floor of the exchange to the nearest
broker's office, through an electromagnet in the ticker machine, and
then on to the next office.  And yes, if the Indians (or a cleaning
lady) broke the wire anywhere, all the tickers went dead.

    Dead?  No, they went crazy.  The continuous telegraph current when
there were no stock trades being reported kept the ticker mechanisms
idle.  Steady mark.  Good.  The start of a trade message was a break
in the circuit (start pulse) which caused the ticker mechanism to
start spinning.  The following sequence of marks and spaces caused the
mechanism to select a particular character on its wheel and a hammer
struck the paper strip against it.

    When the circuit was broken by the cleaning lady, it was in a
"continuous space" condition, causing all the ticker machines to spin
their clockwork, "running open" until someone fixed the break. These
terms stayed with communication technology to the first minicomputers.
The venerable ASR 33 Teletype, one of the foundation stones of the
minicomputer industry, used telegraph series current loop technology,
marks and spaces, and "ran open" when you disconnected it from the
PDP-5.

    Well, if you got this far, you're probably wanting to know about
where your break key came from if you haven't figured it out already.
Yep, it's that knife switch on the side of the telegraph key.  You
didn't know you're a telegrapher, did you?


[Moderator's Note: Thank you for passing along a fascinating story. PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 3 May 93 17:22:01 -0400
From: Gregory M. Paris <[e-mail]>
Subject: Answering Machine OGMs (was How I Answer the Phone)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Matt Simpson) writes:

> The answering machine question is a little tougher. My outgoing
> message has no identifying information (name or phone number) .. I
> figure my friends know who I am. Of course, that doesn't help people
> who dial my number by mistake, and don't know me, and aren't sure if
> I'm who they want. I do occasionally get messages for someone else.

I wouldn't worry about including too little information in your OGM.
People apparently don't pay much attention to these messages; our
experience is that they'll leave messages for the wrong number/person
regardless of what the outgoing message says.  We've tried using our
phone number in the OGM, and when that produced too many wrong
messages, our names, but still we often get messsages for wrong
numbers.

Mostly we get calls from doctors and dentists confirming appointments
for people we've never heard of.  Once we got yelled at for the floral
arrangements "we" supplied having leaked water on the deceased.
Recently, we got a message saying how much the caller liked our OGM,
yet the message wasn't for us (figure that!).


Greg Paris <[e-mail]>
Motorola Codex, 20 Cabot Blvd C1-30, Mansfield, MA  02048-1193

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

Date: Mon, 3 May 93 22:59 GMT
From: Proctor & Associates <[e-mail]>
Subject: Want Digital Voice Recorder and Panel Phones


I need sources for a couple of items:

Panel Telephones (either a standard telephone or key system phone
mounted behind a panel);

Instant Playback Voice Recorders (used in emergency answering centers
for digital storage of audio signals, affording instant playback of
the past 30 seconds or so of speech to aid in deciphering grabled
speech);

Anyone have any suggestions for manufacturers of these devices?


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

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

Date: Mon, 3 May 93 17:34:42 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. PADGETT PETERSON)
Subject: Supra Modem Does Not Have MNP 10


It appears I was wrong about the MNP-10 support by the Supra modem
Nonetheless I am highly satisfied with it (personal opinion). See
below, a note received from Tech Support.


Padgett


Date: Mon, 03 May 93 08:37:45 PDT

The v.32bis modems do not support MNP 10 at this time. I am not sure when, or
if, it will be available in the future.


Terri    Supra Tech Support   [e-mail]    503-967-2440

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

Date: 03 May 1993 08:51:37 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Marc A. Runkel)
Subject: Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

[e-mail] (Mark Petersen) writes:

> Let's not forget that some telemarketing machines are programmed to
> recognize the word "Hello."

Actually, the word spoken doesn't matter, the machine simply waits for
noise on the line, the pause is explained by a poorly maintained
machine.

Modern telemarketing centers use devices that wait to hear human
voices before switching the line to a waiting telemarketer.  I don't
believe there are any "automated telemarketers" that are that
sophisticated though.


Marc A. Runkel                              [e-mail]
Network Analyst                             Of course, this is just my
Registrar's Office * Systems Support Group  tiny, insignificant, humble
University of Massachusetts, Amherst        opinion.  If you don't like it....

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Funk)
Subject: Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")
Organization: Me organized? Nyaaah!
Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 21:13:24 GMT


There's a phone at work we only use for outgoing calls.  When it rings
I've been answering: "Drug Enforcement Agency, Special Agent Smith!"

Most callers kinda cough, then hang-up!


Andrew Funk, KB7UV
Chair, Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society (RATS)
ENG Editor/Microwave Control, WCBS-TV Channel 2 News, New York
Internet: [e-mail]      Packet: kb7uv@kb7uv.#nli.ny.usa


[Moderator's Note: Cute answer-phrase, but take care someone along the
way does not claim -- to your detriment -- that you are impersonating
a government employee ... that's bad news if they make it stick.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rebecca Snyder)
Subject: Re: How I Answer the Phone (was The War on the Word "Hello")
Organization: New Mexico Tech
Date: Mon, 3 May 1993 18:05:36 GMT


One thing I learned from my father for dealing with chronic wrong
numbers -- those people who (presumably) have the number written down
wrong and keep calling back over and over.  It goes something like
this:

Answerer: Hello, <<residence or business name>>.
Caller: Is John Doe there?
A: No, sorry you have a wrong number.

(Caller does this one or two more times, and then ...)

A: Hello?  (no name given)
C: Is John Doe there?
A: Who is this?
C: Jane.
A: Uh, hang on, I'll see if he's here.
   (muffled a little) Hey John, its Jane.  Are you home or not?
   (talking to C again)  No, he's not here now.

This nearly always stopped the person from calling back again, and it
has the side effect of being slightly entertaining.


[Moderator's Note: Either that, or you could say something lewd, crude
and rude about John's activities at the moment and why he isn't willing
to come to the phone. That always stops 'em dead in their tracks.  PAT]

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

Date: 03 May 93 07:37:45 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Canadian Reseller Uses Door-to-Door


In an article written Sun, 02 May 93 [e-mail] writes:

 >> Apparently the company is using both students and full-time employees
 >> for its door-to-door program.

 >> Has anyone in the U.S. encountered a representative of a long-
 >> distance company at their front door?

 > I haven't seen any door-to-door salespersons here in Atlanta, Georgia
 > selling long distance service, but I do know that the "pyramid scheme"
 > people sell a lot of long distance service, and they as annoying as
 > door-to-door salesperson.

U.S. Sprint sales reps used to regularly set up tables on 34th Street,
in Manhattan, between the illegal street vendors, Dyanetics pitchmen
(or pitchpeople? ;), and three-card-monte dealers.  It's difficult to
take any company seriously that depends upon cheap sales gimmicks for
their income.


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: So what kind of 'sales gimmicks' do you think would
enhance their reputation? Should they be the principal tenant in the
Empire State Building?  Nearly everyone uses telecom services; and
that includes the next-door neighbors of the {New York Times}, the
street people of Times Square along 34th Street. Sprint was doing
something AT&T has only begun to learn how to do: actually sell some-
thing directly to people who use it without transferring them on the
phone through a dozen other departments and voicemail systems. Sales
people working in impoverished, lower class inner city areas like
Manhattan or Chicago do things differently. Here in Chicago, 'door to
door sales' could mean spending an entire day -- eight or nine hours --
knocking on one door after another in one single highrise building of
the Chicago Housing Authority. Or, you would set up a table in the
lobby with the management's okay, and chat with the tenants as they
came in and out of the building. People like that definitely need to
have a way to make calls on limited amounts of credit since they have
to use payphones so much of the time -- payphones which won't accept
coins at night due to the War on Drugs. Sprint knows it, I know it,
the people at AT&T panic and ask 'who gave you my number?' as they
transfer you to someone else.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Touch Dial Layout
Date: Mon,  3 May 93 14:58:36 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


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

>> Weren't at least calculators and/or terminals with keypads around before
>> the advent of pushbutton telephones?

> Not really.  Back in 1960 your typical calculator had hundreds of
> moving parts and the keypad was a large array with a full set of
> digits per adder column, and cost so much that only bookkeepers and
> accountants used them.  And a terminal was a model 15 Teletype.  Or
> maybe a Flexowriter, with a moving carriage.

Sorry, John, but there is/was a standard layout for ten key numeric
pads long before Touch-Tone telephones came into existence. All office
adding machines going back to at least the 1930s had a keypad in the
form:

           _____________
           | 7 | 8 | 9 |
           -------------
           | 4 | 5 | 6 |
           -------------
           | 1 | 2 | 3 |
           -------------
           | 00 |  0   |
           -------------

This layout existed and was in common use in every office long before
DTMF was a glimmer in Ma's eye. There were some variations, but the
decimal point was usually not found. These machines were used almost
exclusively for accounting and it was assumed that all entries would
have a fixed point two digits from the right. Hence, a "00" instead of
".".

These were all mechanical machines and a good electric unit was a
thousand dollar item. They were the one item sure to be stolen in any
break-in.

It is true that Ma did a big human factors study and found that this
layout was wrong and chose the pad we see today, but calculators and
terminals descend from the adding machine and retain its layout.


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

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

From: Jerry Glomph Black <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Grand Canyon Phone Service
Organization: McGill University, McRCIM
Date: Mon,  3 May 93 13:46:54 -0400


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Marc
Wiz) writes:

> I don't remember who provides phone service at the Grand Canyon but I
> have hiked the canyon all the way to the bottom three times.

> The last time I did this was in '83 and I was downright shocked that
> there was a payphone at Phantom Ranch which is at the bottom of the
> canyon.

Yup, next time yer at the Phantom Ranch, standing outside at the
payphone, look up.  Just above your head, attached to the building, is
a little (microwave? UHF?) antenna pointed up at the South Rim.  Much
better quality than a similar remote phone atop Mt. Washington, NH.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #300
******************************