Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1993.volume.13/vol13.iss801-844

Internet Message Format | 1994-01-03 | 1MB

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05655;
          6 Dec 93 6:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13169
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Mon, 6 Dec 1993 03:52:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19545
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 6 Dec 1993 03:52:06 -0600
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 03:52:06 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #801

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 6 Dec 93 03:52:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 801

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Voice Mail Cards For Home PC (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: CD-ROM Telephone Directory (Ken K.P. Lo)
    Re: Carrier For 800 Number? (Russ McGuire)
    Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number (Erik Ramberg)
    Re: How Many Cellular Carriers in an Area (John R. Levine)
    Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Matthew Landru)
    Re: AT&T's New Facility (John J. Butz)
    Re: AT&T _Required_? (Marshall Levin)
    Re: Instant Modem Banks (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (C. Harald Koch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: Voice Mail Cards For Home PC
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1993 15:01:08 GMT


It sounds like just the thing you are looking for is from The Complete
PC.  There is a product called The Complete Answering Machine as well
as a companion product called The Complete Fax Machine.

I have had a Complete Answering Machine card for several years.  I
have an old AT&T 6300 w/o monitor that is dedicated to giving a home
to the CAM board.  You can connect from your demarcation point to the
CAM unit.  From the CAM, you can connect all your downstream
extensions.  If you go off hook for more than five seconds (this is
user configurable) without DTMFing or outpulsing, the CAM will
automatically disconnect the subscriber loop and start reading you the
voice mail menu, giving you the opportunity to key in your mailbox
number and password.  I've noticed that CAM normally supplies local
battery to all the extensions when they are on-hook.  The local
battery is about 15 volts.  I've noticed that my one two-line phone
shows the circuit as busy becuase the battery is below the nominal 48
volt on-hook.  Unless you have equipment downstream from CAM that
guages whether or not the line is busy by sampling the battery
voltage, you should not have any troubles.

CAM has the ability to support one or multiple mailboxes, which is
user-configurable.  If you are working with a PBX, you can disallow
mailboxes that start with 9 or 0, if necessary.

CAM can generate hook flashes and can outpulse or DTMF, so it can do
just about anything the big time corporate voicemail systems can do.
Namely call forwarding, call transfer, delayed voicemail delivery,
etc.  One thing CAM will not do is call progess monitoring (at least
not in my version).  I just blind dials when it does a message
forward, then after a delay starts reading your message forward
greeting.  I really don't care, since I use the message forward to
activate my pager.  I have a couple of differnet mailboxes set up, so
I send a different code to my pager depending on which mailbox
received a message.

Up to seven CAM boards can be installed in a computer.  CAM boards can
also daisy chain with a Complete FAX and do automatic routing.  I
don't know anything about a Complete FAX becuase I don't own one.
There are some configuration options in the CAM menu for FAX support.

Best of all, it is pretty reasonably priced.  I've seen it at the
Walmart Sam's Club outlet for about $99.


Bill Mayhew        NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-9995  USA      phone: [phone]
[e-mail]       amateur radio 146.58: N8WED

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken K.P. Lo)
Subject: Re: CD-ROM Telephone Directory
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 18:16:32 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Joe.Bergstein@p501.f544.
n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) writes:

> Regarding discussion of CD-ROM directories, I have noticed that Bell
> Atlantic is now joining the club.  BA recently advertised a new
> service offering their entire white pages for their seven states on
> CD-ROM, with monthly updates available.

Do you know how much it costs?  Bell Canada here in Ontario and Quebec
has one selling for Cdn$10,000, with six bi-monthly updates.  Does
anyone know why they cost so much?


Ken K P Lo
S3 Rm 105 Box 460    A Student of University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario
(519) 725 - 6332     [e-mail]

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

From: Russ McGuire <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 93 13:01:26 -0600
Subject: Re: Carrier For 800 Number?


In article <[e-mail]> Gerry Palmer <p00290@psilink.
com> writes:

> Is there any way left to easily tell what carrier "owns" a given
> 800-number?  I'm trying to find out who is carrying 800-950-3535,
> and have been unable to get any assistance either my local carrier
> (Bell of PA) or my preferred IXC (Sprint).  Ideas, anyone?

I can easily think of three scenario's:

1.    The number currently "belongs" to a company or individual.  In
this case, I can't imagine why you would care which carrier is being
used, unless its your number, and then you would probably know the
carrier.

2.    A Responsible Organization (RESPORG) has reserved the number.
A number can be reserved for up to 60 days in expectation of a certain
company or person taking the number.  A RESPORG may be a carrier, or
may be an individual.  If you call any carrier who happens to also be
a RESPORG (as most of them are), you can request a certain number.  If
the number is not in use or reserved, they can get that number for
you.  If it is reserved, they can tell you which RESPORG has reserved
it.

3.    The number is not being used and it is not reserved.  Any
RESPORG/carrier can claim it for any of their customers.

Of course, all of this only applies to the US and is only true since
800 portability began earlier this year.  Since portability, the 800
number is no longer "owned" by the carrier, but rather by the
customer.  The customer can move the number between carriers and can
even split the traffic for a given number among carriers, based on,
for example, percentage, time-of-day, or LATA conditions.


Russ McGuire   Manager, Product Development
WilTel, Inc.   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: One thing AT&T is still doing that the FCC is going
to make them quit doing before long is reserving numbers for imaginary
customers who do not exist. They are doing this with 'good' numbners
they want to hang on to. I've tried to get 800 numbers for customers
of my service only to have the RESPORG tell me that the number 'belongs
to' AT&T. When you dial it, it goes to intercept, and no actual
customer ever seems to show up, yet the number keeps getting reserved
over and over for sixty days at a time. I recently talked directly to
a staff attorney at the FCC who asked me to call him personally with
a list of 800 numbers in this category and I am compiling them now.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Erik Ramberg)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number
Date: 5 Dec 1993 22:29:06 GMT
Organization: ESL Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave
Fish) wrote:

> I've got a question on how a cellular telephone's serial number is
> used by the cellular telephone system. If I change a cellular
> telephone's phone number to that of another phone in that system will
> I make calls charged against that phone number? Or does the phone
> system "know" about a phone's serial number?

> [Moderator's Note: The phone's ESN or Electronic Serial Number is
> matched with the phone number assigned and the tower will reject your
> call if the two do not correctly match. The exception to this rule --
> and they are few and far between -- is that for a few certain phone
> numbers, the tower is told to either ignore discrepancies in the ESN
> or not to bother checking at all. What types of cellular phone numbers
> are exempt from validation? Administrative numbers used by the cellular
> carrier itself in customer service, maintainence and technical support.
> They want it so the technician going out on maintainence can grab any
> phone handy and take it with him.

Don't forget 911.  You can't legally block that number.


Erik


[Moderator's Note: Landline telcos are under no obligation to provide
a connection to 911 if your service was otherwise cut for reasons of
non-payment or fraud. Neither do cellular carriers have to provide
free air time to reach 911 to someone who won't/can't pay for it.  PAT]n

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

Date: Sun, 5 Dec 93 14:49 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: How Many Cellular Carriers in an Area
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> Ok, as long as we are talking about cell phones, here is a question that
> I have not seen answered.  I understand that in an area there are two
> cellular carriers - wireline and non wireline.  However, here in NJ I
> see advertisements for more than two carriers.  It seems you can buy
> service from Cellular One, NYNEX, or Bell Atlantic - hey wait, thats
> three. ...

Actually the answer is about ten.  Here's why:

The U.S. is divided up into lots of cellular "markets".  There are 306
Metropolitan Service Areas, numbered by population starting with 001
in New York, down to 306 for off-shore Lousiana and Texas (lots of oil
rigs.)  The rest of the country is divided into Rural Service areas,
each containing one or more counties.  Each MSA and RSA has two
carriers, the A carrier which is not related to the local phone
company, and the B carrier which is.

In New Jersey, the division is entirely by county.  There are five
MSA's within New Jersey:

134 Atlantic City (Atlantic, Cape May)
070 Long Branch (Monmouth)
062 New Brunswick (Middlesex)
121 Trenton (Mercer)
228 Vineland/Millville (Cumberland)

Four MSA's in adjacent states include New Jersey counties:

001 NYC (Passaic, Bergen, Morris, Essex, Union, Hudson, Somerset)
004 Phila (Gloucester, Camden, Burlington)
058 Allentown (Warren)
069 Wilmington (Salem)

The remaining three counties are each an RSA:

NJ-1 Hunterdon
NJ-2 Ocean
NJ-3 Sussex

OK, what does this actually mean for who the carriers are?  Here's a little
chart, explanations below:
                A                B
134 Atlantic City    00267 Comcast Cell One        00250 BAMS
070 Long Branch        00173 Comcast Cell One        00022 NYNEX
062 New Brunswick    00173 Comcast Cell One        00022 NYNEX
121 Trenton        00575 Comcast Cell One        00008 BAMS
228 Vineland/Millville    00583 US Cell            00250 BAMS
001 NYC            00025 McCaw (AT&T) Cell One    00022 NYNEX
004 Phila        00029 Comcast Metrophone    00008 BAMS
058 Allentown        00103 Vanguard Cell One        00008 BAMS
069 Wilmington        00123 Comcast Cell One        00008 BAMS
NJ-1 Hunterdon        01487 Comcast Cell One        00250 BAMS
NJ-2 Ocean        01489 Ocean Co. Cell        00250 BAMS
NJ-3 Sussex        01491 Sussex Cell        00022 BAMS?

BAMS is Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems.  The five digit numbers are
cellular system numbers.  If two entries have the same number, they're
the same system.  In some cases, two systems are operated as one,
e.g., it is my impression that BAMS operates systems 00008 and 00250
together.  In Sussex Co., the B operator is listed as BAMS even though
system 00022 is NYNEX New York City.  This is probably correct, since
BAMS is a minority owner of system 00022 due to a lot of it being in
New Jersey.  (It also covers all of NYC, Long Island, Westchester,
Putnam, and Rockland counties in New York, probably the largest system
in the country.)

"Cellular One" is a trademark licensed by McCaw to two-thirds of all
of the A carriers in the country.  It's purely a marketing thing;
there's little relationship among McCaw Cell One, Comcast Cell One,
and Vanguard Cell one.  McCaw recently sold itself to AT&T, and it
seems likely that McCaw will switch to the better known AT&T name, so
who knows what will become of the rest of the Cell One licensees,
maybe they'll sell the name to someone else.

So I see ten different carriers in New Jersey.  Each of them signs up
lots of phone stores in their areas to act as agent for them selling
equipment and service (`Bud's Fresh Bait and Cellular Phone'.)  In
each area, there are indeed only two carriers, but since New Jersey
has so many areas near each other, you'll be hearing lots and lots of
competing ads.

Finally, you'll often find various special roaming arrangements among
nearby carriers.  I don't know about New Jersey, but for example, here
in Boston, I have service with NYNEX, but if I use my phone in Contel
territory in Vermont, I pay 52 cents/min rather than the standard
roaming rate of 85 cents/min plus $3/day.  Some systems even have
`home roaming' plans where in some roamer areas you pay the same rate
as in your home system.  If there is home roaming available, it can be
cheaper to get a phone from a neighboring system than at home.  It
looks like I'd have gotten better rates here in Boston if I'd gotten
my phone in Montpelier VT because Contel charges home roaming rates
for Boston.  On the other hand, my phone would then have a Vermont
number, and Contel just sold their Vermont properties to NYNEX who
will doubtless fix that little loophole.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew B. Landru)
Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service
Date: 5 Dec 1993 23:25:31 GMT
Organization: Project SAVE International


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gregory
Youngblood) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but
> they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence
> users they can't.  PAT]

   Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time.
Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of that uses AT&T
ACUS service connected to the campus phone system, the story is always
the same. You can only use ACUS from the campus phones. 10XXX will not
work. If you want to use a calling card, you need to dial the 800
number for access. (Or you can use a public phone. The public phones
here belong to C&P, and they are able to use 10XXX with no problems.
But there, you have no choice but to use a calling card, or to pump
quarters in.)

   I've contacted both AT&T and Sprint about this. AT&T's response is
that they are not responsible for blocking the calls, and that I
should talk to the university. (The university's phone "experts", BTW,
respond with "what's 10XXX?") Sprint replies with a noncommittal
"we'll look into it."

   I've basically given up. ACUS rates are not exorbitant, and unlike
the previous writer's description, AU does not take any markup at all.
But I'm offering the information in case anyone wants to fight it.


Matthew B. Landry   President of Project SAVE
[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Next time they ask you 'what is 10xxx?' tell them
to quit talking so stupid and pretending like they don't know anything.
Tell them if they don't know what 10xxx is, they have no business
operating a large system like that. If you ask, the FCC will send you
a copy of the rules; make copies of what you are sent and give it to
the 'telecom experts' with a note attached short and sweet and to the
point: "How far are you going to push this? Will it have to go to
litigation?"  See what their answer is to that. I'd also go right on
around them to the VP of telecommunications for the University or
whatever the person's title is and give them a copy also. Also, make
sure the campus newspaper is aware of it.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 05 Dec 93 15:09:35 EST
From: [e-mail] (John J Butz)
Subject: Re: AT&T's New Facility


Dave Niebuhr writes:

> AT&T announced in yesterday's {Newsday} that it will begin laying
> fiber optic cable from Shirley, Long Island, New York (one mile from
> my home) to France (I forget the place).  This cable will travel
> underground from the AT&T site to the Great South Bay where it will be
> buried in a one-step operation, thence across Fire Island, and on out
> to the 30 foot contour.

Over the Thanksgiving weekend, I traveled south on I-95 from NYC to
Washington, DC.  After emerging from the tunnel in Baltimore, the AT&T
cable laying ships are visible from the "port-side" in the harbor.  On
Friday morning, both vessels were docked.  However, on the Sunday
return trip, only one boat was still in port.  Perhaps to Long Island
is where the second ship went?

I've been sailing on the Great South Bay out of Islip and it looks
deep enough to handle an ocean going vessel.  Also, the Robert Moses
causeway bridge to Fire Island would definitely provide clearance for
a fairly tall ship.  However, I've been fluke fishing enough times to
tell you that most of the Great South Bay is pretty shallow.  Dave,
perhaps you could go on a recon-mission and let us know if the AT&T
ship is there?  8-)

> The late G. Marconi (I can't spell his first name :-( ) had his
> transmitting station in Rocky Point prior to RCA taking it over.

One of my favorite resting spots on my bike loop is Twin Lights
Historic Lighthouse, in Highlands, NJ.  Since Twin Lights is one of
the highest points on the Atlantic seaboard, it was a natural choice
as a site for one of the first commercial Marconi radio towers.  The
site operated as a relay station between ocean going ships and the
ship owners in downtown Manhattan (NYC).  Legend has it that market
speculators would try to intercept the messages received by the relay
station and guess what each ship was carrying.  Commodities futures
could then be purchased while the ships were still several days at
sea.  When the ships arrived in NYC to deliver their cargo, prices
would rise, but those early "insider-traders" would be able to
exercise their futures and purchase goods at the lower price.  Pretty
sneaky.


J Butz    [e-mail]   AT&T - CCS

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

From: [e-mail] (Marshall Levin)
Subject: Re: AT&T _Required_?
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 93 07:37:11 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: No, you have that wrong. No telephone company or
> COCOT or Alternate Operator Service (AOS), or reseller of the local
> telephone network can force you to place calls via a certain carrier
> or deny you the right to use the carrier of your choice (as long as
> that carrier wants your business and operates in your area, etc). That
> is the law. There is no such law where the *recipient* of a phone call
> is concerned. The *recipient* can choose to accept calls from any
> carrier, or only the carrier of his choice. Speedway refuses to accept
> calls from other than the AT&T network because AT&T gives Speedway a
> commission on the traffic they handle. Speedway, as the *recipient*
> of the call, has the right to do that if they wish. In other words,
> no one is forcing you to use AT&T to call 503-520-2222, but Speedway
> says unless you do (call via AT&T) they don't wish to connect with
> you since they are being paid by AT&T for the time you spend on line
> with them. Regards the [any carrier <=> any traffic] thing you mentioned,
> also exempt are 800 numbers since the recipient is the one paying for
> the call, and 900 numbers, again since the recipient is the one who
> has the billing arrangements with the carrier of choice.   PAT]

So, theoretically, I could call AT&T, since they are my carrier, and
say I don't want to receive any calls placed via another carrier?  And
then they have to honor this request, and configure their system to
stop other calls?  Would the subscriber have to pay for such service?
Intersting -- when I tried calling speedway via MCI I just got a busy
signal -- is this wat the software tells it to do?  Where does it get
the signal not to accept -- I'm not really clear on how this works
technically -- what sort of signaling system is used?


Marshall Levin


[Moderator's Note: AT&T does not have to do anything of the sort for
you unless they find it to their mutual advantage to go along with
your plans. It is your job to identify the source and routing of the
calls. Let's say you get a huge amount of incoming traffic; umm ..
maybe four or five thousand calls per hour; that is a figure which
will put you in a good negotiating position with any carrier. Now for
every call a carrier hands off to your local telco to be in turn
passed on or delivered to you, they have to pay your local telco
some amount of money; let's say five cents per minute to use round
numbers. Now you go to the various carriers to cut a deal: You say
to them instead of paying the local telco five cents per minute,
how about if they bring a T-1 right to your POP (or point of presence)
and pay you some amount of money instead? Sprint and MCI offer to
give you three cents per minute if they can avoid giving the local
telco five cents per minute. But AT&T says they'll give you three and
a half cents per minute ... okay! Sold to the highest bidder. The
carriers all know that at your volume of traffic you are generating
a lot of business for them, and they are more than happy to make
another penny or two per minute if they can.

So you decide AT&T (or Sprint, MCI, take your pick) has the best
offer. The selected carrier then programs their switch in such a way
that whenever *they* see a call to your number, they pick it off and
route it directly to those new wires they installed next to your
building. The local telco never sees the calls. In the meantime, if
someone calls via some other carrier, that carrier continues to
do as always: hand the call to the local telco who in turn delivers
it to you normally via your main directory-listed telephone number.
So your 'regular' phone will continue to ring off the hook all day
and night just as it always has, but you answer those calls with
a recorded message *that you program and are responsible for handling*
saying something like "I won't talk to you since you did not call
via the carrier I chose. Hang up and dial 10-my-code to get through."

The only people who change anything is the carrier you selected to
handle your calls; they watch for them to come through the network
and pluck them off, and hand them to you directly. Everyone else
continues to call your regular number and you refuse to deal with
them however you wish. Under the law, the carrier you want to use
cannot divert traffic from other carriers; all they can do is agree
to watch for traffic to you and give it special treatment. Since
you see it coming in on special lines, you know it is from them
and accept it.

As I said early on in this note, unless you have heavy inbound
traffic, none of the carriers is going to be interested. It costs
them money to have special lines direct to you. If an analysis of
your traffic does not demonstrate to the carrier how they can
save many, many thousands of dollars per month a few cents at a
time, and split it with you so that both of you make money in the
process, they are not going to be interested. And if you are handling
inbound traffic of several thousand calls per hour, any carrier
would love to have an exclusive on it. Even Speedway, with much
less traffic per hour (but longer connect times per call) is very
lucrative to AT&T. So you would be doing what the carriers cannot
do under the law: force people to call a certain way, and it is
quite legal as long as you, the recipient make the decision. When
the Amoco Oil/Diner's Club Credit Card office was in Chicago many
years ago, the Sales Authorization unit was pulling in that kind
of traffic on 800 numbers from AT&T. It is unlikely any residence
or most businesses would qualify at all, but you never know these
days, given all the changes in the industry.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Instant Modem Banks
Organization: Digital Equipment Computer Users Society
Date: 05 Dec 93 16:23:38 -0500
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


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

> In article <[e-mail]> Martin McCormick <martin@
> datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu> writes:

>> In recent postings, several people told of modem banks which can
>> be attached directly to a T1 and use DSP to simulate 24 dial-up modems.

There are two vendors in this area.

Primary Access has been 'it' for years, and their original hardware
only included internal x.25 PAD functionality. They do support all
sorts of T1 signalling including FG-B and FG-D.

They have noticed the demand for something other than x.25, and you
should check with them. They probably have product by now.

USR is developing a similar product, but allows front-ending with
whatever service is currently cheapest. If POTS analog lines make most
$ sense, use them. When telco wakes up, swap ONLY the front end
card(s) and go to T1.

Primary Access does 20 T1s per full RACK. USR does 2 T1s in either 5
1/4 or maybe 7" of rack space (I forget which).

USR initially has (yuk) x.25 simply because a LARGE customer needing
it was funding development. They are painfully aware that most
everyone else calling has comments too rude to repeat about x.25.

They may be foolish enough to delay time to market by building the
terminal server TOTALLY themselves, or may 'buy' someone's basic
design and s/w and build a card to run in their shelf on their busses.
Fear/Pride in using NIH components can be very costly. Even DEC uses
someone else's LAT code in their latest terminal servers!! And DEC
(and about everyone else) is smart enough to use a lot of 'cisco' in
their HUB pluggable routers.  So we will soon see how smart/stupid USR
really is.

USR claims that at about $1,000. per port (list -- discounts available,
of course) they will be 1/2 the Primary Access price. YUK!! This
market needs some more players.

You may find that buying s USED Mitel SX200D PBX with T1 cards and ONS
line cards and a recent Generic that supports T1 gets you from T1s to
pots analog and into a bank of analog modems for less than a used
channel bank. But check carefully in "Telcom Gear" because there have
been some used channel banks loaded with FXS cards going for very low
prices. Rack these up with somthing like piles of ZyXEL 1496E (not
even the + ones) and you get a LOT for the $ albeit with a LOT of
cables and potential labor and support hassles -- but student labor is
inexpensive at .edu sites ...

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

From: C. Harald Koch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized
Organization: Alias Research, Inc., Toronto ON Canada
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1993 06:07:27 GMT


In <[e-mail]> Mathew Englander <mathew@unixg.
ubc.ca> writes:

> This is news to me. Does this mean that residents of Thornhill, St.
> Catharines, etc. can expect to get calls from people trying to phone
> Mexicans?

> [Moderator's Note: Well, I don't think so unless the caller is using a
> very, very old areacode map/index. How long has the code been gone
> where Mexico is concerned?  Five years perhaps ... PAT]

Many Mexican businesses are *still* publishing 905 on letter-head and
business cards. So yes, people in the new 905 area code will probably
get phone calls destined for people in Mexico ...


C. Harald Koch, Network Analyst  Alias Research Inc. Toronto, ON
[e-mail]                    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #801
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa18408;
          7 Dec 93 17:45 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11008
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:10:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14673
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:10:05 -0600
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:10:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #802

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 7 Dec 93 14:10:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 802

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    World Congress on Computational Intelligence (Patrick K. Simpson)
    '94 Conference on Mobile and Personal Communication Systems (J-P. Gaspoz)
    International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Stewart Fist)
    Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment (Alex Cena)
    Research Assistantship - High Speed Wireless Networking (Joseph B. Evans)
    MCI on the Move (Vancouver Sun via Sid Shniad)
    My Phone Tinkles Nightly (Marc Sira)
    Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (David Gast)
    0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Gary Huntress)
    TDD Software Wanted (Michael A. Hoffhinus)
    Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Ron Richolson)
    Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Rich Mintz)
    Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Curtis Bohl)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (patrick k. simpson)
Subject: World Congress on Computational Intelligence
Date: 7 Dec 93 03:52:47 GMT


                         CALL FOR PAPERS
           Extended Deadline for Papers
            December 31, 1993

              For the First Time ...
        The 3 Most Exciting Technologies in Engineering Today
             Under One Roof

             Presenting the

             IEEE WORLD CONGRESS ON

           COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE

     ICNN         FUZZ-IEEE                EC

    IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks
    IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems
    IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation

    3 Conferences ... 1 Great Location ... 1 Inclusive Registration

      PLUS ... A Special Symposium Combining the Interests of All
          3 Meetings into a Single Comprehensive Forum

            June 26 - July 2, 1994
           Walt Disney World Dolphin Hotel
               Orlando, Florida


              IEEE WORLD CONGRESS ON
            COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE

          Orlando, Florida, June 26-July 2, 1994
      Sponsored by the IEEE Neural Networks Council

The 1994 IEEE World Congress on Computational intelligence consists of
three IEEE International Conferences: The Third IEEE International
Conference on Fuzzy Systems, IEEE International Conference on Neural
Networks, and The IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation.  The
registration fee for the Congress covers admission to all three of the
Conferences as well as to a special five- day Symposium entitled
"Computational Intelligence: Imitating Life."  This Symposium will be
held Monday, June 27, through Friday, July 1, 10:20 am to 12:40 pm.

             SPECIAL SYMPOSIUM

        COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE:  IMITATING LIFE

THE SYMPOSIUM addresses critical and emerging technologies and issues
relating to biologically, psychologically, and linguistically
motivated models that exhibit various facets of computational
intelligence.  The paradigms discussed include learning, reasoning,
evolution, search, and optimization each of which often uses life
imitating metaphors for guiding model building.  Machine learning from
data, neural and fuzzy information processing, approximate reasoning,
and evolutionary computation are examples of computational intelli-
gence approaches addressed by Symposium speakers.  The Symposium
provides a unique forum for cross-fertilization between the areas of
neural networks, fuzzy logic, and evolutionary computing.

SYMPOSIUM presentations are explicitly targeted toward the
identification of challenges, issues, and potential solutions for
problems arising in computa- tional intelligence.

THE SYMPOSIUM consists of 3 public lectures, 10 plenary talks, and 30
mini- symposia presentations, covering Neural Networks (21), Fuzzy
Logic (13), and Evolutionary Computation (9).  Contributions include
recent research that has implications for further progress,
state-of-the-art reviews, and discussions of important applications in
fields such as biology, signal and imaging processing, robotics and
control.  Presenters have been chosen from academia and industry and
represent the leaders in their fields from throughout the world.

THE SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS "Computational Intelligence: Imitating
Life," will be published and available at the Congress for each
participant.  Proceedings will later be distributed by the IEEE Press.


          INSTRUCTIONS FOR ALL THREE CONFERENCES

       Papers must be received by December 31, 1993

Papers will be reviewed by senior researchers in the field, and all
authors will be informed of the decisions at the end of the review
process.  All accepted papers will be published in the Conference
Proceedings.  Please submit the following:

 - Send one original and five copies of the paper.  Six total.
 - Papers must be camera ready on 8 1/2 x 11 white paper, two-column
   format in Times or similar font style, 10 points or larger with one
   inch margins on all four sides.
 - Do not fold or staple the original camera-ready copy.
 - Four pages are encouraged, however, the paper must not exceed six
   pages, including figures, tables, and references.  Papers over six
   pages will not be considered.
 - Papers must be written in English.

Authors are encouraged to use the WCCI LaTex template with the
IEEEtran. sty style sheet.  (The format is similar to that used in
IEEE transactions.)  These documents can be FTP'd using the following
instructions:

    FTP FTP.AI.SRI.COM
    LOGIN:  ANONYMOUS
    PASSWORD:  <USE YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS AS THE PASSWORD)
    (AN SRI INFORMATION DOCUMENT WILL SCROLL.  AFTERWARDS, TYPE ...)
    CD PUB/IEEE
    GET READ.ME
    BYE

Centered at the top of the first page should be the complete title,
author name(s), affiliation(s), and mailing address(es).  In the
accompanying letter, the following information must be included:

 - Full Title of the Paper
 - Corresponding Author (Name, Mailing Address, Telephone and FAX Number)
 - Technical Session (First and Second Choices)
 - Presentation Preferred (Oral or Poster)
 - Presenter (Name, Mailing Address, Telephone and FAX Number)

For information and paper submission, mail to:

World Congress on Computational Intelligence
Meeting Management
2603 Main Street, Suite 690        TEL:  [phone]
Irvine, California  92714        FAX:  [phone]

E-MIAL: [e-mail]

Sponsored by The IEEE Neural Networks Council

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

Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 12:00:33 +0100
From: Gaspoz Jean-Paul <[e-mail]>
Subject: '94 Conference on Mobile and Personal Communication Systems
Organization: EPFL


A few collegues of mine are interested in publishing a paper related
to the management of Personal Communication Systems (PCS) / Universal
Personal Telecommunications (UPT). Are there any conferences covering
or addressing these topics scheduled for !94 ?

The deadline for submitting the paper should of course not be
out-of-date.

Thank you in advance.


JP

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

Date: 07 Dec 93 06:33:34 EST
From: Stewart Fist <[e-mail]>
Subject: International Calls via Cable or Satellite


In Australia we use the access code 0011 for voice calls, and 0015 for
fax calls.  The difference is primarily in the fact that the fax call
will always be placed via cable if cable is available.

There are also some differences in the fact that bit-stealing is
turned off, and some modification to the time-out of the echo
cancellation.


Stewart Fist

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

Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 09:12:30 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment


There has been quite a bit of CDMA vs TDMA debate with respect to the
cellular carriers migration from analog to digital technology as well
as equipment to be used in emerging market for PCS.  But who will be
providing the infrastructure equipment and what is the time frame for
availability.  I've heard some announcements from Ericsson, Hughes
Network Systems and Motorola but not from AT&T.  I'm specifically
interested first in the United States followed by other parts of the
world.  Can any one help me by either posting an answer on the digest
or to me directly?


Alex   Lehman Brothers   [e-mail]
Opinions are mine not my employers.

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

Subject: Research Assistantship - High Speed Wireless Networking
From: [e-mail] (Joseph B. Evans)
Date: 7 Dec 93 08:37:48 CDT
Organization: Elec. Eng. & Comp. Sci., Univ. of Kansas



                 Graduate Research Assistant (GRA)
                              for
              High Speed Wireless Networking Research

                       University of Kansas
       Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
      Telecommunications and Information Sciences Laboratory (TISL)
                        Lawrence, Kansas

TISL is looking for qualified, creative individuals with a desire to
pursue graduate research and education in high speed wireless link and
networking technologies. The position requires an undergraduate or MS
degree in EE, ECE, or CS with credentials for admission to the
University of Kansas Graduate School.  Good communication skills,
strong self-motivation, and the ability to work as part of a team are
required.  A background in communications systems and/or networking is
desired.  The individual will join a team of faculty and students
pursuing sponsored research in high speed wireless communications
networks and in the hardware and software development of a prototype
high speed wireless Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) system.

This position is an opportunity to develop the telecommunications
technology of the future.  TISL has state-of-the-art communications
and computing facilities.  We are a founding member of the MAGIC
gigabit testbed and have experiential ATM and long distance SONET
facilities.  Within TISL, faculty and students address challenging
research issues in various aspects of telecommunications, ranging from
high speed networks to wireless communications systems and advanced
spread spectrum techniques.  The interaction between the laboratory
and the other EECS faculty contribute to the stimulating intellectual
environment.

The University of Kansas is located in Lawrence, a city of about
75,000 people, which is situated in the rolling hills of eastern
Kansas, about an hour's drive from Kansas City.  The city of Lawrence
has a long history and retains may interesting reminders of its
colorful past.  The community has 1,257 acres of public parks, indoor
and outdoor community swimming pools, an arts center, an historical
museum, and an active community education and recreation program.

Interested applicants should submit two copies of both a resume and
cover letter requesting application forms to:

Dr. Victor S. Frost
Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Director, Telecommunications and Information Sciences Laboratory
University of Kansas
2291 Irving Hill Road
Lawrence, KS 66045-6929
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: MCI on the Move
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 93 16:47:42 PST


U.S. PHONE GIANT PLANS MEXICAN CONNECTION

  Don't be surprised to see MCI International link up with a Mexican
telecommunications partner to take advantage of expanded free trade,
says the president of the New York-based company, Seth Blumenfeld.

  "We are certainly in the process of exploring options and
opportunities in Mexico," Blumenfeld said in a telephone interview,
adding that their corporate strategy is to create partnerships with
other telecommunications companies.

  MCI International is a subsidiary of MCI Communications Corp., based
in Washington, D.C.  It is the second largest phone company in the
United States after AT&T and the fifth largest in the world.

  Canadians recognize MCI as the U.S. partner of Stentor, the alliance
of nine Canadian telephone companies that includes BC Tel, and as a
partner of British Telecom in the U.K.

  Blumenfeld said that MCI provides telecommunications services to 18
per cent of the U.S. domestic market, which is worth $60 billion and
grows at seven per cent annually.

  "A one per cent market share is worth $600 million as I calculate it
and we've averaged a 1.0 to 1.5 per cent gain each year," Blumenfeld
explained.

  In pursuing a corporate strategy to increase market share in the
U.S., MCI also wants to keep its multinational customers happy by
providing seamless service across the globe, he said.

                     -- Vancouver Sun --


Sid Shniad

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Sira)
Subject: My Phone Tinkles Nightly
Organization: The National Capital Freenet, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 00:51:21 GMT


I recently replaced my phone with a middle-of-the-line Radio Snack
Duofone model (I was given it after my older, better phone gave up the
ghost). I've noticed in a gradual awareness kind of way over the last
couple of months that this phone makes a little beeping-ticking sound
every night at exactly 4:46 AM (Eastern time). Yeah, I should be
sleeping at this hour instead of waiting around for my phone to tick.
No, it's not particularly loud enough to keep me awake, but I am
curious about it.

The ringer on the phone does seem to be sensitive to the line
condition; taking my modem off-hook or putting it on-hook while it's
on the same line produces a similar, louder noise from the phone. I
imagine a second extension would have the same effect. So presumably
there's a small glitch in the line voltage or something at 4:46 AM
nightly.

Any ideas what the phone company is doing to the line every night that
would cause this behaviour?


[Moderator's Note: Telco is doing line testing of the phones on your
exchange. Your phone is sensitive enough that it notices this when
it occurs. Roll over and go back to sleep. :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David Gast)
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 06:58:04 GMT


I just purchased a new computer.  I have 2400 baud modem and cable
that works just great with my old computer.  With the new one, the
computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from
the modem.  For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a
number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light),
but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem.  (Echo
does not work at all either).

Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the
instruction manual, to have any dip switches.

Any ideas what I need to do?  Get a new card?


Thanks,

David

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Huntress)
Subject: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy?
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 17:29:23 GMT


I've been shopping for a cellular phone for my in-law's Xmas gift.  In
fact I just returned a few minutes ago more confused than when I left.
I had planned on buying one of the smaller style of phones rather than
the "bag" type.  My in-laws will be travelling between MA and FL using
the phone almost exclusively for emergency inbound and outbound calls
(once we get over the "guess where I'm calling from!" phase).

I'm not worried about standby or talk times of the little phones, but
I had not realized that they were 0.6 watts versus three watts for the
bag phones.  So here is my question:

Is the east coast cell coverage sufficient so that 0.6 watts is enough
power to always (or virtually always) be able to send and receive
calls?

None of the sales droids had a clue.  Any info appreciated.


Gary Huntress   [e-mail]   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I imagine the east coast is as saturated with
coverage as the Chicago area, and here, the 0.6 watt phones do fine.
Under rigorous conditions, obviously three watts will give a little
more punch as needed, but I've never seen an instance here where the
lower power did not do as well. Really, it is a personal preference
most of the time.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Hoffhines)
Subject: TDD Software Wanted
Organization: University of Hawaii
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 17:41:30 GMT


Is there any software that emulates a TDD (Telecomm Device for the
Deaf?). This ought to be straightforward, but my local phone company
says that you 'have to buy their TDD hardware'. Say it ain't so!

I don't care what kind of computer, although UNIX-based sources would
be helpful.


Michael Hoffhines    [e-mail]   University of Hawaii

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Richolson)
Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service
Date: 7 Dec 1993 08:47:06 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University


[e-mail] (Matthew B. Landru) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gregory
> Youngblood) writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but
>> they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence
>> users they can't.  PAT]

> Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time.
> Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of that uses AT&T
> ACUS service connected to the campus phone system, the story is always
> the same. You can only use ACUS from the campus phones. 10XXX will not
> work. If you want to use a calling card, you need to dial the 800
> number for access. (Or you can use a public phone. The public phones
> here belong to C&P, and they are able to use 10XXX with no problems.
> But there, you have no choice but to use a calling card, or to pump
> quarters in.)

[ stuff deleted ]

Here at the campus where I work we have a slightly different
arrangement.  The state of Kansas requires all of its state agencies
to use what is called KANS-A-N.  This is a long distance arrangement
that was started years ago before there was competition.  We are still
stuck with it.

All of our long distance calls are automatically switched to this
system.  It is more expensive but we have no choice.  We have our own
telephone switching system on campus.  It is automatic.

We are currently building a new dorm (the only one that is on this
campus).  It will be interesting to see if the students are also
required to use KANS-A-N.


Ron Richolson
Associate Professor     amateur call: KA7FYA
KSU-Salina              [e-mail]
2409 Scanlan
Salina, KS  67401       (913)-826-2675

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Mintz)
Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service
Date: 7 Dec 1993 15:02:19 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico


> [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but
> they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence
> users they can't.  PAT]

Yes they can. I lived in a college dorm for two years, and an
additional year in college-owned apartments. The first year, I could
make 10xxx1 calls with no problem.  Then, they blocked it. I
complained and talked with the guy in charge here, claiming that it
was in violation of the FCC's rules about having to provide equal
access to long distance carriers. The administrator here said he knew
what I meant but that college campuses fall in a special category by
the FCC that don't have this restriction. He said, as it stands now,
college campuses will have to provide 10xxx1 dialing by (I think)
1996, and certain groups are lobbying hard against this mandate. At
the time I checked here on the net or elsewhere (I don't remember) and
what he told me was confirmed.

I tried several times to change my 1+ long distance carrier. Sometimes
nothing would happen at all, other times I'd get calls from confused
representatives at Pacific Bell or the long distance company about the
"special status" of my line. 1-700-555-4141 always responded with
"AT&T".

It blew my mind. In addition to this restriction, we had to pay a per
minute charge for LOCAL calls, since because the school dorms fall
under the category of a business, that's the rate Pacific Bell resells
local service to them. The rep said that outgoing long distance calls
are basically routed through whatever LD company they want them to,
whenever they want. It's presumably to find the best deal, but they
take this option away from the customer.  Operator assisted calls were
contracted out to Sprint only.

If was possible, either by asking the local operator (0) or the LD
operator (00) to manually ask to be connected to another long distance
company. You could also dial 950-10xx to hook into other LD companies.
The problem is that you had to have a phone card or other non-1+
dialing and billing arrangements with that company, and that was
always slightly more costly than the 1+ rate they force fed us.

The school had just bought the apartments and rewired them all to
connect to the school's Centrex system instead of Pacific Bell. I
asked if I could stay on a Pacific Bell line, and they said no. The
whole situation really made me angry. The school would print out its
own itemized bills quoting any long distance prices it chose.
Obviously, this excluded me from the discount plans available from
being a direct customer of the larger carriers (like the overseas
discounts, which would have really been helpful). By the way, I'm at
California State University, Chico.

If any of you is informed on the current status of this matter and
knows for sure that this form of call blocking is illegal, please
advise me of such and I will contact our student legal organization.


Thanks,

Rich

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service
Organization: University of Missouri
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 09:07:38 CST


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gregory
> Youngblood) writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but
>> they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence
>> users they can't.  PAT]

> Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time.
> Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of that uses AT&T
> ACUS service connected to the campus phone system, the story is always
> the same. You can only use ACUS from the campus phones. 10XXX will not
> work. If you want to use a calling card, you need to dial the 800
> number for access. (Or you can use a public phone. The public phones
> here belong to C&P, and they are able to use 10XXX with no problems.
> But there, you have no choice but to use a calling card, or to pump
> quarters in.)

I just checked out our University phone book.  They allow alternate
access via either 9+ 950-XXXX, 9 + 1-800 numbers or 9 + 10xxx+0.  I
assume that these only allow calling card access, rather than billed
back to the calling number.

The university sells residence hall students the same WATS LD service
that is used by administration at a flat per minute rate, down to
$0.11 / min.


Curtis Bohl                      Computer Programmer/Analyst
[e-mail]           4-H Youth Development
Alternate: [e-mail]                   Programs
[phone]               University of Missouri-Columbia

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #802
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22190;
          8 Dec 93 7:40 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25335
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 04:13:03 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25042
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 04:12:43 -0600
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 04:12:43 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #803

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Dec 93 04:11:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 803

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Second Vote Brings Success to c.d.t.t. Advocates (TELECOM Moderator)
    Windows Telephony 1.0 Country List (Toby Nixon)
    Broadband Technologies, Inc. (Randy te Velde)
    From a Qualcomm Press Release (Alex Cena)
    Union Losing Telco Jobs? (Eric N. Florack)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 03:47:12 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom>
Subject: Second Vote Brings Success to c.d.t.t. Advocates


Usenet has decided to have an unmoderated telecom newsgroup. That is
their priviledge of course, but expect the signal to noise ratio to go
downhill fast. Obviously, none of the -- ahem! they like to call them
'tech' -- messages will get out to the Digest mailing list people
unless you have chosen to subscribe the new list they have started for
that purpose.

I'd like to think that now that the advocates of unmoderating the
telecom newsgroup on Usenet have gotten their way that their constant
flaming and harassing activities will come to a halt.

Beautiful dreamer, I ... there is no doubt in my mind that the flaming
will go on for several more weeks at least; that is what so many
Usenetters get off on and are nourished by. I think it is almost a
kind of spiritual nourishment for many of them. I had forgotten how
nauseating it is to read 'news.groups' after having ignored it for a
few years until of necessity I had to start scanning it again to keep
up with this mess as it unfolded day by day. At least now I can
unsubscribe 'news.groups' from my .newsrc and get back to reading more
pleasant things.

Really, I am happy for them; now they have a place to do their
thing. Maybe now I will get to do my thing as well, but something
tells me not to count on it very much. Something tells me the Digest
will get bombarded with all sorts of cross-postings (but none or
few of the replies). I know I certainly do not want TELECOM Digest
confused with the unmoderated group, and I'd prefer not to see the
articles I run here one day show up there the next as they do now
in alt.dcom.telecom, but eliminating all that is going to be very
difficult.

Anyway, that's where it stands. They'll be doing their own thing
henceforth and hopefully permit this Digest the same courtesy without
the constant bickering and flaming for which Usenet is famous, and
which has caused so much of my time to be wasted in recent months.


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (Toby Nixon)
Subject: Windows Telephony 1.0 Country List
Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 19:53:16 GMT


A few months back, I posted a request for help in putting together a
list of all the countries in the world, their country codes, and their
long distance and international direct dialing procedures.  I received
responses from many, many people all around the world, for which I am
most grateful.  Many of you requested that I post the list back to the
net when it was completed.  Well, I won't claim that it is really
complete yet (we're still missing some dialing rules for a few
countries), and I doubt it ever will be done considering the
continuing national boundary changes, planned dialing rule updates in
EC countries, etc., but here is what we shipped in version 1.0 of
Windows Telephony (for those of you who are interested in this list
but don't want to download the whole 3-megabyte SDK to get it).

Note that in the dialing rules "E" means dial the country code, "F"
means dial the city/area code, "G" means dial the local number, "I"
means dial the city/area code (but they are not defined for all areas
of that country), "W" means wait for a second dial tone, "," means
wait a fixed period of time before proceeding.  If the entry for a
country has no rules at all, it most likely means we were never able
to get any information on that country; if the "long distance" rule is
blank but there is an "international" rule, it most likely means that
that country does not use city/area codes and all calls within the
country are "local" (in terms of dialing procedures, although probably
not in terms of toll charges).

Thanks again to all of those who helped to put this list together.
Any help you can offer in keeping it updated will be most appreciated
by both me and by Windows users around the world.


Toby Nixon   Program Manager - Windows Telephony   Microsoft

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

Country                          Country   Long         International
Name                             Code      Distance     Direct Dial

Afghanistan                      93
Albania                          355       0FG          00EFG
Algeria                          213                    00EFG
American Samoa                   684
Andorra                          33        16WIG        19WEFG
Angola                           244       0FG          01EFG
Anguilla                         1         1FG          1EFG
Antigua                          1         1FG          011EFG
Argentina                        54        0FG          00EFG
Armenia                          7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Aruba                            297                    00EFG
Ascension Island                 247                    01EFG
Australia                        61        0FG          0011EFG
Australian Antarctic Territory   672
Austria                          43        0FG          00EFG
Azerbaijan                       7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Bahamas                          1         1FG          0011EFG
Bahrain                          973                    0EFG
Bangladesh                       880       0FG          00EFG
Barbados                         1         1FG          011EFG
Barbuda                          1         1FG          011EFG
Belarus                          7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Belgium                          32        0FG          00EFG
Belize                           501       0FG          00EFG
Benin                            229                    00EFG
Bermuda                          1         1FG          011EFG
Bhutan                           975                    117EFG
Bolivia                          591       0FG          00EFG
Bosnia and Herzegovina           387       0FG          00EFG
Botswana                         267       0FG          00EFG
Brazil                           55        0FG          00EFG
British Virgin Islands           1         1FG          011EFG
Brunei                           673       0FG          00EFG
Bulgaria                         359       0FG          00EFG
Burkina Faso                     226                    00EFG
Burundi                          257                    90EFG
Cameroon                         237                    00EFG
Canada                           1         1FG          011EFG
Cape Verde Islands               238                    0EFG
Cayman Islands                   1         1FG          011EFG
Central African Republic         236                    19EFG
Chad                             235                    15EFG
Chile                            56        0FG          00EFG
China                            86        0FG          00EFG
Christmas Island                 672
Cocos Island                     672
Colombia                         57        9FG          90EFG
Comoros                          269                    10EFG
Congo                            242                    00EFG
Cook Islands                     682                    00EFG
Costa Rica                       506                    00EFG
Croatia                          385       0FG          00EFG
Cuba                             53        0FG          00EFG
Cyprus                           357       0FG          00EFG
Czech Republic                   42        0FG          00EFG
Denmark                          45                     009EFG
Diego Garcia                     246                    00EFG
Djibouti                         253                    00EFG
Dominica                         1         1FG          011EFG
Dominican Republic               1         1FG          011EFG
Ecuador                          593       0FG          00EFG
Egypt                            20        0FG          00EFG
El Salvador                      503                    0EFG
Equatorial Guinea                240                    00EFG
Estonia                          372       8,FG         8,10EFG
Ethiopia                         251                    00EFG
Faeroe Islands                   298                    009EFG
Falkland Islands                 500                    01EFG
Fiji Islands                     679                    05EFG
Finland                          358       9FG          990EFG
France                           33        16WIG        19WEFG
French Antilles                  590                    19WEFG
French Guiana                    594                    19WEFG
French Polynesia                 689                    19WEFG
Gabon                            241                    00EFG
Gambia                           220                    00EFG
Georgia                          7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Germany                          49        0FG          00EFG
Ghana                            233                    00EFG
Gibraltar                        350                    00EFG
Greece                           30        0FG          00EFG
Greenland                        299                    009EFG
Grenada                          1         1FG          011EFG
Guadeloupe                       590                    19WEFG
Guam                             671                    011EFG
Guantanamo Bay                   539
Guatemala                        502       0IG          00EFG
Guinea                           224                    00EFG
Guinea-Bissau                    245                    114EFG
Guyana                           592                    19WEFG
Haiti                            509       0FG          00EFG
Honduras                         504                    00EFG
Hong Kong                        852                    001EFG
Hungary                          36        06WFG        00EFG
Iceland                          354                    90EFG
India                            91        0FG          00EFG
Indonesia                        62        0FG          00EFG
INMARSAT (Atlantic-East)         871                    EFG
INMARSAT (Atlantic-West)         874                    EFG
INMARSAT (Indian)                873                    EFG
INMARSAT (Pacific)               872                    EFG
Iran                             98        FG           00EFG
Iraq                             964       FG           00EFG
Ireland                          353       0FG          00EFG
Israel                           972       0FG          00EFG
Italy                            39        0FG          00EFG
Ivory Coast                      225                    00EFG
Jamaica                          1         0FG          00EFG
Japan                            81        0FG          001EFG
Jordan                           962       FG           00EFG
Kazakhstan                       7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Kenya                            254                    01EFG
Khmer Republic                   855
Kiribati Republic                686                    09EFG
Korea (North)                    850                    99EFG
Korea (South)                    82        0FG          001EFG
Kuwait                           965                    00EFG
Kyrgyzstan                       7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Laos                             856                    14EFG
Latvia                           371       8,FG         8,10EFG
Lebanon                          961                    00EFG
Lesotho                          266                    00EFG
Liberia                          231                    00EFG
Libya                            218                    00EFG
Liechtenstein                    41        0FG          00EFG
Lithuania                        370       8,FG         8,10EFG
Luxembourg                       352                    00EFG
Macao                            853                    00EFG
Macedonia                        389       0FG          00EFG
Madagascar                       261                    16EFG
Malawi                           265                    101EFG
Malaysia                         60        0FG          007EFG
Maldives                         960                    00EFG
Mali                             223                    00EFG
Malta                            356                    00EFG
Marshall Islands                 692
Martinique                       596                    19WEFG
Mauritania                       222                    00EFG
Mauritius                        230                    00EFG
Mayotte Island                   269                    10EFG
Mexico                           52        91FG         98EFG
Micronesia                       691
Moldova                          7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Monaco                           33        16WIG        19WEFG
Mongolia                         976
Montenegro                       381       0FG          00EFG
Montserrat                       1         1FG          011EFG
Morocco                          212       0IG          00EFG
Mozambique                       258                    00EFG
Myanmar                          95                     0EFG
Namibia                          264                    09EFG
Nauru                            674                    115EFG
Nepal                            977                    00EFG
Netherlands                      31        0FG          09EFG
Netherlands Antilles             599       0FG          00EFG
Nevis                            1         1FG          011EFG
New Caledonia                    687                    1900EFG
New Zealand                      64        0FG          00EFG
Nicaragua                        505       0FG          00EFG
Niger                            227                    00EFG
Nigeria                          234                    009EFG
Niue                             683
Norfolk Island                   672                    0101EFG
Northern Mariana Islands         670       1FG          011EFG
Norway                           47                     095EFG
Oman                             968                    00EFG
Pakistan                         92        0FG          00EFG
Palau                            680
Panama                           507                    00EFG
Papua New Guinea                 675                    05EFG
Paraguay                         595       0FG          00EFG
Peru                             51        0FG          00EFG
Philippines                      63        0FG          00EFG
Poland                           48        0FG          00EFG
Portugal                         351       0FG          00EFG
Qatar                            974                    0EFG
Reunion Island                   262                    19EFG
Romania                          40        0FG          00EFG
Rota Island                      670       1FG          011EFG
Russia                           7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Rwanda                           250                    00EFG
Saipan Island                    670       1FG          011EFG
San Marino                       39        0FG          00EFG
Sao Tome                         239                    00EFG
Saudi Arabia                     966       0FG          00EFG
Senegal Republic                 221       0FG          00EFG
Serbia                           381       0FG          00EFG
Seychelle Islands                248                    00EFG
Sierra Leone                     232
Singapore                        65                     005EFG
Slovak Republic                  42        0FG          00EFG
Slovenia                         386       0FG          00EFG
Solomon Islands                  677
Somalia                          252                    19WEFG
South Africa                     27        0FG          09EFG
Spain                            34        9FG          07WEFG
Sri Lanka                        94        0FG          00EFG
St. Helena                       290                    0EFG
St. Kitts                        1         1FG          011EFG
St. Pierre and Miquelon          508                    19WEFG
St. Vincent and the Grenadines   1         1FG          0EFG
Sudan                            249                    00EFG
Surinam                          597                    002EFG
Swaziland                        268                    0EFG
Sweden                           46        0FG          009EFG
Switzerland                      41        0FG          00EFG
Syria                            963       FG           00EFG
Taiwan, Republic of China        886       0FG          002EFG
Tajikistan                       7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Tanzania                         255                    0900EFG
Thailand                         66        0FG          001EFG
Tinian Island                    670       1FG          011EFG
Togo                             228                    00EFG
Tokelau                          690
Tonga                            676                    09EFG
Trinidad and Tobago              1         1FG          01EFG
Tunisia                          216       0FG          00EFG
Turkey                           90        9,FG         9,9,EFG
Turkmenistan                     7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Turks and Caicos Islands         1         1FG          0EFG
Tuvalu                           688
Uganda                           256                    00EFG
Ukraine                          7         8,FG         8,10EFG
United Arab Emirates             971       0FG          00EFG
United Kingdom                   44        0FG          010EFG
United States of America         1         1FG          011EFG
Uruguay                          598
Uzbekistan                       7         8,FG         8,10EFG
Vanuatu                          678                    00EFG
Vatican City                     39        0FG          00EFG
Venezuela                        58        0FG          00EFG
Vietnam                          84        0FG          00EFG
Wallis and Futuna Islands        681                    19WEFG
Western Samoa                    685                    0EFG
Yemen (P.D.R.)                   969
Yemen Arab Republic              967                    00EFG
Zaire                            243                    00EFG
Zambia                           260                    00EFG
Zimbabwe                         263                    09EFG

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

Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 17:30:12 EST
From: Randy te Velde <[e-mail]>
Subject: Broadband Technologies, Inc.


I am seeking information about Broadband Technologies, Inc. (BBT),
which is marketing fiber-to-the-curb and video dialtone equipment to
the RBOCs, for a study at Polytechnic University in New York.

As a potential consumer of switched high-bandwidth digital services, I
am particularly interested in the business potential of marketing
these services to the home.  I think most readers of this news group
would enjoy seeing wide deployment of advanced interactive services.
Unfortunately, if the business community sees little financial reward
in creating the necessary infrastructure for these services, the
promise will be a long time coming.

BBT is a spin-off company (from Siecor) established in 1988, which is
betting its future that fiber-to-the-curb is the deployment method of
choice.  Thus far, it has not sold equipment in any great quantity,
but it has conducted small trials with six of the seven RBOCs, GTE,
and a few companies abroad.

According to the prospectus occasioning its initial public stock
offering (November 3, 1993), BBT believes that by the time it is able
to manufacture in quantity, switched video services can be provided to
the consumer at the average rate of $1,580 per home passed, including
all labor and equipment, not including the cost of retiring current
facilities.  One assumtion underlying this figure is that an average
of eight homes can be served with coax from its "optical network
unit", the device that (normally) terminates the fiber loop at the
curb.  One outside plant engineer told me that the current structure
of outside plant facilities would force the average down to four or
five homes per ONU.

I would enjoy comments about the feasibility of these figures.

Also, I am interested in exploring the feasibility of competing
technologies.  Will we all get stuck with fiber-to-the-node systems,
which allow limited interactivity for the consumer?  Is ADSL for real?
And if so, how will it be switched?  Can we get what we want from it
(HDTV, high bandwidth interactive services), or will it force us to
make due with less?

Please direct replies to Randy te Velde <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 17:48:42 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: From a Qualcomm Press Release


BUSINESS WIRE

12/07 QUALCOMM uses Coral Systems software to support seamless roaming
on wireless networks

LONGMONT, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Coral Systems announced an agreement
with QUALCOMM Inc. (NASDAQ:QCOM) of San Diego, for the use of Coral
Systems' Home Location Register (HLR) software technology.  QUALCOMM
will use this software to enhance the seamless roaming capabilities of
its Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) technology wireless
communications systems.

The HLR is an intelligent network component that permits routing of
calls to wireless users regardless of the user's location, enabling
service providers to associate phone numbers with people, rather than
places.  Currently, the Coral Systems' HLR provides an industry
standard method of passing information between wireless networks to
deliver calls, authorize service and forward any custom calling
features a subscriber may have, such as call-waiting, or three-way
calling.  This process occurs at the time the call is connected and is
in full compliance with the cellular industry's inter-system IS-41
specification, put forth by the TIA TR45.2 Committee.  ``The flexible
and modular design of Coral Systems' HLR enables us to utilize
relevant portions of Coral Systems' software in our CDMA HLR
product,'' said Richard Sulpizio, QUALCOMM's senior vice president and
chief operating officer.  Currently, QUALCOMM and other
telecommunications industry manufacturers are preparing products for
the implementation of CDMA digital service in the United States and
international wireless markets.

QUALCOMM will provide both CDMA subscriber phones and infrastructure
equipment for CDMA wireless sytems.  The HLR stores service profiles,
Mobile Identification Numbers and Electronic Serial Numbers for
account verification when subscribers are calling from areas served by
other carriers.  The local cellular network and subscriber's phone
exchange signals and the cellular network notifies the HLR of the
subscriber's location, so that other cellular networks can deliver
calls and subscriber services.

"Coral Systems' HLR expands a carrier's core business of connecting
subscribers with their calls by providing seamless roaming," said Eric
Johnson, Coral Systems president and chief executive officer.  "We're
proud that QUALCOMM chose software from Coral Systems as the design
best suited to the task."

QUALCOMM Inc.  develops, manufactures, markets, licenses and operates
advanced communications systems and products based on digital wireless
technology.  QUALCOMM's products include the OmniTRACS(R) system and
digital wireless telephone systems and products based on CDMA
technology.  The company also develops and markets a range of VLSI
devices.  Coral Systems Inc. develops, markets and supports UNIX
software applications for the wireless telecommunications industry.
Coral's Wireless Intelligent Network products, which include the
FraudBuster(tm) fraud detection system, Home Location Register (HLR)
and IS-41 Data Message Handler (DMH), are designed to bring realtime
capabilities to cellular, ESMR, and emerging personal communications
networks.  Products are distributed worldwide through strategic
partnerships with Sun Microsystems and Computer Sciences Corp.  Note:
OmniTRACS is a registered trademark of QUALCOMM Inc. FraudBuster is a
trademark of Coral Systems Inc.

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

Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 12:29:18 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Union Losing Telco Jobs?


[e-mail] (Sid Shniad) passes on to us an article by Kim Moody,
entitled: "How Union Jobs Are Being Lost In an Expanding Industry"

The article wails and moans about the loss of union-controlled jobs.

> Unlike the old phone companies, the operations in the newer
> services are mostly nonunion. Cellular is almost completely nonunion;
> cable is about 5% union; broadcasting 15%; and publishing, newspapers
> and printing about 30% union.

> For all the talk of a new hi tech information industry, the means
> of milking telephone are more about dumping union workers than about
> technology.

What the article fails to point out is that the/ unions themselves/
are responsible for pricing themselves and the workers they claim to
represent, out of the market. This, more than any other factor is the
reason the old-style unions are fading. Regardsless of any other
factor, companies whose primary goal is to make money for it`s
investors, will always and invariably move to operate at a lower cost
and a higher profit margin. Such is the nature of competition in a
free marketplace. (This is still America, and not the Worker`s
Paradise that Marx wanted ...)

> In the long run, it proposes a new national regulatory agency to
> oversee the entire information industry. In practice, however, the CWA
> has sometimes supported those aspects of deregulation that allow the
> Bells into new services.

Gee, bigger government. More regulation. /Just/ what we need. Why
doesn`t the union understand that more regulation means FEWER jobs in
the long run, because of hurt business?

> Also, as District 1's Peres points out, the workers in cellular
> and cable perform the same type of work as phone company workers, but
> for about $4-6 an hour less.

And how much of that $4-$6 dollars goes directly to /union coffers/?
How much of that increase is the paying consumer suposed to deal with,
without finding a better, cheaper company with which to do business?
/This is helping the workers?/

At every turn, the CWA and other similar unions have sought to limit
the free marketplace, in favor of their own powerbase, regardless of
the consequences to it`s own rank and file, let alone anyone else who
might be affected.

> As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R for
> Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to pay for
> 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home shopping
> opportunities the new technology promises.<<

Does anyone recall that there were similar arguments against cable TV?
Tell me about how that one panned out, once it was available in the
free market.

No sale.


/E

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #803
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26036;
          8 Dec 93 17:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14145
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:11:48 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15812
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:11:24 -0600
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:11:24 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #804

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Dec 93 13:11:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 804

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Local Loop Deregulation in California (Russell Blau)
    Async/ENET Bridge Router Solution For 14.4 (Sam Ghandchi)
    Voice Response Hardware/Software (Jeff Kenton)
    New Numbering Plan in the Works? (Eric Valentine)
    Making a PBX (Henry Alan Segal)
    Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Caller ID Approved in Wisconsin (Milwaukee Journal via Gary Breuckman)
    Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (Sharif Torpis)
    Help Needed With Cellular Connection (James R. Brosnahan)
    Needs PC Add-on Card For Voice-Mail (Yee-Lee Shyong)
    Calling Cards, 'Easy Access' and PBX's: Answers (Kriston J. Rehberg)
    Re: Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK (David Hough)
    Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Tim Tsai)
    Re: 900mhz Cordless Protocols (Ralph Sprang)
    Re: Tropez 900Mhz Digital Cordless (Patri Friedman)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively
to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email,
in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service
systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited,
complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups.
Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks.

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

Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 18:24:07 EST
From: Russell Blau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Local Loop Deregulation in California


Replying to:
Note 39954 in newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom
From: [e-mail] (Pushpendra Mohta)

> On what date will multiple telcos be able to provide the local loop in
> California?

> [Moderator's Note: To the best of my knowledge, there is no scheduled
> date for this where residential or small/medium size businesses are
> concerned. In some cities, large businesses have a service called
> Metropolitan Fiber available to them and they can justify the cost.

Pat, first off, I won't commercialize the "net" by mentioning that MFS
Telecom (formerly Metropolitan Fiber Systems) does operate in the Los
Angeles and San Francisco business districts and is expanding to San
Jose and Silicon Valley.  :-)

Second, the California PUC order that opened up intra-LATA toll
competition also contained a provision authorizing competition in the
provision of PBX trunks and Centrex "loops"; these are the services
used by most mid-to-large size businesses (say, more than five or ten
phone lines) to obtain dial tone.  As you probably know, however, that
order was withdrawn due to the controversy over parts of it having
been written by Pacific Bell, so it is not known at this time when (if
ever) it will actually take effect.

I would anticipate that, if and when the PUC clarifies its policy and
if the provision allowing competitive Centrex/PBX stands, there will
likely be an announcement from MFS shortly afterwards regarding the
offering of competitive local dial tone services for small business
customers (five to thirty-five lines) in those areas the company
serves.


Russell M. Blau        Swidler & Berlin, Chtd.
[e-mail]    Washington, D.C.
Tel: [phone]    Fax: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Don't worry in the least about 'commercializing the
net'. Usenet now has their own unmoderated telecom newsgroup, and on
this list I don't care what you talk about as long as it is not
absolutely blatantly commercial.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Sam Ghandchi)
Subject: Async/ENET Bridge Router Solution For 14.4
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 21:26:54 GMT


I am looking for a bridge router with multiple ASYNC ports and one or
more Ethernet ports which can handle 2400 to 14.4 mps traffic.  I need
to route IP and IPX.  OSPF support is also a plus.

I have heard of BReeze1000 and DR BOND, but I do not know how reliable
those products are.

Any feedback is appreciated.


TIA,

Sam Ghandchi   [e-mail]

Please forward any information to:
Sam Ghandchi
966 Westlynn Way, Unit 1
Cupertino, CA 95014
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Kenton)
Subject: Voice Response Hardware/Software
Organization: Kenton Systems Corporation, Weston MA
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:25:58 GMT


Does anyone have any recommendations for voice response hardware and
software? What I want is a system that can answer the phone, ask some
pre-recorded questions, get some input from the keypad, and produce a
recorded response (depending on the input, of course).

Has anyone used this sort of system before?


Jeff Kenton    [phone]      [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Have you considered the BigmOuth package? It does
what you are asking for and seems to work okay. I use it on one of
my phone lines here.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Valentine)
Subject: New Number Plan in the Works?
Date: 7 Dec 1993 14:45:20 GMT
Organization: Ellemtel Telecom Systems Labs, Stockholm, Sweden
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Having worked in the Class 5 market over there for awhile, I should
know this, but don't. My understanding is that the current numbering
scheme, while being patched in the short run when an area code gets
overloaded, is due for a "complete" revamping In The Not So Distant
Future. As far as I know, this goes beyond the extension of IC codes
but I don't know how far or if, indeed, this is an industry equivalent
of an urban legend. Isn't Bellcore responsible for handling the number
plan and aren't they trying to shift the responsibilty for it back to
the Feds because of the fear of legal hassles with the independents?
Does anyone have the Straight Poop or know what the number migration
strategy might be?

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

From: [e-mail] (SEGAL  HENRY ALAN)
Subject: Making a PBX
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 20:11:53 GMT


I would like some advice.  (I am in computer engineering at University
of Toronto.)

I have been offered a summer job here at U of T to build a small "PBX"
for a number of offices here.  Each office has one telephone line
going into the room with five about people in each office.  Currently,
there is only one telephone in the room -- this is obviously a major
inconvenience.

The solution would seem to be a system that would:
 1 - Answer the phone;
 2 - Play a message stating "Press 1 for Mr. Smith, 2 for Mr. Johnson, ...";
 3 - Interpret the number that is pressed; and
 4 - switch the phone to the appropriate line.
 5 - If time permits, make a mailbox service.  ("To leave a message for Mr.
     Smith, type 7".)

I believe this is called a PBX.  (Am I right?)

Questions

Q1) To answer the phone, what must I detect?  Is it simply that one of the
    four incoming wires goes to a high voltage?  Is the system, in general,
    a digital system or an analog system?

Q2) To play a message, I would send the sound along the wires.  Is this sound
    in digital form or analog?  Which wires would be involved here?

Q3) How do I interpret when a number is pressed?  Also, how could I detect a
    number being pressed WHILE I am playing my message.  (This would be done
    by impatient callers who already know what the message will say.)

Q4) As for the switch, can I implement this with a simple
    transistor-representing-a-switch ?  (I am envisioning writing a program
    in assembly language,  downloading to a Programmable Logic Array, and
    using Memory-Mapped-I/O to set the gate of one of the transistor-switches
    to high thereby turning on that transistor.)  Are there any problems
    with this approach?

I have practically no experience with telephones, but I know some
electronics, particularly digital electronics.  Is this type of
project finishable in a summer by a student, or should I turn down the
job and recommend that they buy a PBX from NT or some other company?
(And how much would that be?)

Any comments would be much appreciated.


[Moderator's Note: I think if you proceed with this you will be trying
to re-invent the wheel. There are lots of hardware cards and software
programs out there doing this now. Two which come to mind are BigmOuth
for somewhat smaller applications and the Dialogics card for larger,
more heavy duty use. Both have the ability to answer the phone, play
the messages you described and transfer calls around. If you want to
make a little money for yourself, buy one of these pre-packaged, set
up the prompts and routing of calls as desired for your client and
sell it to them at a nice mark up.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:38:32 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs)


[e-mail] writes:

>> As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R for
>> Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to pay for
>> 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home shopping
>> opportunities the new technology promises.<<

> Does anyone recall that there were similar arguments against cable TV?
> Tell me about how that one panned out, once it was available in the
> free market.

Do not think this is apples vs oranges. Cable worked because it filled
a need that local programming was not. Right now I am paying U$300.00
per year for "basic" service (not the brain-dead economy service but
also no "premium" channels) this gives me about 40 tunable channels of
which I usually watch 9 (TNT, TLC, Nickelodean, USA, AMC, BRAVO,
Family, Sci-Fi, and Comedy). This is *enough* (C). Other channel
watching is usually limited to occasional movies and Jeopardy.

Somehow, I doubt that adding another 460 channels would change my
habits much and, since the foregoing is *enough*, would not be willing
to pay any more.

At one time I subscribed to Prodigy but dropped it for lack of
benefit. Of course since I live in Orlando 8*), home shopping has no
advantage; EVERYTHING is cheaper here. (Last Christmas my wife wanted
to be able to exchange video tapes with her cousin Debbie who lives in
England so she needed a PAL-NTSC converter. After pouring over TV
magazines and calling all over the country, the most cost effective
one with decent viewing quality -- an AIWA -- was found about two miles
from my home. Now they are happy -- except now they want ham radio sets
to cut down on long distance telephone costs ...)

The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think
"if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad
enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now
requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for
the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel
listing ?

Channel 9 is the "listing" channel and takes about two minutes to scroll
through the next hour and a half. Same comment.

I suspect that this is part of the problem that has kept satellite
receiver sales down, sensory overload. Why else whould the Internet
Gophers, Archies, and WWW retrieval mechanisms be so popular -- and
these people are probably the "brightest and the best".

So for 500 channels to work, a listing would have to be downloaded
(daily ?, weekly ?) to a storage device that could be set up for
selective retrieval.  Could it be done -- certainly. Will it ?


Enough,

Padgett

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Breuckman)
Subject: Caller ID Approved in Wisconsin
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 06:02:15 PST


 From the _Milwaukee Journal_ (two articles, 12/2/93 and 12/3/93)
(WI) Ameritech Caller ID plan wins approval from PSC

Unless opponents go to court, Wisconsin residents soon will be able to
see the phone numbers of whoever is calling them.  The state's Public
Service Commission on Thursday approved a caller identification phone
service -- generally known as caller ID -- that Ameritech and PTI
Communications Inc. have asked to sell in Wisconsin.  The service is
to be offered for about $6.50 a month.

[ The article goes on to explain blocking approved ... Ameritech will
offer per-call blocking to everyone by dialing a code, and per line
permanent blocking for law enforcement and social service agencies.]

State Senator Lynn Adelman (D-Town of Waterford) says he will sue to
block the PSC decision.  Adelman and the American Civil Liberties
Union want phone companies to offer per-line blocking to everyone free
of charge.

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

From: [e-mail] (Console Cowboy)
Subject: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number
Organization: Anarchy in the U.K.
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 01:12:45 GMT


I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800
number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to
any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The
number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why?


Sharif Torpis       Senior Consultant
[e-mail]  Black Lodge Engineering


[Moderator's Note: Has it continued other than that one burst of
calls? Getting to the bottom of these things is next to impossible
without a lot of research, but if it continues, let's look into it.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (James R. Brosnahan)
Subject: Cellular Connection
Organization: Datascope
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 08:28:19 GMT


Has anyone had experience dialing into a Motorola Cellular with S1936C
cellular connection? I am able to establish the carrier (ie:2400bps),
yet no protocol (ie:LAPM). Any comments or suggestions?


Thanks,

jimb    internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 11:21:24
From: [e-mail] (Yee-Lee Shyong)
Subject: Needs PC Add-on Card For Voice-Mail


    Can anyone provide me any information about PC added-on card
for voice mail?

CAPABILITY:
    1. Two lines per card (better)
    2. records direction/introduction message directly from handset
    3, DTMF receiver
    4. voice file replay


[Moderator's Note: Gee, this is the day for voicemail products to comm-
ercialize the net. Try the Dialogics people. I think they are in
Parsippany, NJ. Their card handles up to four lines at a time.  PAT]

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

Subject: Calling Cards, 'Easy Access' and PBX's: Answers
Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 09:54:19 EST
From: [e-mail]


There has recently been some misinformation blowing around the Telecom
Digest about calling cards and "Easy Access" numbers regarding PBX's
at universities and businesses.

Here's a copy of my notes from a phone conversation last night with an
AT&T customer service rep at 1-800-CALL-ATT.  I am in no way endorsing
AT&T.  In fact, I don't use AT&T calling cards anyway.

1) It is currently NOT necessary for PBX's owned by businesses,
universities, and other institutions to provide 10 + XXX + 0,
generally known as an "equal access" number, for telephone cards.
This is currently in litigation, and the obligation to do so has not
yet become law.  However, "equal access" numbers have been required
for pay phones and regular home phones for some years now.  Most phone
companies maintain a 1-800 number for people who can't get 10 + XXX +
0 access on their desk telephone.  However, it is still possible to
find customer operated coin operated telephones (COCOT's) that will
BLOCK access to both the 10 + XXX + 0 code and will silence touch-tone
access to an 800 number such as AT&T or MCI's alternative 1-800
number which they provide for people without access to 10 + XXX + 0.
(This happens to be illegal for public phones and you should call AT&T
or your local branch of the Public Service Commission for more
information if you find such a telephone).

2) AT&T says that the rates for calling card calls are the same
whether you use the 1-800 contact number, the 10 + XXX + 0 number, or
direct 0+ dialing on a private phone.

3) AT&T rates for calling card calls are whatever the direct dialing
rate is for normal calling plus $0.80 surcharge per call.  The rates
are the same whether you dial through 1-800-321-0288, 10 + ATT + 0, or
0+ dialing.

4) AT&T is not permitted (reasons unknown) to add a calling card
account to an *existing* VISA/Mastercard/Discover card account in the
United States unless you get a *new* "Universal" brand VISA/Mastercard
(which are both co-issued by AT&T and a large bank) which you can link
to your phone credit card.  MCI, on the other hand, can link its phone
credit card to an existing VISA card at one, particular large bank
(you can research this yourself).  You can, however, get an AT&T card
either as a traditional credit phone card or as a pre-paid debit card
but the credit card requires an application process with a check of
your credit rating, BUT, thankfully, these cards are NOT tracked by
credit reporting agencies.


That's all.

Kriston J. Rehberg              |     Internet: [e-mail]
Associate Programmer/Analyst    | IBM Internal: V2ENA81 AT OWEGO
ENSCO, Incorporated             |     or (AFS): [e-mail]
IBM Corporation, Owego, NY  USA |        phone: [phone] or tie: 662-2180

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

From: [e-mail] (David Hough)
Subject: Re: Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 16:31:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Mary Anne Walters <corndog!
[e-mail]> writes:

> I am interested in information on Internet connections in the UK.
> Since there is a charge per minute for even local calls, what kind of
> charges are we talking about for SLIP, if the modem is hooked up all
> day? I've been told there is some kind of dialback option offered from
> Internet providers (as an aside: who else other than PSI offers
> connectivity in Britain?) and would like specifics on that.

There are a couple of thousand (based on the last figures I saw)
customers using Demon Internet Services, me being one of them. Most
users are not on-line all day; I tend to dial up in the morning when
it is nice and quiet, which leads to a better response from the Demon
machines. It is possible to get Demon to dial up when email arrives,
but I wouldn't expect many private users take advantage of it.

There is a list of UK Internet providers in /pub/archives on
ftp.demon.co.uk if anyone is interested (I haven't looked, but I have
seen mention of it).

> I was also told "no one" has more than one phone line over there.  Is
> this true?  And if so, how do people hadle internet access from home
> and still be able to use the phones?

Quite simple really ... when I am on-line, no one can phone me up. Not
that I would want to talk to anyone at 6am anyway! I know a few people
who have two lines, although the second one tends to be a dedicated
fax line in such cases.

You will find that most UK households manage perfectly well with only
one phone line -- if it is in use then tough, ring back later. A
residential line costs 80-100 pounds a year so a second one would need
a fair bit of justification in most household budgets.

I have to admit that from this side of the Atlantic it is amusing to
see the perceived need in the US to have more than one phone line at
home. Do people in the US use the phone more than people over here, or
is it just that everyone in the house needs their own phone as a
status symbol? I daresay that cost plays a big part in the different
outlooks in the US and the UK.


Dave
G4WRW @ GB7WRW.#41.GBR.EU AX25
[e-mail]  Internet
[e-mail]      Amprnet

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Tsai)
Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless?
Date: 8 Dec 1993 09:35:09 GMT
Organization: New York University


I got a flyer from Escort just the other day and they are now selling
the Escort 9000 direct for $299 (express shipping free) until
12/22/93.  I'd buy one in a heartbeat if I am not so broke..  :-(

Apparently they have a "EscortPlus Club" and you get 10% off all their
items if you join the club.


Tim

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 09:08:28 EST
Subject: Re: 900 Mhz Cordless Protocols


Benjamin McLemore recently posted re: 900 Mhz Cordless Protocols:

> 1: Are any of the digital cordless phones direct-sequence spread
> spectrum? What advantages does this actually have over
> frequency-hopping (AT&T, Tropez)?

The Escort 9000 (900 mhz cordless phone) is a direct sequence spread
spectrum product.  The advantages of direct sequence over frequency
hopping systems are more a function of the implementation, rather than
inherent superiority of either approach.

The Tropez product is not spread spectrum, according to a review in
"Spread Spectrum Scene" magazine.  To our knowledge, our product is
the only 900 mhz spread spectrum phone currently available.

> 2: Given that Cylink manufactures the spread-spectrum chip for the
> Escort phone (from the Economist article), and that Cylink is recently
> in the news as a manufacturer of the Clipper chip, what does this mean
> for the security of the new cordless phones to law enforcement
> scanning? Were they designed to be easily broken from the beginning?

Cylink does not manufacture the spread spectrum chip used in the
phone, but does hold patents covering some aspects of this technology.
Cincinnati Microwave has licensing agreements with Cylink, allowing us
to use their technology in our part.  The Escort phone was not
designed to be "broken" by law enforcement agencies, and does not
contain a "clipper" chip or equivalent device.

Spread spectrum communications are inherently difficult to decode, and
the Escort phone provides an extremely high level of security.

> 3: Just how much information can be digitally spread out into the
> 900-928 frequency range? Given Metricom 56Kbps modems and cordless
> phones, when will the error rates get too high for this band to be
> useful?

One key advantage of a direct sequence system is high immunity to
jamming.  While other transmissions in this band do interfere with the
transmitted signal, these "jammers" are processed out when the
received signal is despread.  As a result, our telephone is very
resistant to interference from other signal sources, including other
Escort 9000 telephones (each phone has a unique spreading sequence).

Our product is the only US designed and assembled 900 mhz phone on the
market.  We are currently running a holiday sale on the phone.  Call
[phone] for more information.


Ralph Sprang   Staff Engineer   Cincinnati Microwave

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

Subject: Re: Tropez 900Mhz Digital Cordless
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 17:02:52 EST
Organization: The Cellar electronic community and public access system


Has anyone had any experience with the Tropez 900mhz digital cordless
phones?  They cost about 200$, are digital, have passwords, and all
that neato stuff.  Anyway, has anyone used them?  If so, what was your
maximum range before degradation became unacceptable?  Could max range
be increased by putting the base antenna above the house?

    I am looking for a cordless phone that will operate at a range
of approx. 1/2 mile.  Is this completely impossible?  Or if I get a
good 900mhz, mount a directional (I only need it to work at long range
in a single direction) antenna, is it possible?


Patri Friedman
Libertarian, atheist, techno-rat, in-line hockey player, SCAdian,
HS Senior, SysOp, and occasional dreamy-eyed romantic.
              -=-=-Free backrubs to qualified individuals!-=-=-


[Moderator's Note: Welcome to the Digest, Mr. Friedman. I don't recall
seeing you here before. We've had some recent messages on 900 mhz phones
and it could be you'll find some answers in recent back issues.

On the subject of welcomes to new readers, I wave my hand to the
couple dozen new participants now on line with us via utsa.lonestar.edu
who have signed up for the mailing list. Welcome aboard, one and all.
Remember, to use the Telecom Archives by email, you need to send your
*formatted* text to the email service. If anyone needs a help file for
this, just let me know.  And Mr. Friedman, next time you are in Chicago
I really could use one of your backrubs, thanks!    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #804
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26438;
          8 Dec 93 18:32 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10424
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:56 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18828
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:29 -0600
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:29 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #805


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Dec 93 14:28:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 805

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Chaos Communication Congress 1993 (Bjoern Kriews)
    Re: How About IntraLATA/Limited InterLATA Toll Competition? (John R. Grout)
    Cable TV Local Monopoly (David Devereaux-Weber)
    Starting up a 900 Number (Rich Mintz)
    Take Care of Your Telephone Credit Cards (Nigel Allen)
    Response to Anti-Union Messages in the Digest (Sid Shniad)
    Wanted: Centralized Software Upgrade Management for User Net (P. Knighton)
    Dual Mode (was Re: Roaming, CDMA, TDMA etc.) (Phil Price)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively
to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email,
in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service
systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited,
complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups.
Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks.

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

From: Bjoern Kriews <[e-mail]>
Subject: Chaos Communication Congress 1993
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 18:29:43 MET


"Ten years after Orwell"

10th Chaos Communication Congress, Hamburg, Germany

The Chaos Computer Club invites the global community to participate in
the Chaos Communication Congress in Hamburg and celebrates the tenth
anniversary of this convention.

This hackers' meeting, taking place annually at the end of December,
has become a traditional event which is characterized by a colorful
mixture of absolute chaos, serious discussion and detailed
presentation.

Computer enthusiasts, scientists from well-known institutions,
lawyers, politicians, artists and, of course, hackers as well as
data-travellers and Internauts from many countries are going to meet
at the 'Eidelstedter Buergerhaus' on December 27th-29th for an
interdisciplinary exchange of data and other experience.

Not only concentrating on technical topics, political and social
issues will be focal points of discussion this year.  After ten years
of creative future concepts the time has come to look for achieved
goals and new visions for the future.

This year's list of topics:

The so-called "great peep attack" (a proposed law reform allowing
state authorities to listen in, even in private rooms, in order to
fight organized crime) affects every German citizen and is considered
one of the most important issues of the year.

- What is technically possible?
- What is planned and/or wanted politically?
- How do the right of privacy and ban of encryption software fit together?
Well-informed speakers talk about state-of-the-art technology and legal
limits. Public discussion forums invite you to form your own opinion.

Money always serves for interesting talk:
- How can we improve Electronic Cash?
- How to print your own money;
- How to wash it if it's dirty;
- How to open electronic cash machines without damaging them;
It's up to you to add to this list ...

Hardly noticed by the public, the female part of the hacker scene is
growing. Female hackers' activities have become a regular part of the
congress, the workshop on feminine computer handling is one of the key
events. For the first time, there will be a Women Only room with lots
of equipment to try out, opportunity to ask and learn as well as to
discuss and create.

Other highlights:
Discussions and workshops on
- citizen networks and electronic democracy;
- ISDN, MODACOM (german mobile radio data network) and Beepers;
- Bluebox versus Telekom;
- Electronic Warfare;
- Chip- and other cards;
- inventory differences;
- underground radio stations;
- Computer recycling;
- lockpicking;
- MIME and *ostscript viruses;
- copyright law and the GNU generation.

Furthermore: the Hackcenter, the Chaos Cafe, the Chaos Archive, the
movie theatre (among others: educational propaganda films by the
former East German Ministry of State Security), a Zerberus BBS, the
Internet-FreePort and lots of other things we forgot to mention.  Feel
free to contribute more interesting topics, workshops or
presentations.

Anyway, the hottest news for computer enthusiasts and hackers will be
those you won't find in the press.

What:    10th Chaos Communication Congress
When:    December 27th - 29th 1993
Cost:    DM 42,- Three-day-ticket
Where:   Eidelstedter Buergerhaus
         Alte Elbgaustr. 12
         D-22523 Hamburg
         [phone]

Contact: Chaos Computer Club
         Schwenckestr. 85
         D-20255 Hamburg
         Germany
Phone:   [phone]
Fax:     [phone]
E-Mail:  [e-mail]
Press contact:
Phone:   [phone] (european afternoon, please)

For reservations in an inexpensive hotel (approx. DM 30,-/night), mail
to: [e-mail]

#!/bin/thanks to P. Kane for the word 'InterNaut'.

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Grout)
Subject: Re: How About IntraLATA/Limited InterLATA Toll Competition by LEC's?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:40:52 GMT


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

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

>> My idea is this: Allow local telephone companies to carry toll calls
>> to ADJACENT LATA's only, on the condition that LEC's must compete with
>> each other and the IXC's for intraLATA traffic.  In other words, on a
>> call to an adjacent LATA, you'd have the option of using a 10XXX code
>> to force the call to go via your LEC rather than your long distance
>> carrier.  On an intraLATA call, you'd have the option to your your
>> LEC, or any other LEC operating in your LATA that has toll
>> capabilities (for example, as a GTE customer I'd be able to select
>> Ameritech [formerly Michigan Bell] to handle my intraLATA calls by
>> dialing Ameritech's 10XXX prefix).  Note that no defaults would
>> change ... if you didn't dial a 10XXX code, your call would be handled
>> as it is now....

>> What do you think of this idea?

> I've had the same thought for some time now. One really annoying
> problem with the LATA rules is that they create "Chinese walls" along
> their boundaries.  Is Nashua to Lowell really that different from,
> say, Lowell to Boston?  The latter are farther apart but within a
> LATA.

The LATA boundaries were set up to, more or less, represent the actual
LEC equipment to provide local service and (to an extent) first level
toll switch equipment which existed at that time.  Admittedly, all the
local areas which are in interstate LATAs (e.g., the Kansas part of
the Kansas City, Missouri LATA, the part of Greenwich, CT in the NYC
LATA) were placed there because much of their _local_ service was
provided by interstate facilities ... so, even if NET had equivalent
facilities between Lowell and Nashua and Lowell and some other
equivalent point southwest of it in the Boston LATA (which I doubt),
the LATA boundaries wouldn't recognize that.

However, if people want to serve _parts_ of contiguous LATAs_ (in
effect, partially redrawing LATA boundaries now) ...

> A blanket waiver for contiguous LATAs does a lot to solve this.

If such a waiver made an LEC serve _all_ of a contiguous LATA with a
mileage-oriented tariff, it does _not_ help much.  For example: New
Jersey Bell offers competitive (and low-priced) toll service to NYC
proper and Philadelphia proper from the adjacent NJ counties ... but,
since they don't serve _all_ of the NYC and Philadelphia LATAs, they
can restrict their investment and price their service appropriately.
If they were required to serve _all_ of those adjacent LATAs with a
mileage-oriented tariff (e.g., to charge the same for a call right
across the Hudson upriver from Old Tappan to Tarrytown as one
downriver from Jersey City to Lower Manhattan), they would probably
have to charge _more_ for calls to NYC and Philadelphia proper.

If an LEC isn't allowed to serve _parts_ of a contiguous LATA (or
charge lower rates for part of a LATA than for another based on the
cost of facilities, or some other market-oriented cost), in effect,
the LEC would be operating a captive IXC and be forced into performing
the same kind of cross-subsidization that mileage-oriented IXC tariffs
do already ... removing much of the incentive to provide competitive
inter-LATA service of their own.

There is _one_ relatively minor incentive for an LEC to provide
inter-LATA competition ... the "coin factor".  As far as I know, the
only place in the country in which AT&T faces competition for _any_
coin-paid DDD inter-LATA calls are those NJB service areas mentioned
above ... would more LEC inter-LATA competition help keep down the
rates for relatively short coin-paid DDD inter-LATA calls?  I think
so.


John R. Grout        INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 10:29:34 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Cable TV Local Monopoly


In Volume 13 : Issue 795, Trenton del Rey Gallowglass <trenton@
netcom.com> writes:

> *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access?
> I read somewhere that in the few communities (in the US) that have
> more than one local cable operator that there are more channels,
> better service, and lover prices than elsewhere.

Many cable TV franchises are non-exclusive, which means the franchise
authority would allow a second operator in.  However, most operators
comply with an unwritten code that says that they won't compete with
each other in a market.  Furthermore, if an operator wanted to
compete, it would be difficult to find a lending institution to loan
them money to do so.

> I also don't understand why the courts (I think it's them) don't seem
> to be moving faster in allowing competition for the local dial tone.

Local telephone service is regulated at the federal level by the FCC
and at the state level by a state public service commission.
Competition will not be easy, nor will it solve all phone problems and
make all service cheaper.  If competition is allowed, will companies
also be able to pick and choose markets?  Would it be fair to mandate
that the former regulated company must provide service to anyone who
asks, but new "cream skimmers" can come along and skim the high volume
customers?  If that scenario should happen, the old company would need
to raise rates to make up for the losses; resulting in even more
defections, until the only customers left are the highest cost, lowest
revenue customers, in whom the "skimmers" have no interest (like homes
seven miles outside of town, and residential customers on fixed
income).

Some people who live in dense urban areas feel that they shouldn't
have to support higher-cost rural customers.  However, one of the good
things about our telephone system is that 99% of the people and
companies are accessible by phone.  If we start losing phone
customers, the value of phone service to the remaining customers is
diminished.

Furthermore, as more competitors come online, the pressure on the
numbering plan gets greater.  We are running out of area codes and
prefix codes.  More competitors will accellerate the problem.

I also believe that competition will be good for consumers and the
industry, but we've got to implement the changes carefully.


David Devereaux-Weber        [phone] (voice)
MACC Communications; B263    [phone] (FAX)
1210 W Dayton St.            [e-mail] (Internet)
Madison, WI 53706

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Mintz)
Subject: Starting up a 900 Number
Date: 8 Dec 1993 15:09:50 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico


I'm looking into offering a 900 service. So far, it looks like to
start out I'll need to contract with a "service bureau" which leases
T1 lines from the long distance carrier. I'd greatly appreciate it if
any users with experience in this area would email me information they
think would be useful to me about starting such a service. I'd be
especially interested to know of positive and negative experiences
with particular service bureaus. Also, with such an arrangement, is it
possible to have the service bureaus forward calls to a number going
into my home? I'd like to include some PC-based automated voice
services.


Many thanks,

Rich


[Moderator's Note: One person you should contact for more information
on this is former Digest participant John Higdon <[e-mail]>.
He's been in the 900/976 racket for years, and made a bundle at it with
'services' directed toward the gay community. I'm sure he could explain
the way service bureaus work in detail.  PAT]

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

Subject: Take Care of Your Telephone Credit Cards
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 07:04:00 -0500
Organization: CRS Online  (Toronto, Ontario)


Here is a press release from AT&T.

AT&T SAYS 'TIS THE SEASON TO BE CAREFUL WITH CALLING CARDS

For further information, journalists should call:
Jon Mellor
908-221-5017 (office)
908-874-8964 (home)

     BASKING RIDGE, N.J. -- AT&T warns consumers that calling-
card-number thieves love the holiday season, too.  As shoppers and
travelers use their long-distance calling cards in malls and
transportation hubs, they should be aware that their calling-card
numbers are at the top of some criminals' wish lists.

     Consumers should protect their calling cards as they would
protect credit cards or cash.  AT&T offers the following tips:

   o When entering calling-card numbers on public phones, obscure
     the card, keypad and hand movements from prying eyes.  If
     possible, use a phone that reads the magnetic strip on the
     back of your calling card.  Most AT&T public phones are
     equipped with a card-swipe or card-insert feature.

   o A criminal will pretend to have a conversation on one public
     phone to hear what's being said at the next phone.  If you
     must read your card number to an operator, speak softly to
     avoid being overheard.

   o Customers should call their calling-card providers to learn
     what safeguards those companies offer.  For instance, AT&T
     Personal Choice Calling Card customers can easily memorize
     their card numbers, so they don't need to carry or expose
     their cards to place calls.  And all AT&T calling-card
     customers can put restrictions on their cards that prevent
     the cards from being used for international calls--the
     favorite use of calling-card thieves.

   o Report stolen calling cards or suspicion of fraud to your
     long-distance company immediately.  The company will cancel
     the calling-card number and issue a new card to you.  AT&T
     Calling Card customers should call 1-800-CALLATT.

     For a free brochure detailing these tips and other ways for
consumers to protect themselves, call AT&T on 1-800-851-0439.


[Moderator's Note: Indeed, it is the season for fraud. Statistics
from mercantile and business associations show that the biggest day
each year for fraud where stolen credit cards and bad checks are con-
cerned is ... you guessed it! December 24, Christmas Eve.  The fraud
artists will start coming out of the woodwork all next week and
the week after. Be alert.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Response to Anti-Union Messages in the Digest
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:18:16 PST


I am responding to Eric Florack's diatribe that seems to have been
generated by reading the Labor Notes article I uploaded.  (I ignored
some similar anti-union shots that came across earlier.)

"What the article fails to point out is that the unions themselves are
responsible for pricing themselves and the workers they claim to
represent, out of the market."

Eric doesn't adduce any evidence to substantiate this claim.  In fact,
real, inflation-adjusted wages -- in the unionized telephone industry
and other sectors -- have been declining for more than ten years.  But
let's not let facts get in the way of a good diatribe.  Let's just use
this baseless comment as the launch pad for further baseless
accusations.

"This, more than any other factor is the reason the old- style unions
are fading. Regardless of any other factor, companies whose primary
goal is to make money for it`s investors, will always and invariably
move to operate at a lower cost and a higher profit margin. Such is
the nature of competition in a free marketplace. (This is still
America, and not the Worker`s Paradise that Marx wanted ...)"

If news about unions and their views of developments in the
telecommunications industry is going to generate rabid responses,
perhaps it was wrong to have sent it to this list.  I thought --
perhaps mistakenly -- that folks on this list might be interested in
information like this story from Labor Notes.

"Gee, bigger government. More regulation. Just what we need.  Why
doesn`t the union understand that more regulation means FEWER jobs in
the long run, because of hurt business?"

This is an interesting argument.  Regulation kills jobs.  Ergo,
regulation is bad.  What evidence is there that regulation kills jobs?
None provided here.  Yet another leap of faith in workings of The Free
Market.

However, when the normal workings of said Free Market generate
staggering loss of jobs -- for example, a recent {Wall Street Journal}
article reported that the Fortune 500 employed 16.2 million people in
1990, versus 11.8 million in 1993 -- then this is treated as just a
natural unfolding of the workings of the world.

> Also, as District 1's Peres points out, the workers in cellular
> and cable perform the same type of work as phone company
> workers, but for about $4-6 an hour less.

"And how much of that $4-$6 dollars goes directly to union coffers?
How much of that increase is the paying consumer suposed to deal with,
without finding a better, cheaper company with which to do business?
This is helping the workers?"

If one didn't know better, it might appear that you have something
against unions, Eric.  Do YOU have any idea how much of the $4-$6 goes
into union coffers?  From your argument, I gather you believe that two
major sources of high prices in the US economy are inflated union dues
and wages.  But if these are confiscatory, as you imply, how is it
that companies like MCI are finding ways to invest in overseas
expansion, takeovers, etc.?  How did they manage to hide the profits
they are using in these ventures from the rampaging red hordes in
their unionized ranks?

Forgive me for having disturbed the folks on this list with stories
that disturb their consideration of the technical aspects of the
communications industry.  I will not trouble you with such material in
the future.


Sid Shniad


[Moderator's Note: Part of -- maybe the majority of -- the 'rabid
responses seen here come from the Dungheap Net (Usenet). They can
get pretty far out sometimes. As you know Sid, I sent you a separate
note a few minutes ago noting that most of the readers here like to
see two, or three or four sides to every story. No, I don't think we
want a constant flow of union announcements any more than I want a
constant flow of AT&T press releases. But some of each a better and
more well-rounded journal help produce. Anyway, the Usenet people now
have their very own unmoderated telecom forum to trash out, so maybe
they will quit spilling their venom here for a change.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Knighton)
Subject: Wanted: Centralized Software Upgrade Management for User Network
Date: 8 Dec 1993 17:51:35 GMT
Organization: BT Labs, Martlesham Heath, Ipswich, UK
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Does anyone know of any software to meet the following requirements:-

Consider a range of software products which evolve and must be
released and distributed to a growing network of users, many of whom
are potentially accessible via modem. Each user may use some/all of
these products and records are kept of which products they currently
use (and at what release).

Currently, the upgrade medium is magnetic tape and transport the GPO.

A utility is required which can:-

i) Maintain a customer database (name, company, address, networking
connection mechanism (if available) including authentication) on some
central host.

ii) Using the customer database, remotely upgrade one/some/all
customer's remote hosts, i.e. for each product with a new release
which they also use, upload an upgrade to them via modem.

ii) For each customer effected subsequently update the customer
database as appropriate.

All help/advice much appreciated.


Regards

Paul A. M. Knighton            Network Modelling: Sales & Support Group
Software Development Division,
MLB 5 51, BT Laboratories,          Telephone : (+44) (0)473 649156
Martlesham Heath,                   Facsimile : (+44) (0)473 640279
Ipswich, IP5 7RE,
Suffolk, ENGLAND.               Email (Internet) : [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Price)
Subject: Dual Mode (was Re: Roaming, CDMA, TDMA etc.)
Date: 8 Dec 1993 10:15:36 GMT
Organization: Qualcomm Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Laurence
Chiu) wrote:

> [ lots of interesting technical stuff deleted here]

> I understand roaming and have done so in a couple of occasions within
> the US.

Sorry to misunderstand you.

> My home company is GTE Mobilnet of Northern CA. I also have
> been told that I could roam in many countries that used AMPS and had
> roaming agreements I guess.

> My question really was, not all phones are dual mode, in fact I wasn't
> aware that many were. Perhaps most of the new ones are but there must
> be a large inventory of existing phones out there which are not. But
> for argument's sake, let's say they are. Does that mean, that no
> matter which of the digital technologies being promoted now, your
> phone (if dual mode) will work anyway given that roaming agreements
> are in place? Or is it that the cellular company will offer both forms
> of transmission (AMPS and one of the digital ones) and if you have a
> phone capable of digital transmission then it will work anyway and
> since it's likely to be dual mode, it will work when digital is not
> available.

That's about right. BUT, the phones are usually programmed to use
digital if it is available -- the main driving force for the
introduction of digital systems is (from the perspective of the
service provider) to increase the available capacity for users (i.e.
more money for the same bandwidth ;-).  AMPS is supported because of
the existing subscriber base. Actually, TDMA, E-TDMA and CDMA all rely
on the AMPS system for access functions (i.e.  setting up calls etc.)
-- initially, signalling is done on the analog channels and the base
station tells the phone to switch over to one of the digital modes or
use analog if there is no support available for the digital mode.

CTIA were working on an all-digital system (like GSM), but I lost
track of that about a year ago -- anyone know anything about it?


Hope this helps,

Phil

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #805
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00382;
          9 Dec 93 10:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03920
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 01:02:20 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28678
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 01:02:00 -0600
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 01:02:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #806

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Dec 93 01:02:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 806

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved (David Leibold)
    CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes (Jeff Robertson)
    European ISDN Event - EURIE '93 (D.E. Price)
    Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company (Jack Decker)
    Four-Bit ADPCM (Stewart Fist)
    NAPLPS and RIP Inquiry (Jim Choate)
    Telecom Mouse Standard? (Jim Choate)
    Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted (Jason Demarte)
    Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Gary Breuckman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 00:45 WET
From: [e-mail] (woody)
Subject: Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved


(djcl note: the Canadian telecom regulator, Canadian Radio-television
and Telecommunications Commission, made the following decision last
week. Needless to say, business groups in Canada are not particularly
enthusiastic about the idea of local measured service after a given
monthly calling allowance. In summary, the scheme will not be in
effect until at least 1995, which is when Bell Canada expects to have
its digital switching and billing systems in place. Business groups
like the CBTA mentioned in the decision are warning that residence
customers will be next to get hit with local measured service. Without
further ado, the decision text (subject to the odd typo, official
version available from CRTC) ....)

[from text of CRTC decision]

Ottawa, 2 December 1993

Telecom Letter Decision 93-18

To: Bell Canada
    Interested Parties

Re: Bell Canada - Tariff Restructuring for Business Access Services

On 22 April 1991, the Commission wrote to the telephone companies
referring them to the February 1991 finding of the Terminal Attachment
Program Advisory Committee (TAPAC) that, owing to technological
development, mutually exclusive technical definitions of PBXs and key
telephone systems (KTSs) were no longer practical. The Commission
noted that rates for PBX trunks and KTS access lines were generally
dependent on the classification of equipment on which they terminated,
and that the TAPAC finding called into question the relevance of
tariffs based on that distinction.

As a result of the Commission's letter, the telephone companies filed
tariff revisions or reports of plans to set rates independently of
terminal equipment type (with the exception of AGT Limited and the New
Brunswick Telephone Company Limited, whose rates did not depend on the
type of terminal equipment). The Commission has since approved tariff
revisions for BC TEL, and Newfoundland Telephone Company, Maritime
Telegraph and Telephone Company Limited and Newfoundland Telephone
Company Limited. By letter dated 25 November 1992, the Commission
denied tariff revisions proposed by Northwestel Inc., and directed the
company to file proposed tariff revisions that would be revenue
neutral.

Bell Canada (Bell) filed reports setting out three approaches to
restructuring its tariffs for Business Access Service. These
approaches are described below:

Blended Rate: This approach provides for a common rate for individual
lines and PBX trunks. Bell rejected this approach because of its
effect on customers, specifically, individual-line rates would climb
by 4% to 63%, while PBX trunk rates would drop by 10% to 43%. In
addition, rates for services related to individual lines and PBX
trunks would be affected and, in order to achieve revenue neutrality,
further rate increases would be required.

Sliding Scale: The sliding scale approach would entail replacing PBX
and individual line rates with an ascending rate scale. The scale
would vary with the size of the channel groups (1, 2-5, 6-10, 11-20
and over 20 channels).  Each rate increase along the scale would be
based on the value of incremental PBX trunk rates. Bell submitted that
the sliding scale approach assumes that higher efficiency (i.e.,
increased usage volume and decreased blocking) is achieved with
greater capacity. Illustrative rates developed to achieve revenue
neutrality indicate that KTS customers would be subject to increases
of 13% to 44%, while PBX trunk customers would see decreases of 11% to
27%. The ascending scale could be applied only to access line groups
equipped with hunting. Lines from a customer's terminal not equipped
with hunting would thus be rated at the lowest level, although, when
terminated on sophisticated equipment, they can generate high outgoing
usage to the public switched telephone network.

Threshold Pricing: Under this approach, a business customer would pay
a flat rate for the access channel and a specified amount of usage,
i.e., the threshold. Outgoing calls exceeding the threshold would be
charged for on a per-minute basis. The threshold would not apply to
the user's incoming traffic. The threshold would vary by rate group
bands to take into account usage differences. Bell based the
thresholds for the illustrative rates on a six-month subscriber
line-usage study, commenced in April 1992, of 24,000 business access
lines of various types. Based on Bell's illustrative rates, 10% of
single-line customers, 14% of multi-line and 10% of PBX trunk
customers would pay increased charges.

As indicated above, Bell rejected the blended rate approach because of
its impact on customers. Bell submitted that threshold pricing is more
appropriate than the sliding scale approach because it takes into
account large differences in usage. In particular, Bell submitted that
it ensures billing certainty for the majority of customers, while
reflecting a user-pay philosophy. Bell stated that implementation
costs would be higher than for the sliding scale approach, but that
threshold pricing would permit the introduction of usage sensitive
local business services, which could provide additional revenues to
help offset the local access shortfall. Bell proposed to file a final
rate structure in the fourth quarter of 1994.

The Commission received comments on Bell's reports from the Canadian
Business Telecommunications Alliance (CBTA), the Government of
Ontario, Smart Talk Network (STN) and Unitel Communications Inc.
(Unitel).

The Commission is of the view that threshold pricing is the most
equitable of the three approaches. Blended rates would result in rate
increases for small users in excess of 70%. The sliding scale approach
would result in increases for KTS cutsomers of up to 45%, while PBX
customers would see reductions of up to 27%. Threshold pricing, on the
other hand, can be implemented with no increase in customer billing
for the vast majority of customers. Indeed, based on Bell's
illustrative rates, threshold pricing would lead to increases for 10%
of single-line customers, 14% of multi-line customers, and 10% of PBX
trunk customers.

Unitel objected to the threshold pricing approach, relying on BC TEL's
response to a Commission interrogatory related to that company's
access filing. In that response, BC TEL concluded that a report by
Economics and Technology, Inc. (ETI) on local/access pricing indicates
that local usage- based costs are dropping to the extent that
usage-based pricing is not justified.

The Commission disagrees with this interpretation of the ETI report.
The report provides views both for and against usage-based pricing. In
fact, the report states that, because the evidence is ambiguous as to
whether there are gains to be realized from using local measured
pricing as a principal means of cost recovery, most U.S. regulators
have chosen a combination of flat-rate and usage-based pricing.

While the Commission agress that usage-based costs are in decline, it
considers that they remain a factor in the local service market. In
this context, the Commission notes that threshold pricing includes
both flat-rate and usage-based components, with the latter applicable
to heavier users. The Commission therefore considers threshold pricing
to be consistent with cost recovery requirements in a market where
usage-based costs are declining, but have not been eliminated. In
addition, this approach may afford customers a certain flexibility in
controlling their local access costs.

STN and Unitel suggested that threshold pricing targets and penalizes
high- volume users, particularly alternative long distance providers,
whose access service costs would rise. Bell stated that trunk-side
access/equal ease of access arrangements will be in places before any
threshold pricing scheme. As to the targeting of market segments, the
Commission notes Bell's statetement that differences between light and
heavy users exist across the whole local market, i.e., no particular
market is targeted. Based on Bell's six-month subscriber line usage
study, and using its illustrative rate structure, 16% of users would
exceed the threshold and pay usage-based charges. In the Commission's
view, pricing approaches that recover greater revenues from the
heaviest users should not necessarily be regarded as 'targeting' a
market segment.

CBTA and Unitel submitted that threshold pricing would eliminate
predictability for users generating amounts of traffic large enough to
trigger usage-based charges; as a result, their ability to forecast
and control their telecommunications costs will be curtailed. The
Commission notes that such users have considerable experience in
controlling their costs for usage-priced services like Message Toll
Service and Wide Area Telephone Service.

STN and Unitel submitted that the costs of implementing threshold
pricing are too high. Unitel argued that BC TEL's Small Business/
Standard structure should be imposed because it can be implemented
more quickly and at a lower cost.

The Commission agrees that the implementation time for threshold
pricing is lengthy; however, it is tied to the implementation of
Bell's new billing system. It is Bell's new billing system, which
includes local usage-based billing capability, as well as the
provision of digital switching to all its business customers by
mid-1995, that enables Bell to apply its proposed rating structure. BC
TEL will not be so equipped. The Commission also notes that BC TEL, in
reply to interventions filed in support of the Small Business/Standard
pricing approach, stated that its criticism of usage-based pricing is
based on its own specific circumstances, and that the company may
consider usage-based pricing in the future.

In addition to the above, the Commission notes that Bell and BC TEL
differ in terms of existing rate relationships. The Commission notes
Bell's evidence that, based on the illustrative rates, imposing BC
TEL's approach in Bell's territory would cause the rates of KTS users
to rise by 30% to 80% or more.  The Commission also notes that even
the smallest users would benefit from no increases in rates, while the
smaller users would see substantial increases.  Under Bell's threshold
approach, only the heaviest users would see the increases.

In light of the above, the Commission directs Bell to file proposed
tariffs, in the fourth quarter of 1994, to implement threshold
pricing. The Commission further directs Bell to provide the following:

(1) justification for any differences between the proposed rate
structure and rate structures for its other exchange access tariffs;

(2) a full subscriber impact analysis; and

(3) the effect of the proposed rates on the difference in total
compensation paid to the telephone company for line-side versus
trunk-side access for competitive long distance providers.


Allan J. Darling
Secretary General

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

Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 20:49:47 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes


Bell Canada has won approval for a rate charge that would introduce a
pay-per-use charge for outgoing local phone calls for its largest
business customers.

Companies would be billed on a pay-per-use basis once their monthly
volume of local calls exceeded a yet to be determined threshold.

The new system will go into effect in two years and mean higher phone
bills for Bell's biggest business customers, and its long distance
competitors.

The new pricing scheme proposed by Bell Canada would eliminate the
different trunk costs of $48/month and $80.50/month for loop and
ground start business lines.  It would be one charge for all business
customers allowing unlimited incoming call, but a fixed amount of
outgoing local calls.  Any outgoing local calls beyond the threshold
would be charged by the minute.

However, none of the new charges, including the access rate, the
threshold level and the usage charge have been determined yet.

The CRTC told Bell to file the rates by the fourth quarter of 1994.
The new rates will likely take effect in late 1995 or early 1996, the
utility said in a news release issued yesterday (Tuesday Decemeber
8/93).

Six other federally regulated phone companies have adopted alternative
schemes that do not have usage-sensitvie charges.

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

Is this the first step toward billing personal calls by the minute?
If so, my grandmother (and her rotary phone) may kick the bucket!


Jeff Robertson    [e-mail]    Toronto, ON, Canada

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

From: [e-mail] (D E Price)
Subject: European ISDN Event - EURIE '93
Organization: University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 22:12:33 GMT


Telecommunications 'World Firsts' at EURIE '93
==============================================

UK Universities have joined forces with British Telecom to bring the
European ISDN Event to six locations within the regions and nations of
the United Kingdom.

Integrated Services Digital Network.

ISDN, or Integrated Services Digital Network represents the state of
the art in Pan European communications and supports many new
applications like Videophones, high quality, high speed facsimile
transfer and inter computer communications.  The solution provided by
ISDN is relevant to almost all sectors of the economy from the
smallest companies to International organisations.

Business Solutions for Europe '93.

The European ISDN Event (EURIE '93) is being held simultaneously in
over 70 sites in most European Countries and is being supported by 22
network operators. The event has the full backing and support of the
Commission of the European Communities.  EURIE is the biggest ISDN
event the world has yet seen.

The UK National Event, being titled `Business Solutions for Europe '93'
occurs simultaneously at six locations. The locations are:

BT Business Centre in London Docklands, England;
BT Business Centre in Birmingham, England;
BT Business Centre in Glasgow, Scotland;
University of Salford, Manchester, England;
University of Ulster, Londonderry, Northern Ireland;
University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Wales.

Worlds Largest ISDN Videoconference as Opening Ceremony.

EURIE '93 will be opened by Mr Jean-Pierre Jouyet, deputy head of
Cabinet of President Delors accompanied by Mr Michel Carpentier,
Director General of DGXIII of the CEC. The opening ceremony will take
place in Brussels and will be transmitted by ISDN to a total of 22
centres across Europe. This will be the world's largest ISDN
videoconference.

Santa Claus, Live from Lapland.

As part of Telecom Finland's contributions to EURIE '93, they have
arranged for Santa to be accessible live from Lapland via videophone.
As we all know, Santa's grotto is based in the town of Rovaniemi on
the Arctic Circle in Lapland. He will be talking to his friends from
all over Europe.

Conference Talks.

Some sites will feature conferences in addition to an exhibition of
products and services.

Further Information.

In the UK can be acquired from the British Telecom ISDN Helpdesk
Freefone 0800 18 15 14

Elsewhere in Europe, contact your nearest Telecom Operator.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
Subject: Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company
Date: 9 Dec 1993 04:48:21 GMT
Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)


According to {USA Today Update}, Ameritech has filed a request with
the Justice Department asking that they be allowed to offer long
distance service starting in 1995.  A direct quote from the news item:
"William Weiss, Ameritech chairman and chief executive officer, says
the plan will mean customers can choose to get local and long-distance
communications from a single provider."

What this item does not say is whether Ameritech is willing to open up
local phone service for competition.  If so, and if it's done in such
a way that even residential customers have the option of getting their
dial tone from someone other than Ameritech, I would be all for it.
Somehow, though, considering the way that Ameritech has behaved in the
past (for example, totally eliminating unmeasured local service
wherever a wimpy PUC would allow it), I doubt that they are really
going to do anything that might give their captive customers other
options.  Please, someone, tell me I'm wrong, and that Ameritech
really is going to allow true competition for the proverbial "last
mile"!

In any case, if anyone comes across more details on exactly what
Ameritech has proposed, I for one would be interested in hearing about
it.  Also, I wonder if the Justice Department will be taking public
comments on this?


Jack

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

From: Stewart Fist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Four-Bit ADPCM
Date: Thurs, 9 Dec 1993  00:02:00


I've just come across a reference on fax problems which says the
problems in transmission are often caused by:

> "4-bit encoding" 32 K bit/sec ADPCM systems which are unsuitable.
> 16 K bit/sec or 8 K bit/sec ADPCM systems.

I know that most voice trunk calls in Australia (supposedly 80%) are
made over 32-bit/sec ADPCM trunks, and fax seems to travel over these
quite successfully.  But the quote marks around the "4-bit encoding"
phrase above, seems to suggest that there are a number of different
versions of 32 kbit/sec ADPCM.  Is this correct?

I had assumed that 32 Kbit/sec ADPCM always used 4-bit codes since it
only transmitted the 'difference' between two adjacent samples, rather
than the sample size itself.  But perhaps I've got it wrong.  Is
there, perhaps, a variable length (Huffman-like) code being used here?

I'd also appreciate a quick outline of 16 Kbit/sec and 8 Kbit/sec
ADPCM.  I understand that the 16 Kbit/sec version is now widely used
in Transatlantic cables, so it must be a reasonably 'lossless'
compression system.  Does anyone happen to know if it is also used in
association with DCMS/DCME or bit-stealing techniques?

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Choate)
Subject: NAPLPS and RIP Graphics Inquiry
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:54:33 GMT


Hi everyone,

I am interested in contacting anyone about using NAPLPS or RIP
graphics for increasing the resolution of online communications. At
present I run a small non-inet bbs which supports both of these.

Please respond via e-mail.


Solar Soyuz Zaibatsu       ASCII-ANSI-NAPLPS-RIP    512.458.6084

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim choate)
Subject: Telecom Mouse Standard?
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:55:40 GMT


Are there any standards relating to passing pointing information over
a modem?  In particular I am looking for any discussions on standards
if they exist.

Please respond via e-mail.

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

Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:47:43 EST
From: Jason Demarte <[e-mail]>
Subject: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted
Organization: Penn State University


I have recently been reading about the sytem called Automatic Call
Distributor (ACD) and am wondering who are the major dealers for each
version of ACD: integrated ACD and stand-alone ACD.  If anyone has
some any information on this please post me a response, thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Breuckman)
Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 05:42:29 PST


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

> I just purchased a new computer.  I have 2400 baud modem and cable
> that works just great with my old computer.  With the new one, the
> computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from
> the modem.  For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a
> number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light),
> but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem.  (Echo
> does not work at all either).

> Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the
> instruction manual, to have any dip switches.

This is an external modem, the first think you want to do is test the
serial port on the computer and determine if that can receive or not.
The modem might be working fine, but the port not showing any of the
results.  Receiving is often interrupt driven, and the interrupt for
the port might not be set correctly (if it is in fact something that
can be set separately), or it might not be working.  You might also be
having a problem with the control lines, but with a port that usually
affects SENDING rather than RECEIVING.

So, what you need is a breakout box or a loopback plug, you can make a
loopback plug, jumper the following pins together ...

2->3 (transmit to receive),
4->5 (request-to-send to clear-to-send),
20->6 and 8 (terminal-ready to modem-ready and carrier-detect).

Now, anything you send out the port with your comm program should be
echoed back -- if not, the port has a problem.  These are the pins for
a 25-pin serial port, for the 9-pin it would be 3->2, 7->8, 4->6 and 1.

If that works, and you know the modem works elsewhere, you might try
setting the modem settings back to the factory defaults.  It just
might be some problem with flow control, but I suspect the port.  For
Hayes compatible modems that store the settings (ie, no dip switches,
the command is 'AT&f&w'.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #806
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01256;
          9 Dec 93 12:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00773
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 02:14:30 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26996
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 02:14:10 -0600
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 02:14:10 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #807

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Dec 93 02:14:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 807

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Jack Decker)
    Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Randal Hayes)
    Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Chas. Frankston)
    Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Matthew Landru)
    Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Richard Chin)
    Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Skokie, IL, and Telephone History (James J. Menth)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively
to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email,
in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service
systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited,
complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups.
Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service
Date: 9 Dec 1993 01:21:00 GMT
Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net


I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV :-) , so what follows is
my opinion only.  In the matter of whether college students must be
given access to other carriers, this would really depend on several
things:

1) The FCC rules on equal access, especially as they apply to
aggregators.

2) Whether a university is put into a special classification that
exempts them from FCC rules.

Now, assuming for the moment that either the FCC rules don't require
universities to give "10XXX + 1 +" access, or that universities are
for some reason exempt from such requirements, the next question is
whether students have the right to get residential phone service
directly from the university.

This, in my opinion, skirts around another, much larger legal
question: Do universities have the right to require that students live
in university housing as a requirement of attending the university?
Somehow I cannot imagine that this has never been tested in court, but
at the same time, I'd be hard pressed to understand the legal
justification for this requirement.  It would seem to me not only to
violate a student's rights, but to constitute a restraint of trade,
wherein the university in competing with other rental housing in the
same area and is unfairly requiring students to live on campus in
order to keep the university's housing full (which means that they can
in turn charge any rental fee they like).

To me, this constitutes bundling of services in such a way that the
consumer cannot opt to take one service (education) separate from the
other (housing).  As I say, this may have been litigated in the past,
but I would love to know what the court's rationalle was for allowing
this sort of thing.

But anyway, you're stuck in the university-owned housing and they've
decide to run their own phone service in, and disallow you from
obtaining phone service directly from the local telephone company.
Now another set of questions needs to be answered:

1) Do your state's tariffs require landlords to give telephone
companies access to rental units?

In other words, if you rented an apartment on the tenth floor of a
private apartment complex, and the landlord said, "I refuse to allow
the telephone company (or anyone else) to run phone wiring in my
building; you'll either have to use a cellular phone or do without",
would there be a law or tariff section requiring him to allow the
telephone company access to his building for the purpose of installing
subscriber equipment for tenants?  I suspect that the answer varies by
state (or perhaps NO state requires this).  If your state does not
require this, then basically the university is free to do what it
wants in the apartments it owns and operates.

2) If your state DOES require landlords to give the phone company
access, are universities specifically excepted from this requirement?
If not, then it seems to me that they are obviously in violation of
this law when then refuse to allow students to get phone service from
the telephone company.

3) Is university housing different, in a legal sense, from other
housing?  Again, this would probably vary from state to state.
Consider that in many areas, you probably would not be able to force a
motel operator to let you have a residential phone line run into a
motel room, even if you planned to rent it for an extended period.  My
point is that all housing is not alike, and there may be different
rules for housing that is intended to be used by transitory tenants.

4) Are universities or university housing specifically mentioned in
any telephone tariffs, or telephone-related legislation in your state?
If not, then they probably have to follow the same rules as any other
landlord.

5) Is there any prohibition, in law or tariff, on landlords reselling
telephone service to residential users in your state?  If so, are
universities specifically excepted from that prohibition?

I think you see what I'm getting at ... find out what is required of
landlords in general (you may not have any right to phone service at
all!), and then find out if there is an exception for universities.
This should all be in either the tariffs, or the legislation governing
provision of telephone service in your state.

Now, if the laws of your state aren't really helpful, you might still
be able to argue that since the university requires you to live on
campus, your freedom of speech is inhibited if you cannot get phone
service from whomever you wish, or that some other constitutional
right is violated.  In effect, you'd be asking the judge to find a
right to receive phone service from your chosen provider in some
provision of the constitution.  While this is a really long shot, it
certainly wouldn't be the first time a judge has "found" some right in
the constitution (that the founding fathers probably never intended in
the first place).  If you try this, try to get your case heard by a
Clinton apointee!  :-) :-)

And if all that doesn't help, I'd start calling the smaller long
distance providers and see if you can find one that offers phone
service at "Dial 1" rates even if you use a "950-" access number.
Hint: If you're in a smaller town, look in the yellow pages of a
nearby large city to find such providers, or call your phone company
and ask which long distance carriers offer service in your area.
Smaller providers don't always advertise in the yellow pages of every
community where they offer service (many offer service throughout an
entire LATA, but only advertise in their home city or the larger
cities in the LATA).

And one final tip: If the earlier suggestion of dialing 950-1022 to
see if you get MCI's dialtone (to see if you can access 950 numbers)
doesn't work, try prepending a "1" or an "0" first.  Some older
electromechanical exchanges will allow you to connect to long distance
providers via "950" numbers, but only if you dial a "1" or "0" first
(the call to the "950" number is still toll-free in this case).  Also,
if a particular carrier thinks you should be able to reach their "950"
number from your exchange and you cannot (and it's being blocked by
your local telephone company and not your university's PBX), try
lodging a complaint with the PUC -- there are an amazing number of
switches that are mis-programmed in such a way that 950 calls don't go
through, and calling repair service about these is generally an
exercise in frustration.


Jack


[Moderator's Note: Everywhere I can think of, the telephone company
has easement rights which allow them access to your property when
there are wires or cables in common serving various subscribers.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 8 Dec 93 08:27 CST
Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service


Initially, I must express my opinion that there is NO excuse for a
university to charge students MORE than AT&T rates, whether by
per-minute charges, or some type of surcharge. With the large traffic
volume, it is easy to offer some type of discount, roughly equivalent
to the lower rates students could get on their own, and still allow
for a reasonable "profit" to help subsidize the telecom department's
operation. Anyone who has to gouge their customers to make ends meet
should simply be considered less-than good managers.

However, I believe I posted information here a while back regarding
the aspects of 10XXX blocking/unblocking per the Operator Services Act
of 1990.  Essentially, those systems that could make 10XXX-0 dialing
accessible immediately via simple reprogramming had to do so by March
16, 1992. For those who could modify their systems for $15/line or
less to allow 10XXX, they were required to do so by March 15, 1993.
And, those installations who required major equipment purchase or
upgrade to allow 10XXX have until April 17th, 1997.

You must also remember that a switch has to be able to program this
out to 10XXX-0XX to disallow international direct dialing, or the
institution would have all kinds of non-university business
international calls billed to it. Hopefully, no colleges or
universities are improperly hiding behind this schedule to avoid
upgrades at this time. A simple challenge to the telecom staff (with
emphasis that the FCC will be notified) should hopefully get you a
legitimate response as to why 10XXX is not currently allowed, and when
it will be allowed.

> The administrator here said he knew what I meant but that college campuses
> fall in a special category by the FCC that don't have this restriction.

WRONG! ACUTA (Association of College and University Telecommunications
Administrators) attempted to have colleges and universities exempted
from the definition of "aggregator" in the verbage of the ACT. I had
stated they did not have a chance, since they were dead center in the
definition of aggregator as stated in the ACT. The FCC denied ACUTA's
request, specifically ruling that colleges and universities were
indeed "aggregators" as defined, and were subject to the Operator
Services Act of 1990.

Th bottom line is -- before someone states publicly that an entity is
doing something illegal, I suggest they check out what the legality
is, as in the case of the 10XXX/Operator Services Act of 1990, some
institutions may simply be following the law to the letter!

All of this babbling is simply the opinion of Randal J. Hayes, and
does not necessarily reflect the opinions of my employer (although
they may selectively claim the opinions that they like!)


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 22:56 -0400


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Matthew B. Landru) writes:

> Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time.
> Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of

When this topic last came up in the Digest, I asked a friend of mine
who works in the MIT telecom department what their policy is.  Bear in
mind, that until MIT installed one of the first private 5ESS exchanges
in the country around 1985, all MIT dormitory rooms had intra-campus
telephone service provided via a largely student labor maintained
step-by-step system.  The dormitory rooms, as well as offices, labs,
etc. were all connected to the 5ESS, except that the dorms only got
analog service.

Anyway, here's my friend's comments.  Since I didn't get a chance to
ask him permission I'm not identifying him by name:

        Well, it has been a while since I was in the telephone "loop"
here. However here is what I recall of our policies (which we used
when we negotiated with the LD providers).

        I write these from the MIT point of view addressed more or less
to a prototypical LD provider wishing to get our business.

1) MIT wishes its students to have access to LD calling services from
   the MIT owned phones in their rooms.

2) MIT (to NET) wishes (and got) unlimited residential rates (billed by
   NET to MIT) for local calls within NETs local calling areas (i.e.,
   we have residence trunks going into our 5ESS). We had to win a case
   in front of the DPU to get this. (Mass. DPU 86-13).

3) MIT will not be a phone service re-seller. All arrangements for LD
   service are between the student and the LD provider.

4) MIT will *not* block access to other services (for calling card calls).

5) MIT will cooperate and provide technical support to reduce fraudulent
   calling (i.e., access PINs and Automatics Number Identification).

6) MIT will *not* withhold degrees or in any way take action against
   students who are in default with the LD provider. Basically MIT wishes
   to be neutral with respect to any relationship between the LD provider
   and the student.

7) MIT requests that the LD provider give students a discount. Why?
   Because we believe that our students, as a subset of the population,
   are more credit worthy as a group then a similar sized subset of the
   general population.

8) Service by LD to student must be offered in a non-onerous way.
   We learned this one the hard way. The first LD company we did business
   with setup an onerous cash-in-advance debit system of bill paying
   (i.e., Student had to maintain a positive balance with the provider,
   or be cut off). We terminated this contract (and all other MIT business
   with that provider) at the first legal opportunity. [They are *still*
   burning because of this :-) ].

I believe that our students get a good deal from the LD provider
(which is currently AT&T). I don't know if AT&T offers them the
various discount plans though. They can always use 950 (or 800)
numbers to bypass our arrangement with AT&T. Keep in mind that
students do not have a telephone account with MIT, the phone is simply
part of their room.

I wonder if any of the posters you whose stuff you forwarded to me has
the option of opting out of the system and just getting a phone from
the local telco? Last I checked (and I'll double check tomorrow during
business hours when people are in) MIT students could elect to get
their own phone from NET (just like in the days of dormphone). So in
essence students have the ultimate choice of ignoring MIT Telecommun-
ications and going directly to NET.

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew B. Landru)
Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service
Date: 8 Dec 1993 23:23:34 GMT
Organization: Project SAVE International


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

> If any of you is informed on the current status of this matter and
> knows for sure that this form of call blocking is illegal, please
> advise me of such and I will contact our student legal organization.

   I am writing this just to advise people that I am currently waiting
to hear back from the FCC about this matter. I called their office
(being right in Washington DC helps with that :) ) and no one has (as
of yet) returned the call. I'll let everyone know if and when I get a
straight answer from them.


Matthew B. Landry
President of Project SAVE
[e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:36:26 PST
From: Richard Chin <[e-mail]>


Three or four years ago when I was a student living on campus at
Stanford, the university decided that it would be better to own and
operate its own phone system.  Students (like myself) who lived on
campus were compelled to buy both local and long distance service from
the university.  I believe that AT&T was the carrier for long distance
calls but that the university acted as a resller.

At the time there was a considerable uproar over the lack of carrier
choice for long distance calling, particularly since many students had
friends and family overseas.  A group of law students challenged the
university in court and before the California Public Utilities
Commission.  The students lost in both forums although I do not
remember why.

While 10XXX access to carriers of choice would be nice on university
campuses, I have not heard of a single precedent in which students
have overturned a university's restriction of 10XXX access where the
phone system is owned by the university.


Richard Chin
(these comments are my own)

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy?
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:07:17 GMT


The difference in power ratio between a 600 mW and 3.0 watt phone is
about 7 dB.  It is easy to obtain at least as much effective signal
gain by attaching an exterior antenna to your phone.

Here in northeastern Ohio, Cellular coverage is pretty good in
metropoletan areas as well as in corridors surrounding major
interstate highways.  Cell towers near interstates have shaped
patterns that favor improved reception in zones paralleling the road.
Where you run into toruble is in country areas that have hilly
topology that can block a weak signal.

In town and on the highway, I get pretty good results with a 600 mW
Motorola phone OEM version that I bought from GTE.  What I have is
called, "America Series."  It is like a flip phone Microtac without
the flip down mike; sort of fat and stubby.  Despite the dimutive
size, audio quality is very good.  If you buy service from GTE, the
phone is about $179; I got mine from Sears & Roebuck.  The phone runs
for about 12 hours on a charge.  12 hour batteries are about $30 at
Cellular One (same battery as the flip phone).

There is a nickel metal hydride battery that gives up to 24 hours of
operation.  If you use the NiMH battery, you need to use the desk
charger -- about $80 bucks.  I'm just using the regular NiCd pack, but
decided to get the rapid charger anyway.  Cellular One had the best
price on the charger locally.  The America Series does NOT have an
external antenna jack unless you use an external cradle / amplifer
system that has an outrageous price something like $350.  Basically,
the cradle amp is an entire cell phone except for the CPU and
microphone, hence the cost.  If you want power and external antenna,
you might as well get any one of the bag type phones that go for
around $50 if you purchase service.  A few of the hand-held phones can
use an external antenna when you use an adaptor cable that isn't
expensive; be sure to check that out if you want a hand-held phone but
anticipate spending time in rural areas.

One other thing about service providers.  GTE seems to have available
anywhere, a follow-me option that lets you key in *18 in any roaming
area to have your calls automatically forwarded from your home area --
at your cost of LD, of course.  Cellular One has "Ohiolink" here
in-state that is $2/mo that automatically logs you anywhere you roam
without having to enter a code; you pay LD charges to the roaming
point.  For an additional couple bucks (I didn't opt for it) you can
get Nationlink that automatically logs you anywhere.

Over-all, GTE is probably better if you don't mind pressing *18 when
you get to your destination.  They say that it might take up 30
minutes for the registration to get back to your home area for
forwading.  Seems to happen faster than that.  The Ohiolink on
Cellular One seems to be virtually instantaneous, save a slight delay
of a couple of seconds before somebody calling you hears ringing.  The
air time rates for either carrier are about the same.  It pays to
check out carefully for any incentive packages.  You can play one
carrier off the other by mentioning a quote you got.  They may offer a
few feature for a while to sweeten the pot, etc.  GTE has better
coverage in the rural parts of Ohio.


Bill Mayhew        NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-9995  USA      phone: [phone]
[e-mail]       amateur radio 146.58: N8WED

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy?
Date: 8 Dec 1993 20:14:38 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Huntress) writes:

> I've been shopping for a cellular phone for my in-law's Xmas gift.  In
> fact I just returned a few minutes ago more confused than when I left.
> I had planned on buying one of the smaller style of phones rather than
> the "bag" type.  My in-laws will be travelling between MA and FL using
> the phone almost exclusively for emergency inbound and outbound calls
> (once we get over the "guess where I'm calling from!" phase).

> I'm not worried about standby or talk times of the little phones, but
> I had not realized that they were 0.6 watts versus three watts for the
> bag phones.  So here is my question:

> Is the east coast cell coverage sufficient so that 0.6 watts is enough
> power to always (or virtually always) be able to send and receive
> calls?

> None of the sales droids had a clue.  Any info appreciated.

> [Moderator's Note: I imagine the east coast is as saturated with
> coverage as the Chicago area, and here, the 0.6 watt phones do fine.
> Under rigorous conditions, obviously three watts will give a little
> more punch as needed, but I've never seen an instance here where the
> lower power did not do as well. Really, it is a personal preference
> most of the time.   PAT]

What most people don't realize is that the specification for analog
North American cellular permits the network to command a particular
cellular telephone to reduce its RF output level to any of several
reduced levels.  The idea is to force the telephone to transmit with
only just barely enough power to reach the cell antenna, so that the
channel may be reused one or two cells away.

It is commonplace for a three-watt telephone to be transmitting at
only 1.2 watts or 600 milliwatts or one of the levels below 600
milliwatts, for the simple reason that the network told it to do so.
In such an area it will be appreciated that the person who happens to
have a three-watt unit will only sometimes be better off than the user
of a 600-milliwatt unit.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW    Oppedahl & Larson (patent lawyers)
Yorktown Heights, NY   voice 212-777-1330

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

From: [e-mail] (James J. Menth)
Subject: Re: Skokie, IL, and Telephone History
Organization: AT&T-Little Rock
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 16:11:53 GMT


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

> When Western Electric's Teletype Corp. was located in Skokie, the
> plant (on Touhy Ave.) was the largest open area manufacturing facility
> in the world. At it's peak, well into the '70, they received more
> orders for Teletype machines in a month than they could build in a
> year.  It was a very interesting place to visit.  I left Chicago in
> the early sixties and have no idea what happened to the area. Does
> anyone know the fate of the Teletype complex ?

In 1956, when Model 28 was king, some of the subassembly operations
were moved from Skokie to a facility in Little Rock, Arkansas.  This
facility was in leased space but land was purchased and 650,000 square
feet of air conditioned manufacturing space (largest in the state at
the time) was completed in 1972.

The Little Rock plant gradually replaced the Skokie facility with the
last manufacturing operations, printed wiring boards and LSI manufact-
uring, phasing out in the middle 80's.

Another milestone was the retiring of the Western Electric and
Teletype names after the 1984 divestiture.

The last facility at the Skokie location was the Research and
Development organization, Teletype's version of Bell Laboratories.
The last time I visited R&D (can't recall exact date) the shopping
center now on the site had already encroached over half the old tract.

I still remember my first visit to Skokie in 1977.  It reminded me of
a General Motors plant with parts of model 33 machines moving on roof
mounted conveyers, coming together at the final assembly area.

This triggered lots of memories but I don't have time now for more
reminiscing but I will look at the rest of the Digest for responses
before submitting again.


Jim Menth at Little Rock [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #807
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01673;
          9 Dec 93 13:07 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31249
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:02:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30854
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:02:18 -0600
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:02:18 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #808

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Dec 93 04:02:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 808

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T _Required_? (Russell Blau)
    Re: AT&T _Required_? (Marshall Levin)
    Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (John A. Romano)
    Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (John R. Levine)
    Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response (Danny Padwa)
    Re: PC to Alpha Pagers! (Sam Noonan)
    Re: PC Pursuit; Also Inexpensive 14.4k FAXmodem (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Finally Got REAL Phone Service (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Call Waiting 14.4 Mod (Laurence Chiu)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively
to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email,
in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service
systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited,
complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups.
Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks.

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

Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 18:26:13 EST
From: Russell Blau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T _Required_?


In a series of recent articles, you have discussed the fact that some
customers are rejecting inbound calls that are not being carried by
the recipient's preferred carrier.  The articles are too lengthy to
quote, but the gist was that you stated that the recipient is free to
accept or reject whatever calls it wants, even when the caller is
paying.

As a lawyer specializing in common carrier regulation, I am not aware
of any law or decision that either supports or contradicts the
position you took.  I don't think that either the FCC or the courts
have addressed this question yet.  But I don't think the issue is as
cut and dried as you suggested.

As you described it, the customer in question orders a telephone line
(which comes with a number) from their friendly local telco. Then they
arrange with their preferred LD carrier to screen inbound calls dialed
to that number and route them over a dedicated terminating access
facility, not over the telco's lines. Any call that comes into this
number over the telco's lines is given a busy signal or a recording by
the *customer's PBX*, not by the telco.

Now, what happens when an ignorant user (like me) tries to dial this
magic telephone number using the "wrong" LD carrier; or, for that
matter, as a local call?  The recipient's PBX sends back busy signal
or a recording.  It may or may not also send answer supervision; if it
does, I will be charged by my carrier for a one-minute call.  If that
happens, I will be mad as hell and will complain to the FCC that this
is illegal!  On the other hand, if it does not send answer
supervision, then I won't get billed for the call but my LD carrier
*will* get billed by the local telco for access charges for the time
it was using the telco's network. (The LD carriers pay for all
"access minutes" they use, whether or not a call is completed, as
opposed to us lowly end users who only have to pay for "conversation
minutes.") It would seem to me that the LD carrier, if it wanted to
make a stink, would have grounds to go to the FCC and complain about
this arrangement too, since it has no way of knowing that the "magic
number" will be blocked by the recipient and therefore will incur
excessive liability for calls that can't be completed.

Of course, the major LD carriers may be unwilling to make such a
complaint because each of them has this type of arrangement with some
of their high-volume customers.  There might be some smaller resellers
out there, though, who don't have such conflicting interests and would
want to raise the issue in order to trim their access costs.  (This
could be an interesting case to handle on a _pro bono_ basis.)

Of course, there are relatively few kinds of businesses that could get
away with setting up an *exclusive* terminating access arrangement
like this.  Each of the examples that I know of involve an Internet
access provider; in this case, the caller has already subscribed to
the recipient's service and is paying to use it, and so is not likely
to complain too loudly about having to use a particular LD carrier.
However, most businesses wouldn't want to take the risk that the
recording telling the caller to hang up and use a different LD carrier
would annoy a potential customer/client, and so they would continue to
accept incoming calls from the telco's lines in addition to the
preferred carrier's dedicated facility.


Russell M. Blau        Swidler & Berlin, Chtd.
[e-mail]    Washington, D.C.
Tel: [phone]    Fax: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Actually, Internet service providers are only a
small part of the scene. Almost all the organizations doing it are
providing sexual 'hot chat' phone services. It has been noted in
this Digest in the past that all the long distance carriers love
'hot chat'; the idea of a guy and a woman, or two guys or whatever
who are otherwise perfect strangers hanging on the long distance
telephone for a half hour to an hour in the middle of the night
getting each other off is what the carriers like :)  The eager
participants cruise on someone's 900 or 976 conference bridge at an
early hour in the morning and an exhorbitant fee per minute --
like one of the bridges John Higdon <[e-mail]> operates
out of his home and has installed in a few other places around the
USA -- they like what they hear and one or the other gives out his
phone number; names are not necessary nor desired. The one calls
the other and they talk about whatever they want, but at direct
dial overnight rates to avoid further (high) payment to the bridge
tender and his 900/976 line. AT&T likes that as does Sprint/MCI.

When 900 got very problematic for the bridge tenders what with all
the deadbeats wanting to have their fun but not pay for it later on
and convincing the telcos to charge it all back, etc, the carriers
(and they are all nothing more than keepers of disorderly houses, as
the old police complaints read years ago; electronic madams if you
will) thought up the 'recipient chooses/denies carrier' scheme. It
has obvious advantages over 900/976: as regular numbers, they cannot
easily be blocked on PBXs; the revenue per minute is less but the
guarentee of collection is almost assured a hundred percent, since
telco CAN cut you off for non-payment of tolls even if they CANNOT
cut you off for non-payment of 900 billings; and well, all around
it just works out better.

Since about all the services using this arrangement are sex-oriented
I guess the proprietors figure the customers aren't in any position to
make a stink about getting billed for a busy signal. Anyway, a message
*is* delivered (rather than a busy signal) by most of the services:
they say "We will not talk to you unless you hang up and redial using
10xxx plus the number you originally dialed." The law is on their
side. No one has to come to the phone and speak with you merely
because you are paying for a call to them. Yeah, I would say AT&T
knows all about how these things work. An ad in one of the Chicago
'alternative lifestyle' newspapers awhile back showed these two
guys with whips, chains, handcuffs, the whole routine. And the
caption said 'Make new friends using the AT&T network. Just dial
10288-1xxx-xxx-xxxx. No extra fees; just toll charges.' You bet!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marshall Levin)
Subject: Re: AT&T _Required_?
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 21:14:01 GMT


> building. The local telco never sees the calls. In the meantime, if
> someone calls via some other carrier, that carrier continues to
> do as always: hand the call to the local telco who in turn delivers
> it to you normally via your main directory-listed telephone number.
> So your 'regular' phone will continue to ring off the hook all day
> and night just as it always has, but you answer those calls with
> a recorded message *that you program and are responsible for handling*
> saying something like "I won't talk to you since you did not call
> via the carrier I chose. Hang up and dial 10-my-code to get through."

Hmm.  When I called Speedway via MCI to see what would happen, it was
simply always busy.

Thanks for your explanation.


Marshall


[Moderator's Note: It could be Speedway always leaves that line off
the hook. Some use that method of dealing with callers via non-approved
carriers.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John A. Romano)
Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service
Date: 8 Dec 1993 13:39:24 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park


P. Calvert ([e-mail]) wrote:

> A friend of mine lives in a university-owned apartment.  A few months
> ago the university took over the phones and now he has to pay the
> university for long-distance calls instead of being able to select a
> long distance company.  He is forced to use AT&T, and the school
> charges a rather exorbitant mark-up over AT&T's rates.  And to force
> you to use their system, access to other networks (like MCI and
> Sprint) is blocked.

> Does anyone now of any legal alternatives to get around this?  One
> idea is to use a calling card and call a toll-free access number.
> However, the usual calling cards would probably be too expensive --
> unless there exists some competitor's card that has reasonable rates.
> Any suggestions?

This issue goes back to the FCC ruling which took effect in March.
Universities with student residents (dorms, etc) were considered
"aggregators" just like hotels and are required to provide "equal
access".  It's a pretty legally complicated docket to read but I think
10xxx access isn't the only way to provide equal access, but maybe
someone who knows the FCC rulings better than I do can fill that in.
We decided to set up 10xxx access via a dial access code so anyone who
doesn't feel like using ACUS can use there own calling cards. (NOTE:
this applies ONLY to student resident phones; administrative phones do
not have to have equal access).  There is some outrageous fine like
$10,000.00 a day if you are caught by the Feds, although there is some
doubt about how strictly it will be enforced.

I also heard that the FCC had stayed its ruling to give people more
time to unblock access.  I haven't heard whether its in effect,
although we took the safe route and have complied.  Maybe someone else
can fill in the detail ...


John Romano    Telecommunications Engineer
University of Maryland - College Park
Eyes:  [e-mail]   Ears:  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk
Date: 9 Dec 1993 05:27:01 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Comroe-CDCS37 Rich) writes:

> Fred R. Goldstein writes:

>> Well here I am, posting my first note over my BRANDY-SPANKIN' NEW ISDN
>> RESIDENCE LINE!  I had an ISDN line before as part of a trial, but
>> this is a genuine tariffed line provisioned by New England Telephone
>> from my local central office, the same one that provides analog dial
>> tone to the analog home >phone.

> ...  I'm curious if the two residential ISDN owners cited above
> have 'residential service' or business service to the home ... or was
> IBT all wet with the story that it wasn't available (the residential
> service agent didn't know what ISDN was, and had to find a supervisor
> to informed me that it wasn't available.)

To restate: My ISDN line is under RESIDENTIAL tariff.  I can make free
calls any time of day within a 20-mile radius, under an obscure and
limited-availability residential calling plan that New England
Telephone never thought could carry 56 kbpd data (but it does; witness
this connection).  Business lines here in Metro Boston are always
measured.

This is not the case in all states.  New England's ISDN tariff is
quoted as a surcharge over any other service, residence or business.
Some states treat it as a different service, which may be business
only.  Of course you can have a business line in the house (we do
here, for a real business, but it's an analog line) if you're willing
to pay the freight.


Fred R. Goldstein  k1io   [e-mail]
Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.

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

Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 12:21 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> I'm curious if the two residential ISDN owners cited above
> have 'residential service' or business service to the home ... or was
> IBT all wet with the story that it wasn't available

Fred lives here in Massachusetts where the NET, under considerable
regulatory prodding, offers residential ISDN for $8/mo above POTS.

There are a few little warts.  The worst is that the last I heard they
still don't promise digital connections outside of the local CO, so
it's only useful if you have ISDN friends in the same town.  Also, the
charging for calls is a bit strange.  Voice calls are charged the same
as voice POTS calls, which within the local calling area are free.
Data calls are charged message rates, about 2 cents/minute.  So anyone
with the brains of a papaya adjusts his equipment to mark everything
as voice and lives with 56K rather than the clear 64K promised on data
calls.

I considered ISDN for my Internet link (the POP is indeed here in
Cambridge), but it ended up being cheaper and easier to set up a
wireless link to a friend's house and share his existing DDS
connection.  The cable company says they'll have 500Kb IP for
$100/month early next year, which if true (we're all very sceptical)
would make ISDN moot.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:11 GMT


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

> Anyway, here is what I heard back.  It seems clear that NYTel is
> cream-skimming -- serving only the highly profitable areas that want
> ISDN, and leaving the unprofitable areas to others.  That is exactly
> the opposite of what common carriers are supposed to do.

Somebody ought to explain to these guys that service needs to be
available at both ends in order to be useful.  If I put my business
office in the "cream" CO, that doesn't help me to do, let's say,
telecommuting over ISDN, if my employees don't live where it's
offered.


Ed Greenberg           [e-mail]        Ham Radio: KM6CG

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

From: [e-mail] (Danny Padwa)
Subject: Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response
Organization: PARA Systems Development - Goldman, Sachs & Co.
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 16:32:07 GMT


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

> The BIGGEST rub may be training their joke-grade sales force. The
> answer to that is to ONLY sell it through their 'authorized' agents --
> even for home ISDN. NYNEX seems to have century old labor relations
> policies and enjoys worker moral/quality to match. The agents are
> outside companies and can do a much better job and train faster.

> An example of their weak sales ability is their frame relay product
> which is great, but only the larger accounts served by select quality
> sales staff use it. They need to let the rest of the customer base in

To give them credit, NYNEX does appear to have some (at least one)
knowledgeable sales-droid.  I called yesterday to ask about switching
my service when I move (three blocks on Manhattan's West Side).  I
asked if I would be able to keep my phone number, and if (when) I
would be able to get ISDN at my new location.

While I was disappointed by the answers (no and no), I was surprised
by the knowledgeable response given by the service rep.  He was
willing to explain the reason I couldn't keep my number (my three
block move crosses CO boundaries), and the details of ISDN
availability ("The new CO has two switches, a 1A that can't support
it, and a 5ESS that maybe can, etc, etc").  All in all a shockingly
knowledgeable sales/customer rep.

Side question if the ISDN thing doesn't pan out (I've heard
guesstimates of May '95 for ISDN in the new CO (Manhattan Ave), as
opposed to "a few more months" for the old one (W 73 St).  Since the
distance involved is so small (I'm really only moving three blocks!!)
how likely do y'all think it is that NYTel will be willing to run a
slightly longer wire for me??  Especially if it is a "business
circuit" (employer-billed line for dialup)??


Thanks,

Danny Padwa   [e-mail]
Note: These are not necessarily the opinions of my employer

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

From: [e-mail] (Sam Noonan)
Subject: Re: PC to Alpha Pagers!
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 18:18:52 GMT


Steve Lamont ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Several people have posted questions about sending messages to alpha
> numeric pagers.  I just saw an announcement for *free* software,
> called MessageFlash, to send messages from any PC with Windows and a
> modem.  All they charge is $7.50 for S&H.  The number to call is
> 1-800-99FLASH or e-mail your address and credit card data to:
> [e-mail].

There is also Software on AmiNet FTP sites called CyberPage for the
Amiga computer.

 From what I have seen, I have a friend who I can use this software to
page or I can call the system directly and do it by hand.  All you
need is the Phone # of the system.  The one I call is at 300 baud 7E1.

So check your service for a modem number to call.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: PC Pursuit; Also Inexpensive 14.4k FAXmodem
Date: 08 Dec 1993 21:51:23 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


Global Access which was or maybe still is on SprintNet offering a
service about like PCP has started moving over to BT's Tymnet which
has a lot more indials as well as outdials. It might be worth looking
into because I believe BT has 9600 outdials. It does not support Data
Commpression though, I found that out because I use it for my
Homebanking.

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin McCormick)
Subject: Re: Finally Got REAL Phone Service
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 21:02:31 GMT


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

> may recall that I posted a list of changes I had noted, including this
> one:

>> 1) My on-hook line voltage increased from ~15 volts to ~44 volts DC.
>> Also, the tip/ring polarity reversed from what it had been when I was
>> on the carrier.

    When the line is fixed, it might be interesting to see if the
on-hook voltage is any higher than 44 volts.  It could be that the
pinched spot with the addition of a little moisture began to conduct
slightly.  Maybe, at first, it was a few thousand ohms.  With a little
more water, it may have dropped down to a low enough resistance to
start causing real problems.

    The green color could have been either corrosion or
electrolisis caused by the current flowing between the two conductors
through the liquid.

    The increase in voltage would definitely speed up this process
and cause metal to gradually break down from the cathode or negative
wire and migrate to the positively-charged wire.  It is just like what
happens in the electroplating process.  I remember as a young boy
trying to plate copper from Pennies, (yes, I know, shame on me), onto
my mother's table knives, a combination domestic/federal crime.  I
never succeeded in doing anything more than making a mess of things,
but it was quite interesting.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Subject: Re: Call Waiting 14.4 Modem
Date: 08 Dec 1993 21:01:00 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access


In a message, [e-mail] said:

>> If it is important to be able to reach you when data calls are in
>> progress, I recommend a second telephone line.

> Not exactly the tip of the century but I my have my phone set up to
> divert on busy to my cellular phone. The drawback is that I pay for
> the diverted call but as I have the cellular phone anyway it's
> cheaper than a second line.

A useful tip in some circumstances. The trouble is, in the U.S. you
pay for incoming calls on your cellular line. These cost me $0.75/c
minute any time of the day with my calling plan. So I would be paying
for the call to the cell phone (though this might be a local call -- I
haven't checked yet) and for receiving the call on the cell phone.
This is something I would rather not do. They can always calls back or
if they wait long enough, the ringing will usually drop the carrier.
People do comment that it does take an inordinate amount of time for
me to answer the phone though!


Laurence Chiu                Walnut Creek, California
Phone(Work) : 510-215-3730   Internet:  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #808
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04570;
          9 Dec 93 19:19 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08223
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:11:25 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30188
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:11:05 -0600
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:11:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #806


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Dec 93 01:02:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 806

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved (David Leibold)
    CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes (Jeff Robertson)
    European ISDN Event - EURIE '93 (D.E. Price)
    Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company (Jack Decker)
    Four-Bit ADPCM (Stewart Fist)
    NAPLPS and RIP Inquiry (Jim Choate)
    Telecom Mouse Standard? (Jim Choate)
    Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted (Jason Demarte)
    Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Gary Breuckman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 00:45 WET
From: [e-mail] (woody)
Subject: Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved


(djcl note: the Canadian telecom regulator, Canadian Radio-television
and Telecommunications Commission, made the following decision last
week. Needless to say, business groups in Canada are not particularly
enthusiastic about the idea of local measured service after a given
monthly calling allowance. In summary, the scheme will not be in
effect until at least 1995, which is when Bell Canada expects to have
its digital switching and billing systems in place. Business groups
like the CBTA mentioned in the decision are warning that residence
customers will be next to get hit with local measured service. Without
further ado, the decision text (subject to the odd typo, official
version available from CRTC) ....)

[from text of CRTC decision]

Ottawa, 2 December 1993

Telecom Letter Decision 93-18

To: Bell Canada
    Interested Parties

Re: Bell Canada - Tariff Restructuring for Business Access Services

On 22 April 1991, the Commission wrote to the telephone companies
referring them to the February 1991 finding of the Terminal Attachment
Program Advisory Committee (TAPAC) that, owing to technological
development, mutually exclusive technical definitions of PBXs and key
telephone systems (KTSs) were no longer practical. The Commission
noted that rates for PBX trunks and KTS access lines were generally
dependent on the classification of equipment on which they terminated,
and that the TAPAC finding called into question the relevance of
tariffs based on that distinction.

As a result of the Commission's letter, the telephone companies filed
tariff revisions or reports of plans to set rates independently of
terminal equipment type (with the exception of AGT Limited and the New
Brunswick Telephone Company Limited, whose rates did not depend on the
type of terminal equipment). The Commission has since approved tariff
revisions for BC TEL, and Newfoundland Telephone Company, Maritime
Telegraph and Telephone Company Limited and Newfoundland Telephone
Company Limited. By letter dated 25 November 1992, the Commission
denied tariff revisions proposed by Northwestel Inc., and directed the
company to file proposed tariff revisions that would be revenue
neutral.

Bell Canada (Bell) filed reports setting out three approaches to
restructuring its tariffs for Business Access Service. These
approaches are described below:

Blended Rate: This approach provides for a common rate for individual
lines and PBX trunks. Bell rejected this approach because of its
effect on customers, specifically, individual-line rates would climb
by 4% to 63%, while PBX trunk rates would drop by 10% to 43%. In
addition, rates for services related to individual lines and PBX
trunks would be affected and, in order to achieve revenue neutrality,
further rate increases would be required.

Sliding Scale: The sliding scale approach would entail replacing PBX
and individual line rates with an ascending rate scale. The scale
would vary with the size of the channel groups (1, 2-5, 6-10, 11-20
and over 20 channels).  Each rate increase along the scale would be
based on the value of incremental PBX trunk rates. Bell submitted that
the sliding scale approach assumes that higher efficiency (i.e.,
increased usage volume and decreased blocking) is achieved with
greater capacity. Illustrative rates developed to achieve revenue
neutrality indicate that KTS customers would be subject to increases
of 13% to 44%, while PBX trunk customers would see decreases of 11% to
27%. The ascending scale could be applied only to access line groups
equipped with hunting. Lines from a customer's terminal not equipped
with hunting would thus be rated at the lowest level, although, when
terminated on sophisticated equipment, they can generate high outgoing
usage to the public switched telephone network.

Threshold Pricing: Under this approach, a business customer would pay
a flat rate for the access channel and a specified amount of usage,
i.e., the threshold. Outgoing calls exceeding the threshold would be
charged for on a per-minute basis. The threshold would not apply to
the user's incoming traffic. The threshold would vary by rate group
bands to take into account usage differences. Bell based the
thresholds for the illustrative rates on a six-month subscriber
line-usage study, commenced in April 1992, of 24,000 business access
lines of various types. Based on Bell's illustrative rates, 10% of
single-line customers, 14% of multi-line and 10% of PBX trunk
customers would pay increased charges.

As indicated above, Bell rejected the blended rate approach because of
its impact on customers. Bell submitted that threshold pricing is more
appropriate than the sliding scale approach because it takes into
account large differences in usage. In particular, Bell submitted that
it ensures billing certainty for the majority of customers, while
reflecting a user-pay philosophy. Bell stated that implementation
costs would be higher than for the sliding scale approach, but that
threshold pricing would permit the introduction of usage sensitive
local business services, which could provide additional revenues to
help offset the local access shortfall. Bell proposed to file a final
rate structure in the fourth quarter of 1994.

The Commission received comments on Bell's reports from the Canadian
Business Telecommunications Alliance (CBTA), the Government of
Ontario, Smart Talk Network (STN) and Unitel Communications Inc.
(Unitel).

The Commission is of the view that threshold pricing is the most
equitable of the three approaches. Blended rates would result in rate
increases for small users in excess of 70%. The sliding scale approach
would result in increases for KTS cutsomers of up to 45%, while PBX
customers would see reductions of up to 27%. Threshold pricing, on the
other hand, can be implemented with no increase in customer billing
for the vast majority of customers. Indeed, based on Bell's
illustrative rates, threshold pricing would lead to increases for 10%
of single-line customers, 14% of multi-line customers, and 10% of PBX
trunk customers.

Unitel objected to the threshold pricing approach, relying on BC TEL's
response to a Commission interrogatory related to that company's
access filing. In that response, BC TEL concluded that a report by
Economics and Technology, Inc. (ETI) on local/access pricing indicates
that local usage- based costs are dropping to the extent that
usage-based pricing is not justified.

The Commission disagrees with this interpretation of the ETI report.
The report provides views both for and against usage-based pricing. In
fact, the report states that, because the evidence is ambiguous as to
whether there are gains to be realized from using local measured
pricing as a principal means of cost recovery, most U.S. regulators
have chosen a combination of flat-rate and usage-based pricing.

While the Commission agress that usage-based costs are in decline, it
considers that they remain a factor in the local service market. In
this context, the Commission notes that threshold pricing includes
both flat-rate and usage-based components, with the latter applicable
to heavier users. The Commission therefore considers threshold pricing
to be consistent with cost recovery requirements in a market where
usage-based costs are declining, but have not been eliminated. In
addition, this approach may afford customers a certain flexibility in
controlling their local access costs.

STN and Unitel suggested that threshold pricing targets and penalizes
high- volume users, particularly alternative long distance providers,
whose access service costs would rise. Bell stated that trunk-side
access/equal ease of access arrangements will be in places before any
threshold pricing scheme. As to the targeting of market segments, the
Commission notes Bell's statetement that differences between light and
heavy users exist across the whole local market, i.e., no particular
market is targeted. Based on Bell's six-month subscriber line usage
study, and using its illustrative rate structure, 16% of users would
exceed the threshold and pay usage-based charges. In the Commission's
view, pricing approaches that recover greater revenues from the
heaviest users should not necessarily be regarded as 'targeting' a
market segment.

CBTA and Unitel submitted that threshold pricing would eliminate
predictability for users generating amounts of traffic large enough to
trigger usage-based charges; as a result, their ability to forecast
and control their telecommunications costs will be curtailed. The
Commission notes that such users have considerable experience in
controlling their costs for usage-priced services like Message Toll
Service and Wide Area Telephone Service.

STN and Unitel submitted that the costs of implementing threshold
pricing are too high. Unitel argued that BC TEL's Small Business/
Standard structure should be imposed because it can be implemented
more quickly and at a lower cost.

The Commission agrees that the implementation time for threshold
pricing is lengthy; however, it is tied to the implementation of
Bell's new billing system. It is Bell's new billing system, which
includes local usage-based billing capability, as well as the
provision of digital switching to all its business customers by
mid-1995, that enables Bell to apply its proposed rating structure. BC
TEL will not be so equipped. The Commission also notes that BC TEL, in
reply to interventions filed in support of the Small Business/Standard
pricing approach, stated that its criticism of usage-based pricing is
based on its own specific circumstances, and that the company may
consider usage-based pricing in the future.

In addition to the above, the Commission notes that Bell and BC TEL
differ in terms of existing rate relationships. The Commission notes
Bell's evidence that, based on the illustrative rates, imposing BC
TEL's approach in Bell's territory would cause the rates of KTS users
to rise by 30% to 80% or more.  The Commission also notes that even
the smallest users would benefit from no increases in rates, while the
smaller users would see substantial increases.  Under Bell's threshold
approach, only the heaviest users would see the increases.

In light of the above, the Commission directs Bell to file proposed
tariffs, in the fourth quarter of 1994, to implement threshold
pricing. The Commission further directs Bell to provide the following:

(1) justification for any differences between the proposed rate
structure and rate structures for its other exchange access tariffs;

(2) a full subscriber impact analysis; and

(3) the effect of the proposed rates on the difference in total
compensation paid to the telephone company for line-side versus
trunk-side access for competitive long distance providers.


Allan J. Darling
Secretary General

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

Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 20:49:47 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes


Bell Canada has won approval for a rate charge that would introduce a
pay-per-use charge for outgoing local phone calls for its largest
business customers.

Companies would be billed on a pay-per-use basis once their monthly
volume of local calls exceeded a yet to be determined threshold.

The new system will go into effect in two years and mean higher phone
bills for Bell's biggest business customers, and its long distance
competitors.

The new pricing scheme proposed by Bell Canada would eliminate the
different trunk costs of $48/month and $80.50/month for loop and
ground start business lines.  It would be one charge for all business
customers allowing unlimited incoming call, but a fixed amount of
outgoing local calls.  Any outgoing local calls beyond the threshold
would be charged by the minute.

However, none of the new charges, including the access rate, the
threshold level and the usage charge have been determined yet.

The CRTC told Bell to file the rates by the fourth quarter of 1994.
The new rates will likely take effect in late 1995 or early 1996, the
utility said in a news release issued yesterday (Tuesday Decemeber
8/93).

Six other federally regulated phone companies have adopted alternative
schemes that do not have usage-sensitvie charges.

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

Is this the first step toward billing personal calls by the minute?
If so, my grandmother (and her rotary phone) may kick the bucket!


Jeff Robertson    [e-mail]    Toronto, ON, Canada

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

From: [e-mail] (D E Price)
Subject: European ISDN Event - EURIE '93
Organization: University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 22:12:33 GMT


Telecommunications 'World Firsts' at EURIE '93
==============================================

UK Universities have joined forces with British Telecom to bring the
European ISDN Event to six locations within the regions and nations of
the United Kingdom.

Integrated Services Digital Network.

ISDN, or Integrated Services Digital Network represents the state of
the art in Pan European communications and supports many new
applications like Videophones, high quality, high speed facsimile
transfer and inter computer communications.  The solution provided by
ISDN is relevant to almost all sectors of the economy from the
smallest companies to International organisations.

Business Solutions for Europe '93.

The European ISDN Event (EURIE '93) is being held simultaneously in
over 70 sites in most European Countries and is being supported by 22
network operators. The event has the full backing and support of the
Commission of the European Communities.  EURIE is the biggest ISDN
event the world has yet seen.

The UK National Event, being titled `Business Solutions for Europe '93'
occurs simultaneously at six locations. The locations are:

BT Business Centre in London Docklands, England;
BT Business Centre in Birmingham, England;
BT Business Centre in Glasgow, Scotland;
University of Salford, Manchester, England;
University of Ulster, Londonderry, Northern Ireland;
University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Wales.

Worlds Largest ISDN Videoconference as Opening Ceremony.

EURIE '93 will be opened by Mr Jean-Pierre Jouyet, deputy head of
Cabinet of President Delors accompanied by Mr Michel Carpentier,
Director General of DGXIII of the CEC. The opening ceremony will take
place in Brussels and will be transmitted by ISDN to a total of 22
centres across Europe. This will be the world's largest ISDN
videoconference.

Santa Claus, Live from Lapland.

As part of Telecom Finland's contributions to EURIE '93, they have
arranged for Santa to be accessible live from Lapland via videophone.
As we all know, Santa's grotto is based in the town of Rovaniemi on
the Arctic Circle in Lapland. He will be talking to his friends from
all over Europe.

Conference Talks.

Some sites will feature conferences in addition to an exhibition of
products and services.

Further Information.

In the UK can be acquired from the British Telecom ISDN Helpdesk
Freefone 0800 18 15 14

Elsewhere in Europe, contact your nearest Telecom Operator.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
Subject: Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company
Date: 9 Dec 1993 04:48:21 GMT
Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)


According to {USA Today Update}, Ameritech has filed a request with
the Justice Department asking that they be allowed to offer long
distance service starting in 1995.  A direct quote from the news item:
"William Weiss, Ameritech chairman and chief executive officer, says
the plan will mean customers can choose to get local and long-distance
communications from a single provider."

What this item does not say is whether Ameritech is willing to open up
local phone service for competition.  If so, and if it's done in such
a way that even residential customers have the option of getting their
dial tone from someone other than Ameritech, I would be all for it.
Somehow, though, considering the way that Ameritech has behaved in the
past (for example, totally eliminating unmeasured local service
wherever a wimpy PUC would allow it), I doubt that they are really
going to do anything that might give their captive customers other
options.  Please, someone, tell me I'm wrong, and that Ameritech
really is going to allow true competition for the proverbial "last
mile"!

In any case, if anyone comes across more details on exactly what
Ameritech has proposed, I for one would be interested in hearing about
it.  Also, I wonder if the Justice Department will be taking public
comments on this?


Jack

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

From: Stewart Fist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Four-Bit ADPCM
Date: Thurs, 9 Dec 1993  00:02:00


I've just come across a reference on fax problems which says the
problems in transmission are often caused by:

> "4-bit encoding" 32 K bit/sec ADPCM systems which are unsuitable.
> 16 K bit/sec or 8 K bit/sec ADPCM systems.

I know that most voice trunk calls in Australia (supposedly 80%) are
made over 32-bit/sec ADPCM trunks, and fax seems to travel over these
quite successfully.  But the quote marks around the "4-bit encoding"
phrase above, seems to suggest that there are a number of different
versions of 32 kbit/sec ADPCM.  Is this correct?

I had assumed that 32 Kbit/sec ADPCM always used 4-bit codes since it
only transmitted the 'difference' between two adjacent samples, rather
than the sample size itself.  But perhaps I've got it wrong.  Is
there, perhaps, a variable length (Huffman-like) code being used here?

I'd also appreciate a quick outline of 16 Kbit/sec and 8 Kbit/sec
ADPCM.  I understand that the 16 Kbit/sec version is now widely used
in Transatlantic cables, so it must be a reasonably 'lossless'
compression system.  Does anyone happen to know if it is also used in
association with DCMS/DCME or bit-stealing techniques?

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Choate)
Subject: NAPLPS and RIP Graphics Inquiry
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:54:33 GMT


Hi everyone,

I am interested in contacting anyone about using NAPLPS or RIP
graphics for increasing the resolution of online communications. At
present I run a small non-inet bbs which supports both of these.

Please respond via e-mail.


Solar Soyuz Zaibatsu       ASCII-ANSI-NAPLPS-RIP    512.458.6084

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim choate)
Subject: Telecom Mouse Standard?
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:55:40 GMT


Are there any standards relating to passing pointing information over
a modem?  In particular I am looking for any discussions on standards
if they exist.

Please respond via e-mail.

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

Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:47:43 EST
From: Jason Demarte <[e-mail]>
Subject: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted
Organization: Penn State University


I have recently been reading about the sytem called Automatic Call
Distributor (ACD) and am wondering who are the major dealers for each
version of ACD: integrated ACD and stand-alone ACD.  If anyone has
some any information on this please post me a response, thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Breuckman)
Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 05:42:29 PST


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

> I just purchased a new computer.  I have 2400 baud modem and cable
> that works just great with my old computer.  With the new one, the
> computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from
> the modem.  For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a
> number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light),
> but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem.  (Echo
> does not work at all either).

> Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the
> instruction manual, to have any dip switches.

This is an external modem, the first think you want to do is test the
serial port on the computer and determine if that can receive or not.
The modem might be working fine, but the port not showing any of the
results.  Receiving is often interrupt driven, and the interrupt for
the port might not be set correctly (if it is in fact something that
can be set separately), or it might not be working.  You might also be
having a problem with the control lines, but with a port that usually
affects SENDING rather than RECEIVING.

So, what you need is a breakout box or a loopback plug, you can make a
loopback plug, jumper the following pins together ...

2->3 (transmit to receive),
4->5 (request-to-send to clear-to-send),
20->6 and 8 (terminal-ready to modem-ready and carrier-detect).

Now, anything you send out the port with your comm program should be
echoed back -- if not, the port has a problem.  These are the pins for
a 25-pin serial port, for the 9-pin it would be 3->2, 7->8, 4->6 and 1.

If that works, and you know the modem works elsewhere, you might try
setting the modem settings back to the factory defaults.  It just
might be some problem with flow control, but I suspect the port.  For
Hayes compatible modems that store the settings (ie, no dip switches,
the command is 'AT&f&w'.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #806
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04890;
          9 Dec 93 20:08 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15760
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:23:01 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24764
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:22:41 -0600
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:22:41 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #809

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Dec 93 11:08:09 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 809

Inside This Issue:                         Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Commercial OSI Products for SPARCstation (Phil Price)
    ISDN - Another Voice (William Hugh Murray)
    POCSAG/GOLAY Message Formats? (Mike Detlef)
    Re: Research on the Effects of Telecommuting (Koos de Heer)
    For Your Amusement, if Possible (Patrick Tufts via Mark Brader)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Phil Price)
Subject: Re: Commercial OSI Products for SPARCstation
Date: 9 Dec 1993 11:01:09 GMT
Organization: Qualcomm Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Tohru Asami) wrote:

> Does anyboy know a commercial version of OSI tool kit which supports
> up to OSI Presentation Layer?

The following is a collection of articles recently posted to
comp.protocols.iso - the scope is slightly larger than Sun, but I
thought that other people may also be interested (and I didn't want to
edit it ;-) ...


Phil

  From: [e-mail] (James Schontzler)
  Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso
  Subject: Re: OSI Stack Availablity
  Date: 1 Dec 1993 21:38:34 GMT
  Organization: Marben Products Inc.

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

> I am looking for an OSI stack for a Unix environment.

> Has anybody compiled a list of OSI stacks, their capabilities (CMIP,
> FTAM etc), and what platforms they run on (OS2, Unix )?

> I am familiar with several:

>    Touch/Marben
>    Retix
>    HP OTS9000

> Both the Touch/Marben and the Retix run on Unix, OTS9000 runs on HP's
> HPUX 8.0 or higher.

Just to update the story on Marben in the US ...

Touch Communications, which used to resell the Marben OSI products, is
no longer in business.  Marben's OSI products are now distributed and
supported throughout the USA by Marben Products Inc., a California
corporation owned by MARBEN in France.

Also, Marben's OSI software is typically distributed in source code
form to computer manufacturers. The source code comes with its own
kernel and a generalized porting kit that allow it to be ported to a
variety of platforms from single board embedded computers to
workstation to mainframes. Thus, although Unix is the most common
target it is not the only OS that works with the portable Marben code.
In fact the stack can run stand-alone without any OS.

Runtime OSI products are available from Marben for certain
configurations.  In addition Marben's OSI technology is OEM'ed by MOST
of the major Unix workstation manufacturers in the US (I'm not sure I
am allowed to publicly disclose their names).

Hope this information is helpful.


James Schontzler
Marben Products, Inc.     3 1/2 N. Santa Cruz Ave., Los Gatos, CA 95030
Internet: [e-mail]   voice: 408-399-8888      fax: [phone]


 From: [e-mail] (John Gottschalk)
 Date: 3 Dec 1993 16:18:34 +1000
 Organization: CiTR, University of Queensland


The following should be added to the list of other replies:

Novell's Unix System Laboratories OSI products run on Unix and some
non-Unix environments. The following are available:

OSI WAN products, offering the transport layer interface
OSI LAN products, offering the transport layer interface
OSI upper layers, offering the X/Open ACSE/Presentation layer interface
(XAP)
FTAM, including an FTAM to ftp gateway
CMIP
ASN.1 compiler
X.400
OSI Transaction Processing (which is available with Tuxedo)

These products are now being sold by Firefox, who also have an X.400
(1988) product suite.

I have the contact addresses for the company, in case anybody is
interested.


John Gottschalk,         [e-mail]
Project Manager, CiTR,        [phone] (phone)
Gehrmann Building,              [phone] (fax)
The University of Queensland, 4072,  Brisbane, Queensland, Australia,

  From: [e-mail] (Matt Thomas)
  Date: 2 Dec 1993 23:20:25 GMT
  Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <2dhsph$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Patrick
Pleinevaux) writes:

> A few OSI stacks available on UNIX:

> AEG Computrol        PC/AT SCO UNIX        MMS
> Bull            DPX 2000        MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (DP=MAP)
> Bull            DPX 2            MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (IS)
> HP            HP 9000/800 series    MMS, FTAM
> IBM            RS 6000/AIX        MMS (already available ?)
> Motorola        Delta Series        MMS, FTAM
> Olivetti        LSX 5000        FTAM, X.500, X.400
> Siemens Nixdorf    PC SCO UNIX        MMS
> Siemens Nixdorf    MX 300            FTAM, X.400, RDA, MMS

Digital            ULTRIX V4.2 or later    MMS, VT, FTAM, X.25,
            (VAX or MIPS)        X.400, X.500
Digital            DEC OSF/1 (Alpha AXP)    VT, FTAM, X.25
                        (X.400, X.500, MMS soon)

Matt Thomas                    Internet:   [e-mail]
U*X Networking                 UUCP:       ...!decwrl!thomas
Digital Equipment Corporation  Disclaimer: This message reflects my own
Littleton, MA                              warped views, etc.


  From: [e-mail] (Alain Martineau)
  Organization: Hydro Quebec
  Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 12:26:29 GMT

You have any idea of the price tag of DECnet for OSF/1 ? We are in the
process of procuring an energy management system with about 140 OSF/1
workstations. The specification said it should be UCA ( now IGOSS ? )
compliant. At $3500 CAN each, that makes $490 000, when TCP/IP comes
for free, and does more ( multicast is required, for instance ). That
was a shock, as I am used to get DECnet for free with VMS, and adding
TCP/IP is far from being that expensive.

These days, that kind of expense is not justifiable, especially when
OSI nodes are nowhere to be seen, and with that kind of pricing, it's
likely to stay that way.

Alain Martineau    Hydro Quebec   [e-mail]


  From: [e-mail] (Robert Andersson)
  Date: 6 Dec 1993 17:22:05 +0100
  Organization: Gallagher & Robertson A/S

In <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Alain Martineau) writes:

> At $3500 CAN each, that makes $490 000, when TCP/IP comes
> for free, and does more ( multicast is required, for instance ). That
> was a shock, as I am used to get DECnet for free with VMS, and adding
> TCP/IP is far from being that expensive.
> These days, that kind of expense is not justifiable, especially when
> OSI nodes are nowhere to be seen, and with that kind of pricing, it's
> likely to stay that way.

DEC is far from alone in doing this.  Sun, HP and IBM all do the same
thing.  I'm sure a lot of the other major players in the Unix market
also do.  One vendor I believe bundles OSI transport with the base OS
is NCR.  Almost all vendors bundle TCP/IP with the base OS these days.
The only exception seems to be vendors of Unix for the Intel x86
platform like SCO and Novell, but I expect them to bundle TCP/IP
pretty soon.  And while this happens we continue to pay through the
nose for OSI.  I believe that this is one of the major reasons for
OSI's fall in the marketplace.  If this fall is a good or bad thing is
a religious discussion, please don't start that one again :-)

Regards,

Robert Andersson    Voice [phone]     Gallagher & Robertson A/S
[e-mail]       Fax   [phone]     Kongensgt. 23, 0153 Oslo,
Norway

  From: [e-mail] (Bob Tausworthe)
  Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1993 01:00:42 GMT
  Organization: Hewlett-Packard


Patrick Pleinevaux ([e-mail]) wrote:

> A few OSI stacks available on UNIX:

> AEG Computrol        PC/AT SCO UNIX        MMS
> Bull            DPX 2000        MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (DP=MAP)
> Bull            DPX 2            MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (IS)
> HP            HP 9000/800 series    MMS, FTAM

Good list!
To update this, it should read:

HP      HP 9000/800+700 series  MMS, FTAM, X.400, X.500, CMIP

Just trying to stay accurate. I won't turn this into an ad. If you
want more information (API support, profiles, conformance, etc) drop
me a line and I'll forward it to the proper people.


Bob Tausworthe    Hewlett Packard
19420 Homestead Rd  Cupertino, Ca 95014
[phone]   [e-mail]


 From: [e-mail] (John Brady - SunNetworks Consultant)
 Date: 3 Dec 1993 13:32:55 GMT
 Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Another "commercial" OSI stack for UNIX...

SunLink Product Line...

SunLink OSI        Solaris 1.x & 2.x        FTAM, VT
SunLink X.25        Solaris 1.x & 2.x        X.25
SunLink MHS        Solaris 1.x & 2.x        X.400


John Brady  Network Management Consultant
SunNetworks, A Sun Microsystems, Inc. Business
[phone]   [e-mail]


  From: [e-mail] (Daniel Fauvarque - SunConnect ICNC)
  Date: 3 Dec 1993 15:11:39 GMT
  Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.

To be added:

SUN Connect         SunOS 4.X          X.400, FTAM
                    Solaris 5.X        X.400, Mime Gateway, FTAM, CMIP, VT


  From: [e-mail] (david s. grieve)
  Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville AL
  Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1993 16:00:24 GMT

Also...
Intergraph    CLIX    FTAM, MHS, VT, TP0,2,4, ES-IS


David S. Grieve           [e-mail]
Integraph Corp.           Phone: [phone]
MS GD3005                 Fax  : [phone]
Huntsville, AL 35894-0001 Bldg 30, Room 128U


   From: [e-mail] (Alasdair Grant)
   Organization: University of Cambridge
   Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 17:49:48 GMT


Just out of curiosity, does anyone, anywhere, have JTM?


  From: [e-mail] (Matt Thomas)
  Date: 5 Dec 1993 21:59:37 GMT
  Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

Lower layers (bottom up):
    HDLC, LAPB, DDCMP (VAX ULTRIX only),
    FDDI, Ethernet, TokenRing (OSF/1 only)
    LLC2
    CLNS, X.25 (over either LLC2 or LAPB) & CONS, DECnet Phase IV
    OSI Transport (classes 0, 2, and 4), RFC1006 (TP0 over TCP)

ULTRIX implementation is US and UK GOSIP'ed.  OSF/1 implementation is
in the process of being GOSIP'ed.


Matt Thomas                       Internet:   [e-mail]
U*X Networking                    UUCP:       ...!decwrl!thomas
Digital Equipment Corporation     Disclaimer: This message reflects my
                                              own warped views, etc.
Littleton, MA

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

Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 10:49 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject:  ISDN - Another Voice


I have listened with interest the discussions on ISDN.  While I have
learned a lot, I feel that one important point has been missed.

I suggest to you that there is nothing in the world quite so useless
as one telephone.  Even two telephones have limited value.  The value
of a telephone rises along an s-shaped curve with the number of
potential connections.  Incidentally, as its value rises along this
curve, its price tends to fall.

The problem with ISDN is not simply that it costs too much, but that
there is no one to talk to.  The price of a 9600 modem has recently
fallen to under a $100- and that of a 14.4 to under $200-.  The
effective speed of the 14.4 approaches that of ISDN.  The difference
is that with the modem there are lots of people to talk to.  Why would
I want to pay five times the cost of the modem for an ISDN card when
no one that I want to talk to has one.  For ISDN value to be
comparable to that of a 14.4 modem, the number of people using them
would have to be comparable.

Note that I made the same argument when comparing ISDN to 2400 modems,
which were no where near the speed of ISDN.  The number and price of
14.4s is getting better much faster than ISDN.

Much of the discussion here has been about the use of ISDN for the
last mile connection to the internet.  Here, even the one advantage
that ISDN really has, fast call setup, is lost.

I will leave it to the reader to figure out at what point one might be
willing to give up the scarce slot that his 14.4 is using to put an
ISDN card in it.

I am sure that I want high speed digital connections to the home more
than most people.  My personal comm bill runs about a thousand dollars
a month, so I am about as likely to pay for it as most.  But it still
seems to me that ISDN is a day late and a dollar short.  I find it
much easier to forsee the cross over between modems and packet
switched on CTV broadband than that between modems and ISDN.  It may
well be that George Gilder is right and low-power, spread-spectrum,
digital RF will beat modems, ISDN, and CTV.


William Hugh Murray, Executive Consultant, Information System Security
49 Locust Avenue, Suite 104; New Canaan, Connecticut 06840
1-0-ATT-0-700-WMURRAY; WHMurray at DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for pointing out what is so often overlooked
when comparing technological advances and pricing in telecom services
when compared with other 'utilities' as one example or devices and
gimmicks: unlike virtually everything else, the telephone and its
peripherals take two to tango. I don't care where you get your cable
television; I don't care whose computer and software you purchase.
None of it affects me. Wire it however you like; use expensive or
cheap and worthless components ... but if your telecom equipment is
of poor quality then it affects my use of my telecom equipment. Only
the telephone matters in this respect: we all have to do it the right
way, else everyone else's service is degraded as a result. Because
of this, you can't quite apply the pricing and scale of economics to
telecom that you can to other 'electronics' or 'computer equipment'.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Detlef)
Subject: POCSAG/GOLAY Message Formats?
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:35:23 GMT


I'm getting ready to start a home project that will involve sending
coded numeric pages to a smart box that decodes them and prints a
"grocery list" for a remote user.

The two formats that seem to be most prevalent are POCSAG and GOLAY.
Can anybody provide me with 1) details or 2) pointer to a source for
details on either of these?


Thanks,

Mike

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

From: cvitoa![e-mail] (Koos de Heer)
Subject: Re: Research on the Effects of Telecommuting
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 11:45:17 GMT
Organization: Centrum Voor Informatieverwerking, Utrecht, The Netherlands


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (G. Trevor Foo)
writes:

> Help!  I am doing some research on telecommuting and its effects.  My
> research requires that I determine the percentage of the U.S.
> workforce that is potentially suitable for telecommuting.

> I am trying to find "a list" of all job classifications that will
> fulfill the requirements for a potential telecommuting job.

Due to newsreader problems I didn't see your question earlier.  I am
involved in a telecommuting project in The Netherlands. One of the
problems is finding out when it will and when it will not 'work'. A
few pilots are running. In general, full-time tele- commuting is
seldom a succes. Usually the telecommuting portion of a job varies
between 20 and 60% (one to three days per week). This requires also a
different way of dealing with office space -- but that is too far away
from telecommunications to discuss here.

Another question is how to define telecommuting. How about the
salesperson who writes reports from the car or from home at the end of
the day and sends them to the office by modem or network?  How about
the worker who takes some extra work home and does that on the
privately owned PC in the evening? There are other border-line cases
and they are hard to ignore for the number of people involved.

I don't have the list you are looking for -- unsure if one exists but
also unsure if it is wise to create one. Aren't jobs changing
continuously? In my opinion it is better to look at criteria that make
it possible or impossible to telecommute. Then you can try to estimate
a percentage. But certainly that percentage will not be fixed - my
view is that it will grow substantially over time as our work changes
and technology develops.

Criteria that we have come up with so far (some quite obvious):

- work has to be mainly desk work (research, writing, telephoning or
  faxing, data entry, and the like), or in other words: aimed at
  the creation, processing or retrieval of information;

- job should not require frequent contact with co-workers;

- organization has to be able to deal with remote workers, which
  means that management has to control output of workers rather than
  presence in the office (for many managers, this is a problem!);

- worker has to _want_ to telecommute;

- worker has to be able to work independently (this is very
  important when one works at home; working in a telecommuting
  center near home requires less discipline);

- when working at home: home situation has to be fit for working
  (small space with two young kids around could be problematic);

- the information and communication aspects of the work have to be
  highly automated (workstation network, phone/fax, videoconferencing
  etc. rather than books, binders and live meetings);

Recently, I read about research in the US (no source was given) that
estimated the number of telecommuters in the US at 8 million and
growing by 25% per year.

Dutch research in 1992 showed that in the near future 25 to 33% of the
total working population will be telecommutable, i.e. meeting the
above criteria.

Hope this is of some help, I am interested in further comments of
course.

> Thank you.

Pleasure.


koos de heer    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:24:31 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: For Your Amusement, if Possible


[Moderator's Note: Found in alt.config by our correspondent and passed
along.  PAT]

  Newsgroups: alt.config
  From: [e-mail] (Patrick Tufts)
  Subject: Newsgroup proposal: alt.sect.telecom
  Organization: Brandeis University
  Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 19:48:08 GMT


[e-mail] (Tim Pierce) writes:

> Please consider alt.religion.islam rather than alt.sect.islam.  There
> is already an alt.religion hierarchy in place, and it follows the
> model set by alt.dcom.telecom, alt.sources, etc. for having an
> unmoderated alt group with a parallel name to a moderated Usenet group.

alt.sect.telecom - its time has come.


Tim Pierce     [e-mail]   (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST)


[Moderator's Note: So true, so true. The scandalous thing about the
Dungheap Net is that its not just the formation of the unmoderated
newsgroup they are now using for telecom; its *any* group they start
there. The battles go on and on and on. Well, their time is drawing
nigh ... watch what happens when the new Plantation Masters MCI and
Sprint -- operators of backbone sites everywhere -- crack their whip
and raise the rates for transmission to the point that the anarchists
flee in terror. Sites will start getting severely truncated news feeds
(all they'll be able to afford); absolutely no one will bother getting
a full news feed any longer; the Sunday afternoon in the park analogy
by Gene Spafford will turn into a ride on the New York Subway late on
a Saturday night during a hot summer, etc. I predict Usenet will go
through something like the CB craze of the late 1970's: everyone will
be connected, the noise will be so awful that everyone gives up on it
and admins will be severely pressured by their superiors to either
eliminate it due to the increasing costs or at least severely cut back
on it.

And God help the poor devils, if Usenetters were told "you have a
final 24 hour period to say something significant and make a substan-
tial difference in the world via this medium before the plug is pulled
once and for all," most of them would spend the 24 hours flaming about
the proper way to set up a newsgroup and whether or not someone was
making a couple dollars on the side from it. Its interesting though
that a certain highly-placed netter who has much to say about which
groups are created and which are not is never called to account for
the fact that his employer UUNET definitly stands to benefit from the
increased traffic via charges to their clients.  Ooops, I was not
supposed to say that, was I ... :)  See ya tomorrow!  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #809
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07594;
          10 Dec 93 5:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06995
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Fri, 10 Dec 1993 02:12:27 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02895
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 10 Dec 1993 02:12:04 -0600
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 02:12:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #810

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 10 Dec 93 02:12:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 810

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cable TV Meets Telecom (Dave O'Shea)
    Cable Channels (was Quantum Economics) (David L. Kindred)
    ATM Conference Jan '94/Vancouver Update (Mark Fraser)
    Reflections of a Phone Company Boss (Vancouver Province via Sid Shniad)
    Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line (Neklan Brozensky)
    FTP'able EIA/TIA/IS-54B? (Wade Stone)
    Are ORA Hands Free Car Kits Any Good? (Pete Helme)
    Phone System/Voice Mail Recommendations Wanted (Bryan Gonderinger)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave O'Shea)
Subject: Cable TV Meets Telecom
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:21:44 EST


[e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

>>> As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R for
>>> Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to pay for
>>> 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home shopping
>>> opportunities the new technology promises.<<

>> Does anyone recall that there were similar arguments against cable TV?
>> Tell me about how that one panned out, once it was available in the
>> free market.

> Somehow, I doubt that adding another 460 channels would change my
> habits much and, since the foregoing is *enough*, would not be willing
> to pay any more.

You're working under the assumption that Cable TV will continue to
simply add more broadcast channels with all this extra capacity.

First, the "500 channels" figure is possibly misleading. It was tossed
out in reply to a reporter's question by the president of TCI (Tele
communications, Inc., a good-sized cable operator) when he was asked
what kind of capacity these systems might have. Reporters (and most
consumers) can't relate things like mbit/s, DS3, Sonet, and ATM to
useful measures.

That bandwidth could be used to carry a number of different things. A
couple that come to mind are interactive games, information services,
and possibly tele/videoconferencing services. Who knows what other
things will be dreamed up in the decade or so that it will take to
implement all this. Now, remember, that is just the bandwidth carried
into your home. Some sort of switching system, like distributed
mini-CO's, may be able to take portions of an even bigger data pipe
and selectively feed it to consumers on demand. It may come to pass
that the distinction between your phone service and your cable service
becomes a little hazy.

Bill "Who could ever use 640k?" Gates didn't think anybody could use
more capacity than he provided, either. :-)

> The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think
> "if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad
> enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now
> requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for
> the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel
> listing?

Suppose the listing were piped into a cable converter that had a few
pages of video memory, and allowed you to scroll through the guide,
perhaps filtering on new-release comedy movies starting at 9:00pm? Or
offering a $3.00/hr multi-player game which would be your computer
would be the client for? It wouldn't be at all difficult to put an
ethernet connector on the back of a cable box, and the price of a
router might drop the way pocket calculators did in the '70s with mass
production and LSI technology.

> I suspect that this is part of the problem that has kept satellite
> receiver sales down, sensory overload. Why else whould the Internet
> Gophers, Archies, and WWW retrieval mechanisms be so popular -- and
> these people are probably the "brightest and the best".

Well, there's also price (low end units are still expensive), you need
to be fairly technically sophisticated to be able to understand where
to located programming, and many people (apartment-dwellers, folks in
towns with scrict zoning regulations) simply have no place to put a
dish.

The trick is to make retrieval of useful information practical for a
non- technical person. Archie amd related services are great, but you
still need a large base of knowlege and skills before you can use it
or interpret the information it provides.

> So for 500 channels to work, a listing would have to be downloaded
> (daily ?, weekly ?) to a storage device that could be set up for
> selective retrieval.  Could it be done -- certainly. Will it ?

No reason to expect it won't. Scientific Atlanta, General Instrument,
and several other companies have surely seen the value of such a
service. (As have most of the RBOC's, I'm sure.)


Dave O'Shea                          [e-mail]
Sr. Network Support Engineer         201.236.3730
WilTel Data Network Services

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

Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 09:20 EST
From: [e-mail] (David L Kindred )
Subject: Cable Channels (was Quantum Economics)


A Padgett Peterson <[e-mail]> writes:

> [e-mail] writes:

>> As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R
>> for Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to
>> pay for 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home
>> shopping opportunities the new technology promises.

> this gives me about 40 tunable channels of which I usually
> watch 9 (TNT, TLC, Nickelodean, USA, AMC, BRAVO, Family,
> Sci-Fi, and Comedy). This is *enough* (C).

Your point is well made, however there is one thing you have
overlooked, and that is that although each us may only watch nine or
so channels, it is quite possible that we each want nine DIFFERENT
channels.  My cable company has about 45 channels of capacity, which
means that there are channels I want that I can't get, as they also
have to accommodate everyone else.  (BTW, I only get four of the
channels you listed, and would like at least three of the others).
The advantage of a "500" channel system would be that each of us can
select what we want, without preventing our neighbor from doing the
same.  Hopefully the implementation of these new systems would allow
us to pay for what we wanted, and let us leave the rest behind.


Dave

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Fraser)
Subject: ATM Conference Jan '94/Vancouver Update
Date: 9 Dec 1993 09:42:17 -0800
Organization: Wimsey Information Services


January 27-28,1994    Vancouver, BC, Canada

Rapid adcances in switching and transmission technologies are
propelling fast-paced developments in high speed communication
networks that are capable of achieving transfer speeds in excess of
150 Mbps. Canada is at the forefront of this exciting development with
companies such as MPR Teltech, Newbridge, Northern Telecom, Bell-
Northern Research (BNR), and others doing research and developing
products in the Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) arcs. ATM is a major
technology focus in high speed networking.

The purpose of this conference is to bring together major ATM players
from industry and academia to talk about the technology -- its past,
present, and future. This conference is the first of its kind in
Canada.

The specific objectives of this conference are:

    To provide a gathering of technology developers, service
providers, network operators, and researchers who are deeply involved
in high speed communication networking to describe the state-of-the-
art in ATM networks, covering topics in technology, hardware,
software, standards, trials, and innovative applications.  Emphasis
will be focused on both current developments and near future trends.

    To provide a forum for developers and providers to meet with
application user groups and government policy planners to exchange
views and insight on ATM networking. To promote a meeting of the minds
so that a better understanding of the needs and problem of the user
communities can be accomplished, resulting in products and services
more tailored to meeting those needs and solving those problems.

    To provide a starting point for building a community of
interest in ATM high speed networking with representation from all
interested parties.

The target audiences include:
Technology developers        Product developers
Service providers        Researchers
Network operators        Application users
Industry observers        Company executives
Government policy planners

The conference is co-sponsored by six research institutes:

    Telecommunications Research Laboratories (TRLabs), the National
    Wireless Communications Research Foundation (NWCRF), , the Ottawa
    Carleton Research Institute (OCRI), the Telecommunications
    Research Institute of Ontario, the Telecommunications Consortium
    of Canada (TCC) and the Institute for Electrical and Electronics
    Engineers and supported by: Canadian Institute for
    Telecommunications Research (CITR).

There will be three keynote speakers, about 15 invited speakers, and a
lively panel discussion. The conference will have academics talking
about their research, as well as industrial representatives discussing
equipment developments, standards, trials, etc. in a vendor neutral
way.

For registration and        For Technical Program Conference
Information        Information: John Mele     Dr. Carey L.
Williamson ATM Conference Coordinator     Co-Chair, ATM Technical
Committee NWCRF     TRLabs Suite 450, 1122 Mainland St.      108 -
15 Innovation Boulevard Vancouver, BC, CANADA     Saskatoon, SK, CANADA
V6B 5L1     S7N 2X8 Tel: [phone]     Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]     Fax: [phone] e-mail:
[e-mail]     e-mail: [e-mail]

Request for refunds must be received prior to January 20, 1994.
Refunds are subject to a $50.00 administration fee. Participants with
confirmed registrations who fail to attend or notify NWCRF of
cancellation prior to the refund date, are subject to the full fee.
Substitutions are allowed at any time.

Registration Form

Early Registration  $495.00   +GST = 529.65
(must be received prior to January 3rd, 1994)

After January 3rd, 1994

Members*            $550.00   +GST = 588.50
Non-members         $625.00   +GST = 668-75
Students            $200.00   +GST = 214.00

*open to employees of member companies of sponsoring
organizations

Method of Payment

   _____ Cheque/money order
   _____ VISA

Card # ______________________ Expiry date _________________
IEEE #___________________________

Name         ___________________________________________

Title        ___________________________________________

Organization  ___________________________________________

Address       ___________________________________________

City/Prov     ___________________________________________

Postal Code   ___________________________________________

Tel           __________________  Fax ___________________

e-mail        ___________________________________________

Please make cheques payable to:  NWCRF

ATM: Technology, Standards, Trials and Applications
Agenda

Thursday January 27, 1994

9:00 am Keynote Session I
    James Mackie, Vice President, Business Development, Newbridge

10:30 am Session I: Technology Overview

Chair: Carey Williamson, TRLabs
    ATM Networking
    - Alberto Leon-Garcia, University of Toronto, CITR
    CITR Projects on Broadband Networks and Services
    - Johnny Wong, U. of Waterloo/CITR

12:00 Lunch

1:00 pm Keynote Session II
    ATM: Issues and Challenges Ahead
    - Raj Jain, DEC

Parallel Session

2:00 Session II: Technology - Hardware
    Chair: Norm Dowds, MPR
    T.B.A.
    - Norm Dowds, MPR Teltech
    A Parallel Host Interface for ATM
    - Mark McCutcheon, UBC
    A Desktop T1 Interface to ATM
    - Dave Dodds, TRLabs

3:30 Session III: Technology - Software
    Chair: Gerald Neufeld, UBC
    The Xunet II Native Mode ATM Protocol Stack
    - Srinivasan Keshav, AT&T
    High Speed Protocols for ATM
    - Gerald Neufeld, UBC
    Dynamic Incremental Reconfiguration of Virtual Paths
    - Mike MacGregor, TRLabs

Parallel Session

2:00 Canarie: Status and the Way Ahead
    TBA, Canarie

3:00 OCRInet: Research Networks in the Ottawa-Carleton Region -
    First Impressions
    TBA, OCRI

3:30 Panel Discussion: ATM Research Networks
    - Edgar Froese, RNet
    - Brian Unger, President, Western University Research Network
    - TBA, Quebec Network

Friday, January 28, 1994

8:30 am Keynote III
    Does 'ATM' Equal 'Broadband'
    - John Bourne, BNR

9:30 am Session IV: Standards Update
    Chair: Karen Kobierski, BNR
    International Standards Update
    - Richard Vickers, BNR
    ATM Traffic Management
    - Dave McDysan, MCI
    The AAL-5 Adaption Layer Standard
    - Craig Partridge, BBN
    ATM Signalling Standards
    - Gregg Ratta, Bellcore

11:00 am Session V: Applications and Trials
    Chair: Peter Briscoe, Newbridge
    The Viewstation: An ATM-Based Environment for Media-Intensive
    Applications
    - David Tennenhouse, MIT
    SaskTel's Residential Multimedia Broadband Trial
    - Perry Gray, SaskTel
    Traffic Management and Congestion Control in ATM Networks
    - Chuck Kalmanek, AT&T

12:30 Lunch

1:15 pm Session VI: Panel Discussion
    Chair: Rick Bunt, TRLabs
    - Raj Jain, DEC
    - John Bourne, BNR
    - Johnny Wong, U. of Waterloo/CITR
    - T.B.A.

2:15 pm Closing Remarks

Parallel Session

9:30 Strategic Alliances: An Instrument to Build a Canadian
    National Information Infrastructure
    - Allan Kennedy, President, Telecommunications Consoritum of Canada

10:00 Panel Discussion: Initiatives in ATM Networks in the US
    - Matt Kuhn, North Carolina ATM Network
    - TBA, NII PacBell Research
    - TBA, Network Nielson

11:30 Initiatives in Europe - SuperJanet
    TBA

12:00 Lunch

1:15 Panel Discussion: Canadian Federal/Provincial Government
    Initiatives
    - Jocelyn Ghent Mallett, Industry Canada
    - Gordon Gow, Ontario International Corporation
    - TBA, Quebec
    - TBA, BC

2:15 Closing Remarks

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Reflections of a phone company boss
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 11:34:58 PST


Values lost along that bottom line

     -- by Doug Hockley

  Have you ever had a little rational bubble float to the surface of
your consciousness that leaves you with a twinge of conscience?  I've
experienced a few of them recently and they concern the importance of
people versus corporate profits.

There are intrinsic Canadian values as we passively tolerate a
concerted corporate lobby for a globalized marketplace in what used to
be our country.  Ours as in yours and mine, not some foreign money and
management force that has taken over.

  Every day I read about companies reaping a profit margin unheard of
in former times -- and at the same time I see more job erosion.  I
watch the evening news and hear how governments wonder where to cut
social programs.

  We should start questioning the presumptuous corporate realm and our
own misguided assumption that making money is more important than
rights of an individual or the family.  And we should start
questioning all political parties that would give away our national
integrity for the sake of foreign interests.

  I've heard that we can't build a wall around our country and I look
at Switzerland and say why not?  Why not experiment with a Canadian
job tariff?  Every job exported in the name of NAFTA could have a
tariff imposed that would be transferred to unemployment insurance and
job retraining programs.

  Let's not lose sight of the fact that we have an extraordinary array
of natural resources and an abundance of renewable resources.  Our
population is relatively small in comparison to other countries and
our land reserve is virtually untapped.

  ... And here's a radical thought: Why is half my income
taxed away while corporate taxes remain incomprehensibly
low?  Considering the profits being made and the willingness
of companies to increase my tax burden by manufacturing
offshore, their tax rate should be doubled.

  Ask yourself this: How many multinational stop to
consider the impact of their strategic objectives on
citizens?  I think we're overdue for a re-evaluation of what
is fundamentally important to us as Canadians, otherwise
we're going to lose what in the world envy.

  Let us not allow "our home and native land" to be given
away for the sake of some corporate bottom line.
                            _____

  --Doug Hockley is the Employee Assistance Manager at the
     British Columbia Telephone Company.  He deals with
     employees' difficulties related to alcoholism, drug
     abuse, stress, and family problems.  This article ran
     in the {Vancouver Province}.


Sid Shniad

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

From: [e-mail] (Neklan Brozensky)
Subject: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line
Date: 10 Dec 1993 00:07:36 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! Communications Corp


Hi Netters,

I have a Unix background. Recently I've taken a job which involves IBM
AS/400 and dedicated long distance data comunications, niether of
which I've had tons of previous experince with. I'd like to get an
outside opinion on a company-internal comunications question.

I'm a systems administrator in a branch office. We have currently 30
terminals/printer unit attached to our head office's AS/400 in
Colorado Springs accross a leased analogue line. The remote controller
unit is attached to an IBM 5866 9600 baud modem.

We are planning to totally upgrade the connection because our office
is growing rapidly and even more terminals will be required. However
in the mean time I was thinking that changeing the modem to say a
v.32bis type modem would be a fast inexpensive way to increase
throughput untill the issues around a more permanent faster solution
got sorted out.

The people in the head office aren't enamoured by the temporary solution.
Their chief arguments are:

1. The are uncertain that the line will support a faster line speed.
That there may be problems with the line that only manifest them
selves at the faster rate. and if they occur, too much time will be
spent fooling around tyring to solve that.

2. They don't think that the solution will result in the antiscipated
payoff of increased response for keyers at dataentry terminals. The
guy cites a test that he did a while back measuring response times for
a 9600 baud modem link and the a 56K link.(The kind with the DSU/CSU).
At that time he only got a 10% increase in resposiveness.

I think something is wrong here. Keeping in mind that this dedicated
line is going from Vancouver, Canada to Colorado Springs, I still
think that the line is not going to be taxed that much more if the
modem is signalling at 14400 instead of 9600. In fact our local telco
repesentative suggested even using a v.fast type modem accross the
line.

I have even less reason to buy their second argument. Making the
assumption that SNA (or what ever the communications protocol is for
the AS/400s to comunicate with our remote terminals) can be compress
almost as well as you average ascii text, then there should be a
significate speed up taking place.

What are people's thoughts here about this ... what reply would you
guys make to these claims.

Are they resonable technical objections?  Are they being intransigent?

Thanks for any insights you can provide.


Neklan Brozensky   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wade Stone)
Subject: FTP'able EIA/TIA/IS-54B?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 01:57:38 GMT


Is there some public domain version of this meaty spec?  If you know
of, have heard of, or think you might have heard of availability of
this (other than Global Engineering [US$218] or the local public
library [microfiche 310 pages at US$0.25/page]), then I thank you for
any info.  Please follow up on this thread or e-mail me.


Thanks in advance,

Wade Stone    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Pete Helme)
Subject: Are ORA Hands Free Car Kits Any Good?
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 20:21:46 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc.


I was thinking of getting an ORA hands free kit for my NEC P600. Are
they any good?  Do they recharge the battery as well as just power it?


Thanks,

[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bryan Gonderinger)
Subject: Phone System/Voice Mail Recommendations Wanted
Date: 9 Dec 1993 16:39:52 -0700
Organization: NeXagen.com


We've outgrown our current phone system/voice mail combination (a
StarPlus 96EX hybrid key system coupled with a Vodavi StarPlus AVP
voicemail system).  I'd like to hear any recommendations for alternate
phone systems and associated voice mail systems.

We've been recommended by our current vendor to go with the StarPlus
SPX PBX system and upgrade our StarPlus AVP system, but we've had no
end of problems with our current StarPlus system, so I'm a bit leery
of this solution.

Currently, we've looked into a ROLM system, but even though this
product is very impressive looking, I think that we'd be paying for
many features/capabilities that we would never use.  I'd appreciate
any comments on the ROLM system (we were considering the ROLM 9200 CBX
system with the ROLM PhoneMail voice mail).  So far, all I've heard is
good stuff about this system (well, except for the price :).

Our current setup has approximately 16 key phones and 60 single-line
phones, and we're planning to expand next year to about 120 single
line phones, and maybe add a few key phones as well.  The StarPlus
system was recommended because it would allow us to use all our
existing phones.  The ROLM system is compatible with our SLT phones,
but we would need to replace our key phones.  Obviously, reusability
of our current equipment would be nice, but not necessary (assuming
the overall price was right).  We'd like a system that would allow us
to expand beyond this point at some time in the future (perhaps to
around 300 or so phones), as well as one that's relatively cheap to
operate.

One potential problem - we've got a number of extensions that are
shared by multiple people, each of whom has their own separate voice
mail box.  The Vodavi system allows us to have the "message waiting"
light lit on the extension if any of the users (about four per
extension) of that extension have a message in their mailbox.  Our
current supplier tells us that that is a feature not commonly found on
voice mail systems.

Well, if you've waded through all that diatribe, and have any info.,
please email me back, or give me a call at [phone] x155 (or
give me your number and I'll be happy to pay the charges).


Thanks,

Bryan Gonderinger ([e-mail])

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #810
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25569;
          13 Dec 93 15:40 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23262
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 09:47:35 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17097
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 09:47:13 -0600
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 09:47:13 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #811

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 11 Dec 93 09:47:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 811

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir (Charles Hoequist)
    International X25 Connections (Frederic Albrecht)
    Airphone Enhancements, Anyone? (Andrew C. Green)
    "POTS"/CBL Maintenance Specifications (Anthony D. Vullo)
    Free Phone Calls on Itineris Service in France ([e-mail])
    Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Local Telco Blocking Carriers (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Do You Know About the Corning Plant in Wilmington, NC? (Phil Crawley)
    What is MF4? (Stephen L. Moshier)
    Help - Do You Know Who Sells Prepaid International Calling Cards? (Sue Liu)
    High Speed Links ([e-mail])
    Phone Card For a PC (Paul L. Egges)
    Telephone Company Rate Survey (Hansel E. Lee Jr.)
    Satellite Monitors Wanted (Darren Ingram)
    Caller ID Telephone (Russ Kepler)
    Caller ID in Software? (John Allen)


TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively
to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email,
in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service
systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited,
complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups.
Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks.

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 16:15:00 +0000
From: Charles Hoequist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir


Last night, a message was waiting on my answering machine when I
arrived home, from a Southern Bell representative requesting me to
call their customer service number concerning my billing address.
Aha, I thought. They are tired of the billing address not being the
same as the service address and wish to make them the same.

Wrong, wrong. I call the number, wade through the voicemail system,
state the issue to the rep, and she asks me for my residential
address.  After taking it, she says, "Then you don't live at 820 Old
Apex Rd?"

No, I don't. I've never been to that address, which is in another
town, and presumably not even served by the same CO as mine.  The rep
could not tell me how it happened, nor could she tell me how the
discrepancy was discovered. The risky part, however, is embodied in
her comment, "well, it's a good thing you didn't call 911!"

True enough. Imagine the fire/police/ambulance speeding to some
location a dozen miles from me, while whatever disaster is underway
plays itself out. Worse: how many more such obvious database glitches
are hanging around undetected? I say 'obvious', in light of the
likelihood that the incorrect address in not in the correct CO service
area, and should therefore be easy to spot.

And if I called 911 and gave an address which didn't match the
database, what would the 911 operator do?


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


[Moderator's Note: The printout 911 receives is more of an advisory in
the event the caller is unable to speak with them for whatever reason
than an absolute guide to location. Had you told them a different address
police/fire would have come to the address you stated. Regretfully, had
you been incapacitated and been only able to dial the number then unable
to speak (unconcious, dead, etc) their initial trip would have been to
the wrong address. :(.  Errors will occur in data entry when thousands
of entries are entered manually. The listings have a high degree of
accuracy, but that of course is of little comfort to the person whose
entry is incorect.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Frederic ALBRECHT)
Subject: International X25 Connections
Organization: R.C.I. CalvaCom
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 13:55:29 GMT


Hello,

I've been asked to write a booklet on ways to connect to a French
online service from various countries: Europe, North America, Japan
and the Commonwealth. This online service is accessible from the
French X25 packet switching network Transpac.  It should therefor be
accessible through any national X25 network with an international
call.

Trouble is I don't know how other network operators handle
international calls. Which is why I now turn to the Digest.  Any help
from people from any of the above countries would be very much
appreciated regarding ways to place an international call on their
local X25 network (is some form of subscription needed?) or the phone
number or e-mail address of the local network operator.

In return, I'd be glad to answer any questions about France.  Please
reply by email.


Fred     [e-mail]    100136,711 (CIS)

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 10:01:29 CST
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Subject: Airphone Enhancements, Anyone?


I've recently received an invitation to participate in a survey by a
market research outfit. No, no, this is a _real_ one, a firm that pays
me in cash to show up, frown thoughtfully at the sponsor's product and
make inspired suggestions about how they could improve it, as if the
future of the free world depended on, say, hair mousse, to cite one
recent session.

Anyway, next Monday evening, December 13th, I am scheduled to be in a
small group discussing possible new services and capabilities that we
feel would be useful additions to airplane telephones. The focus of
the evening seems to be adding laptop PC or fax machine connectivity,
to judge from an unusual advance letter I just received from them.
They say, "One of the major stresses on our discussion will be on
developing A LIST OF ALL THE POSSIBLE CIRCUMSTANCES AND SITUATIONS IN
WHICH YOU AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PANEL CAN VISUALIZE OR IMAGINE THAT
YOU MIGHT USE SUCH A SERVICE." (Emphasis theirs)

They ask, "[T]hink about this topic, to visualize yourself and perhaps
other people as using this feature, and the situations of its use."
Since you are all Other People, as far as I can tell, I thought I'd
collect suggestions from you to raise in discussion next Monday.

Please send whatever ideas you have to me via E-mail (in brief,
please; I will be only one of at least six people, so I can't read
speeches to them), and assuming I don't get bumped from an overbooked
panel, I'll submit a summary of the evening afterwards.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.           Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron               UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610-3498    FAX: [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 93 16:51 EST
From: Anthony D. Vullo <[e-mail]>
Subject: "POTS"/CBL Maintenance Specifications


     I am looking for reference documentation, tariffs, ect. that
govern the local exchange companies (LEC) in the US for providing and
maintaining "POTS" or Common Business Line (CBL) service.  My prime
focus is to gain the resource to enable me to quote "chapter and
verse" of the appropriate techno-legal references to drive trouble
resolutions with local providers on POTS/CBL services, especially with
dial-up data problems.

     I would like to assign one of our lines as a test reference,
calibrate it, and use it to test the other lines when trouble is
encountered.  Then, with test data in hand, call the LEC repair office
to report the *EXACT* problem.

     Specifically:

     - What are the design specifications for the LECs to provide this
     service?

     (C.O. to demarc)
      o  Loss at 1004 hz
      o  3 tone slope (404 hz, 1004 hz, 2804 hz)
      o  S/N
      o  Noise with a quiet termination
      o  Any other measureable parameters to define this service

     - What are the maintenance specifications for the LECs to provide
     service?

      (C.O. to demarc)
      o  Design loss at 1004 hz +- X dB
      o  Design 3 tone slope (404 hz, 1004 hz, 2804 hz) +- X dB
      o  Design s/n +- XdB
      o  Design noise with a quiet termination +- X dB
      o  Any other measureable parameters to maintain this service

     Thanks.


Tony Vullo

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

From: [e-mail] (cccf)
Subject: Free Phone Calls on Itineris Service in France
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 93 12:28:52 EST


     I discovered some time ago the new and very efficient Itineris
service.  Philips gave me as journalist the marvellous PA 810 portable
(made in Finland) with a 11 hours battery.

     France Telecom offer me the line in some seconds and attribute me
the 07038236 phone number without any question. Two days after, I
receive an invoice of 1,075.05 FF: 350.00 FF for the initial fees and
556.45 for a "little amount of your future communication costs."

     The service works in the street, in the tube, in the TGV train,
in the taxis, in the restaurant, in the church, in my bed, in my WC,
etc.  My company found this wunderful phone more practical and
pleasant in comparison with the poor pager named Alphapage that can
only capture 80 alphanumerical characters.

     The security of my Itineris is poor: only the PIN code work and I
already have a little external kit (320.00 FF) that crash this
protection.  All my friends put the default value "0000" as the only
door to access to the French phone network.

     The invoice is noted with "C.G.R.T." (33047 Bordeaux Cedex,
toll-free phone number: 05 14 20 14) label. This phone help-desk will
be of no interest for all my questions.

     Yves-Marie, my 17-year old brother, use my Itineris in school for
no cost :-) He phone me for maximum 15 seconds and ask for a return
call: between October 1st and the end of 1993, all these "short calls"
are free.

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 08:28:38 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK


[e-mail] (David Hough) writes:

> You will find that most UK households manage perfectly well with only
> one phone line -- if it is in use then tough, ring back later. A
> residential line costs 80-100 pounds a year so a second one would need
> a fair bit of justification in most household budgets.

This is true of *most* households in the US also, but TELECOM readers
are not in the majority. I have had two phone lines ever since I moved
from Texas to Florida (and the cost here for two is about the same --
$30/month -- as one line was in Texas). It does not sound like this is
much different from the 80-100 pounds per year per line in the UK
particularly when McDonald's prices in London seem to have the sane
numeric value as in the US, just in pounds not dollars.

I should mention that my two lines are both "basic" service with no
add-ons other than the Caller-ID on my "hobby" line (now U$6.00/month)
since the cost of all the "Touchstar" services would be more than the
other line cost.  Also it is nice to be able to bring up someone's
computer on line two while talking to them on line one. "Blind Bravo
Indias" in the military taught me the value of keeping in touch.

Then again the fierce competition for long distance in the US helps
also (I figure on U$0.15 or less per minute anywhere in the States).
Unmetered local and 800 service is another plus.

Not to say that this is necessarily typical -- Orlando is one of the
least expensive places in the US to live -- just that there are a lot
of variables and a second telephone line just does not seem much more
expensive than one.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 08:51:46 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Local Telco Blocking Carriers


The following announcemet appeared in my November Southern Bell bill:

"Effective December 1, 1993, Southern Bell will begin blocking access
by long distance companies to local calls. Under Florida law, local
telephone calls must be handled by the local exchange telephone
company only."

My concern is that I often go through my LDC to make a local call when
at a pay phone and do not have change (it is less than the U$1.00-U$1.25
charged to make a collect local call). I called Southern Bell and was
told that the ruling only affects residences but have not verified
this as yet.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Crawley)
Subject: Do You Know About the Corning Plant in Wilmington, NC?
Date: 9 Dec 1993 10:03:04 -0500
Organization: McGill University - MACS Laboratory, Montreal, CANADA.


I've heard that Corning has its telecommuniations research plant in
Wilmington, NC. Unforunately, I have not been able to find out if they
do any circuit design at this location. I figured that if Corning does
do IC design it would probably be on a GaAs process, but I would like
to be sure before sending in a job application.  Also I would like to
know if they do any analog design at this plant.

     I anyone has any information I would greatly appreciate hearing
what you have. My email address is [e-mail].


Sincerely,

Philip Crawley

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen L Moshier)
Subject: What is MF4?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 06:57:40 GMT


Can someone supply a reference or info on MF4 signalling?  It is
supposed to be a variant of MF multifrequency tone signals, perhaps a
protocol using those tones.

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

From: [e-mail] (Sue Liu)
Subject: Help - Do You Know Who Sells Prepaid International Calling Cards?
Date: 11 Dec 1993 11:09:45 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA


Any info is greatly appreciated.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: High Speed Links?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Center of Excellence for Document Analysis and Recognition
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 22:10:39 GMT


We are in the need for a temporary, high-speed ( ~ 50-100KBytes/sec )
link from our offices in Buffalo, to Washington D.C. I'd like to get
some information regarding how much such a link would cost, what is
involved in setting up the link at both ends, how much would it cost
to lease the equipment for the period of time, what are our options,
etc. etc. As you can see, Telecomm is definitely not one of my
strongpoints, so I'm just fishing for ideas right now!

Any help will be appreciated!


Ajay   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul L. Egges)
Subject: Phone Card For a PC
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 23:44:16 GMT


My company is looking for software/hardware for a pc-clone that will:

1. Recognize caller id;
2. Understand dtmf tones;
3. Prompt a caller with a voice or tone;
4. Execute a hook flash (for doing a call transfer);
5. Dial out a number (one that the person who has called into the system
   has entered);
6. Interface with database to verify that the caller is allowed to
   call out.

This board should work in an IBM-PC 386/486. Prefer that the board can
handle more than one phone line.

Additional question:

Where is the faq for this group?

Thanks for your help in advance.


Paul Egges


[Moderator's Note: The TELECOM Digest FAQ is located in the Telecom
Archives, accessible using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. You can also
get it by using the email information server. If you need a help file
on that, let me know.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hansel E. Lee Jr.)
Subject: Telephone Company Rate Survey
Date: 11 Dec 1993 06:25:05 GMT
Organization: US Air Force - SMC/INKA
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Hansel E. Lee Jr.)


I am conducting a rate survey of long distance companies.  Currently I
have contacted:

MCI
Sprint
AT&T
US Long Distance
Metromedia/ITT
All Net
Cable & Wireless
Opticom

If you know the name and customer service number to any other long
distance companies please e-mail them to me at [e-mail]
so I can include them in my comparison.

I will post the results of my comparison when it is complete.

Thank you for any assistance.


Hansel E. Lee Jr., GS-07, USAF   [e-mail]
System Threat Analyst            [e-mail]
Space & Missile Systems Center   DSN Prefix     (DSN) 833-
Directorate of Intelligence      Office/STU-III [phone]
SMC/INKA                         Unclass Fax    [phone]
180 Skynet Street, Ste 2271      STU-III Fax    [phone]
Los Angeles AFB, CA 90245-4690   Home Phone     [phone]
PGP Public Key available upon request or at keyservers

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 07:43 GMT
From: Darren Ingram <[e-mail]>
Subject: Satellite Monitors Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail]


            SATELLITE WATCHER, CABLE HOG OR TELLY ADDICT?

Are you an enthusiastic viewer of all things televisual?

Do you keep an active eye on what is happening on the small
screen?

Do you care about what is coming up for your viewing pleasure in
the future?

YOU COULD HELP:

Satnews is looking for active enthusiasts and even professionals
around the world to provide timely information on developments in
cable, satellite, broadcasting and mainstream telecomms, who will act
as a tipster or correspondent.

Whether you can tell us about a story concerning a Brazilian cable
television network in Rio; Icelandic MMDS, Russian satellite dishes or
Australian aboriginal television, you can help.

Every fortnight M2 Communications Limited releases a full-text version
of Satnews free-of-charge to the global on-line community, shadowing
developments in the worldwide market place.  This resource can cost
many hundreds of dollars/British pounds if you had to pay for it.

We cannot give you piles of money; but then again we are not asking
you to spend a lot either. Just keep an eye on your local
cable/satellite TV, daily newspapers, radio and even bits of paper
that you come into contact with in your day-to-day employment. At
times, however, there may be a requirement for some assistance (if you
can provide it) and we may be able to pay you a modest stipend for
your efforts and expenses. Such assignments would be proposed and
agreed before you would be expected to expend any time or effort.

To tell Satnews your news please send us a message as soon as possible
after discovery providing as much information as possible -- if you
wish to scan/type the story in and e-mail it that is even better. For
those rich enough to do so, you may also fax any articles. It is
important that you cite the source and date of any clippings you send
us.

We will not be copying these cuttings, instead using the data as a
reference source and a grass roots intelligence resource for our
newsgathering. You will be credited for the discovery in any published
story (i.e. additional information by John Doe) unless you desire
otherwise. Regular contributors will also be given access to the
subscription newsletter we also produce on satellite technology,
delivered by electronic mail, as a token of our appreciation and
gratitude.

If you are looking at breaking into journalism or an allied trade, you
could even attempt at writing copy directly, submitting it with any
associated material. Phone numbers, fax numbers and contact names are
always very useful. If you do require any feedback or printed examples
of any published work, we may be able to send you copies in the mail.
Due to budget constraints we cannot send out regular printed copies of
published articles.

So what do you have to lose. Please forward any material AS SOON
AS POSSIBLE after discovery to:

 DARREN INGRAM  ([e-mail]).

Do not be worried if your message does not get acknowledged, but
wherever possible you will get a response ... even if it just says
"Thanks!"

You can receive Satnews free-of-charge for non-commercial usage direct
to your Internet/Compuserve mailbox. Signing on is easy. Send a message
to our INTERNET mailbox:

[e-mail]

and in the first line of your message (ignore the subject line),
enter:

subscribe satnews first_lastname

At anytime you can unsubscribe from this automatic mailing list by
sending a message to the same address with the words "unsubscribe
satnews" on the first line of text.

This mailing list is not a interactive discussion forum, and hence
traffic is usually limited to around seven to ten messages a month;
comprising of two Satnews issues (100k) and the occasional
administrative message.

If you do have any queries please contact me. If you are considering
providing assistance in the future also mail me with your street
address/tel/fax and other e-mail details. A few words about your own
personal situation/employment would also be appreciated. It is amazing
who you get hiding behind a e-mail account these days.

Let us work together and keep the Internet spirit going.

With best regards and thanks.


Darren Ingram EDITOR Satnews M2 Communications Limited Reptile
House, 2nd Floor 20 Heathfield Road Coventry  CV5 8BT United
Kingdom Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] Eml:
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Russ Kepler)
Subject: Caller ID Telephone
Organization: BASIS Int'l, Albuquerque NM USA
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 11:14:05 GMT


I recently bought an AT&T model 764 telephone to replace a
malfunctioning phone at my house.  I selected the 764 because it has
an integral Caller ID display with handy redial, etc.  All in all it
had the features that I wanted in a combined Caller ID box and phone.

It didn't work.  After much gnashing of teeth and moving around of
telephones and answering machines it finally turned out that the built
in caller id decoder isn't capable of handling (or ignoring) the name
portion of the caller id data, and would always fail.

Does anyone know of a telephone with the same feature set of the 764
(caller id display, scroll, call back, distinctive ring, etc.) that
also handles or ignores the name portion of the datastream?


Russ Kepler, Basis International Ltd. [e-mail]  phone: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Allen)
Subject: Caller ID in Software?
Organization: Standard Insurance Company - Portland Oregon
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 03:31:35 GMT


Are there any tools that do Caller ID in software? I really do not
want to buy a box when I have all these nice computers sitting here
ready to do some work for me.


John Allen  - Network Executive          E-mail: [e-mail]
Network Services                      Telephone: [phone]
Standard Insurance, Portland Oregon         FAX: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #811
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25941;
          13 Dec 93 16:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29109
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 21:48:34 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31093
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 21:48:10 -0600
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 21:48:10 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #812

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 11 Dec 93 21:48:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 812

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Delaware Phone Bill Announces Pa. Split (Carl Moore)
    Restrictions on Repeat Call and Return Call (Carl Moore)
    Vacancies in the Band for Cellulars (Mikhail  Boukhny)
    Cellular Caller ID (Leroy Donnelly)
    How to Find Number in 313 Area Code? (Victor R. Volkman)
    Telephone Number Readback Number (Jim Sturtevant)
    PC Board Wanted (Paul L. Egges)
    What is "Blueboxing?" (Steve Cogorno)
    Cellular Systems in Argentina and Peru (Alex Cena)
    Digital Phone Service in Canada (Alex Cena)
    More Wireless Questions (Roy Thompson)
    Information Wanted on Unix E-mail Packages (Bob Krause)
    SL-1 to Voice Mail Integration (R. Schwartz)
    Special Fax Long Distance Service? (Robert J. Keller)
    A Modem With a Seat Belt 12/02/93 (H. Shrikumar)
    Re: On Line GSM Recommendations? (Alan Levy)
    Re: For Your Amusement, if Possible (Thomas Lapp)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 13:48:31 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Delaware Phone Bill Announces Pa. Split


I have just picked up my December phone bill from Delaware, and it has
notice of the 215/610 split (PRINTED ON THE BACK OF THE ENVELOPE with
a list of the prefixes, right there, which will be in 610).

Notice also appears in the enclosures.  It says that if you dial Area
Code 215 to reach any of the exchanges on the list, you should dial
Area Code 610 to reach them starting Jan. 8.  BUT: "If you dial seven
digits to make local calls into Pennsylvania today, you can continue
to dial seven digits after January 8, 1994."  I do not think any of
the Pa.  prefixes which are local to Delaware are duplicated in
Delaware.  There has been some publicity in Delaware in recent years
about expanded local areas (with the leading 1 going away for
newly-local calls), and (just my own idea) there could be confusion
about "7D means local" if Delaware ends up removing the leading 1 for
all calls within it.

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 14:07:43 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Restrictions on Repeat Call and Return Call


Arriving with my Delaware phone bill, and I have put some comments in
in brackets; *69 for return call and *66 for repeat call, with 11
replacing the * if used from rotary phone:

Some phones may not respond properly to the Repeat Call and Return
Call special rings.  A local or toll charge may apply for calls made
with Repeat Call and Return Call.  [What is the special ring like, and
what does such improper response consist of?  I guess the internal
signal is different in some way.]

Repeat Call and Return Call do not work with calls made to most 700,
800, and 900 numbers.  [What are the exceptions, and what happens if
you attempt this and it indeed does not work?]

You can request your local business office to restrict Repeat Call and
Return Call from your telephone line at no extra charge.  [What
happens if such a restriction exists at the receiving end of your
intended call?  Or does this mean that if I have such a restriction, I
cannot use these features?]

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

From: Mikhail Boukhny <[e-mail]>
Subject: Vacancies in the Band For Cellulars
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:23:54 GMT


Someone has asked me recently what if he wants to build a competing
network for cellular phone. Are there any gaps left in the bandwidth?
Whom should he ask to for a license? Federal Communication Commission?
Any information is appreciated.


Mike

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 12:39:38 CST
From: [e-mail] (Leroy Donnelly)
Subject: Cellular Caller ID
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


> From the November 22, 1993 issue of Radio Communications Report

                       Cellular gets Caller ID

    Cellular carrier Bell Atlantic Mobile announced it will use
intelligent switching equipment to test services in Washington,
D.C./Baltimore next year designed to give cellular customers more
control over the calls they receive.

    BAM plans to implement GTE Telecommunications Services IntelliBase
Enhanced services technology so its customers can take advantage of
new Spoken Caller Identification, Selective Call Delivery and Who's
Calling Me? services.

    Spoken Caller Identification enables cellular telephones to
announce the name or number of a caller using digital voice technology
before the call is answered.  Calls can be screened, and the voice
application lets customers keep their eyes on the road while driving,
BAM noted.

    Selective Call Delivery lets customers program a list of call
numbers into the phone that can be automatically rejected.  Who's
Calling Me? gives customers a spoken list of unanswered names or
numbers, which can be returned by touching one button.

    BAM employees will be the initial trial participants, starting in
January.  The test is expected to last about five months.

Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1
DRBBS -- Planet {Connect} Schmanet Janet  (1:285/666.0)

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

From: [e-mail] (Victor R. Volkman)
Subject: How to Find Number in 313 Area Code?
Date: 11 Dec 1993 18:38:31 GMT
Organization: Msen, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, Michigan


Is there a number in the 313 area code that I can dial that will tell
me what number I'm calling from?  I saw of list of these here once
before.  Can anybody mail or repost it?  I planning on rewiring
several phone outlets (customer wiring) and it would be most helpful.

Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Sturtevant)
Subject: Telephone Number Readback Number
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 16:44:59 GMT


I've seen several postings of various phone numbers to call to have
your telephone number read back.  I'm in PacBell area (San Mateo, CA).

There have also been postings of 800 numbers to call and have the ANI
readback.

Any help would be appreciated if you have these numbers.

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul L. Egges)
Subject: PC Board Wanted
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 04:39:50 GMT


My company is looking for special board and software that will allow
us to do the following:

1. Read the caller id of the caller;
2. If the caller id is in the database allow the user to enter
   a phone number to dial out (using call transfer from the telephone
   company);
3. If the caller id is not in the database prompt the user for a
   password;
4. If the password is in the system allow the user (caller) to enter a
   phone number to dial out (using call transfer from the telephone
   company).

Basically, then the hardware needs to get the caller id, and
understand DTMF codes.

We don't want to buy a voice mail system!!


Thanks,

Paul

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: What is "Blueboxing?"
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:41:05 PST


Someone was telling me that the pre-breakup AT&T telephone network
operated on a set of 12 tones to control trunks and switches.  He said
something about blue boxes, blueboxing, or something like that, that
would generate tones to signal switches.

I assumed that he was talking about a technician's butt-set or test
unit, but that doesn't make sense because they are usually bright
orange (at least the PacBell ones are).  What are these things used
for?

Also, has the network been changed so that it no longer responds to
audio tones?  I would think that would be a major cause of telephone
fraud if a phreak made a device to generate the control tones.


Steve   [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015


[Moderator's Note: 'Blueboxing' referred to placing tones not normally
available to telephone subscribers (but otherwise used by telco) on the
line with the intent of defrauding telco of toll charges. One such tone
was often known simply as '2600' because of its frequency. These tones
are/were used internally by telco as a way of telling the switching
equipment to begin or end 'supervision'; that is, the timing of calls
for billing purposes. Today's network also responds to audio tones, and
yes, in the past phreaks have constructed devices to generate these
control tones. But the network operates differently today, and theft
of service, while not impossible, is much more difficult than in the
past. This Digest has never been a phriend of phreaks, and consequently
discussions of how to cheat telco are generally kept purposefully
vague.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 11:50:45 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Systems in Argentina and Peru


Argentina and Peru recently have purchased cellular infrastructure
equipment from AT&T.  Does anyone know if its analog or digital
technology.  If its digital, what technology are they using TDMA,
CDMA, GSM, etc?


Thanks,

Alex M. Cena   Lehman Brothers    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 09:05:05 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digital Phone Service in Canada


> DIGITAL PHONE SERVICE. New Brunswick Telephone became Canada's first
> phone company able to provide computerized digital service to every
> subscriber -- the first step in transforming the company's network
> into a high-speed, electronic information highway. (Toronto Globe &
> Mail 11/30/93 B7).

Does anyone have the details on the infrastructure/technology
equipment deployed by NBT for this broadband service? i.e. ADSL, PONs
or NGDLC?  Does digital service actually reach your home or is this a
FITL deployment?


Thanks in advance,

Alex M. Cena,  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Roy Thompson)
Subject: More Wireless Questions
Date: 11 Dec 1993 19:32:46 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA


It seems the hot topic of the month is PCS and GSM.  I have heard of
at least three major groups jumping out in favor of GSM as the new
infrastructure for PCS.  To my knowledge, NexTel, MCI (and the 100+
members of their consortium), and PTAG (a consortium of all the RBOCS
(except Bell South), Sprint, and a few others), have all selected GSM.

After the spectrum allocation in May, what are the likely timeframes
we will see for new infrastructure being deployed?  I'm assuming,
because of the nature of the FCC handling of spectrum allocation, many
new PCS systems will be deployed with older systems and exisitng
wireline networks being used for backhauling.  Is there anything,
other than frequency issues, that make the PCS infrastructure much
different from standard cellular networks?

 I suppose the micro and pico cell management will create some
uniqueness in the network.  In that case (with a pico cell for
example), will more switches be required?  Or will it be more of a
service platform issue?

I'm not a radio/frequency expert, so I ask the question: What are the
unique requirements for implementing at 1.8 GHz?  I thought the higher
the frequency the more power was required.  But the PCS phones (GSM)
have lower power requirements than some cellular phones.  Is it
because of the microcell implementation that allows higher frequency,
lower power?

Do the basic switching requirements change in the new PCS
infrastructure?  Do the requirements for HLR change?

I understand, maybe incorrectly, that GSM uses TDMA as the AIR
standard.  Is that TDMA different from that specified for the US?  I
remember something about a channel number difference.  Also, as GSM
becomes the defacto standard for PCS in the US, what happens to CDMA?
Isn't their an FCC regulation on wireless phones to support a
dual-mode?  I assume that means a dual AIR standard.  Could that mean
that GSM TDMA and CDMA will probably be supported out of the same
phone, or other similar configurations?


Roy Thompson - [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 11:16:11 EST
Subject: Information Wanted on Unix E-mail Packages
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
From: [e-mail] (Krause)


Hello all,

 I was wondering what large scale e-mail packages people might be
running off of their Unix boxes out there.

 I am interested in receiving information (product and vendor) on
e-mail packages that can be used in a corporate environment where one
RS/6000 will act as a central point and other RS/6000's will dial into
for mail. Mail could consist of regular mail as well as binary files
(ie. spreadsheets, designs, etc.).

 Any information specific or general would be greatly appreciated. If
you want, please send e-mail directly to me to avoid making the lists
receive the traffic.


Thanks,

Bob Krause    e-mail: [e-mail]
phone: [phone] ext.-4472

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 23:50:00 BST
Subject: SL-1 to Voice Mail Integration


I'm looking for information to help me integrate an Northern Telecom
SL-1 phone system to a PC based Voice Mail Card.

What I need to know is:

Is the SL-1 capable of ringing a voice mail port and touch-tone the
calling extension number to the vm port prior to conecting the caller?

Can the SL-1 give in band supervision via Touch-Tone back to a VM port
that is acting as an Automated Attendant?  ie: Line busy, line
answered, etc.

I know that the Panasonic KSU has these capabilities and works
wonderfully, but I have yet to be able to track down any info on the
SL-1 and these features.

If you can help, please respond first to my Internet address or as a
reply to the Digest as a second choice.


Thanks,

Robert Schwartz   Internet: [e-mail]    ActionTel

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

Reply-To: [e-mail] (Robert J. Keller)
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 10:29:57
Subject: Special Fax Long Distance Service?
From: [e-mail] (Robert J. Keller)


I heard once about some sort of resale long distance service in which
the provider multiplexes a small number of regular voice grade long
distance circuits into a larger number of narrower bandwidth circuits
and then resells them for dedicated fax use.  The theory is that the
narrower bandwidth is more than adequate for fax (although horrible
for voice) thereby allowing a discount from the usual LD rates.

I have four questions regarding this:

        1.  Does any one know the names and/or contact info for any
such long distance providers?

        2.  Does the fax quality suffer as a result?  And what about
fax speed in this day of 9600 and 14.4 faxing?

        3.  Would the same type of lines be adequate for high speed
(9600 bps and up) data in addition to fax? (I think I already know the
answer to this one, but thought I'd ask anyway!)

        4.  What sort of discounts are we talking about?


Thanks,

Bob Keller (KY3R)    Tel [phone]
[e-mail]    Fax [phone]
[e-mail]    CIS 76100,3333

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:44:44 -0500
From: [e-mail] (H.Shrikumar)
Subject: A Modem With a Seat Belt
Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Systems Bombay India


Hi,

    I just read about the Konnexx line of adapters that lets you use a
modem with "any" sort of a telephone/PBX system. The idea is simple:
it takes the handset jack, and use the handset wires to give out a
POTS style RJ11. [ Any user reports ?? ]

    The simulated POTS line lacks battery feed, and my guess is it
lacks ringing and pulse and digital/PBX style signalling (tho' tone is
possible) as well. [ In fact, from the BORSCHT functions ... I guess
it only provides the H=Hybrid function :-) ]

    Back a while ago I was wondering if such a device was possible, and
had shot a query to the all-knowing Digest ... if the handset jack was
more or less standard, and I was asking if one could use the hack to
obtain easy connections in all hotel rooms and friends apartments and
also avoid need for certified and surge protected DAAs. [ It got acked
but I did not see it appear on the Digest tho' ... wonder if PAT lost it
in a deluge ! :-) ]

    I was surprised to see that the said device lists at a handsome
$150 ... maybe I am a bit simplistic, but can you not take the mic and
speaker pairs, combine with some imedance matching, maybe an dual
opamp, and maybe a hybrid (transformer or transformerless) to obtain
an device that can connect a RJ11 to a handset jack? Can you not put
one together for much less? Can not the PCMCIA modem guys build it in
for cheaper and smaller than their current RJ11 DAAs?


shrikumar ( [e-mail], [e-mail],
            G=Shrikumar; S=Hariharasubrahmanian; P=itu; A=arcom; C=CH )


[Moderator's Note: I'm sorry to say I don't remember seeing your other
article, so if you want, please send it in again. It sounds like an
interesting topic of conversation.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan Levy)
Subject: Re: On Line GSM Recommendations?
Organization: Logica Space & Communications Ltd
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 13:08:31 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Bui Anh Jonathan Banh
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Can someone tell me where (ftp sites) I might find some GSM
> recommendations/standards (on line), particularly, signalling
> protocols and interface.  Similarly, recommendations/standards on
> DCS1800.

The GSM and DCS 1800 specifications are commercial publications and
are not available in the public domain (OK _should not be_, I can't
definitively say that they _are not_).

You can buy the specifications from ETSI.  They are priced in ECU
(European Currency Units -- not _real_ money :-).  They are fairly
expensive -- a year ago they cost around 2000 UK Pounds (US$3000) for
the full set of Phase 1 Specifications.

The contact address is:

ETSI publications office
06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex
France

Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]

They have no Internet address that I am aware of, but you could try
hunting around the net.

All opinions expressed are the author's own (whose else would they be?)

Alan Levy ([phone] x4729 [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 17:15:21 EST
From: Thomas Lapp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: For Your Amusement, if Possible


Our Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: So true, so true. The scandalous thing about the
> Dungheap Net is that its not just the formation of the unmoderated
> newsgroup they are now using for telecom; its *any* group they start
> there. The battles go on and on and on.

I see your point.  Perhaps it is time to filter the TELECOM
solicitations even more than you do already.  A filter to eliminate
any articles not sent explicitly to the group comp.dcom.telecom or
telecom@eecs might be the next step.  It would probably cut down on
duplicity of noise on this group.

After reading and participating in Usenet for over four years now, I
can see three things happening.  First, the noise/signal ratio is
going up, and the difference between Usenet newsgroups and the noise
on "public access" systems like Fidonet conferences is getting less
and less.  Perhaps this just means that "the masses" are now getting
onto Usenet as much as they used to get into Fido.

Another thing I see happening is a division between alt.*, soc.* and
like groups and comp.* and sci.* groups.  Although you have to look
long and hard sometimes, there are still some good groups out there
that don't have too much traffic each day and have some good experts
reading the group and willing to participate (although it is
increasing in volume, sci.med is one example I can think of).  If or
when it becomes necessary to pick and choose newsfeeds, I think that
the "entertainment" hierarchy will be dropped by many of the sites and
just the "real" newsgroups that have value will stay around on most
machines.

Finally, I see the formation of e-mail distribution lists or
controlled listservers taking over the roles of the "serious"
newsgroups.  It is already happening, and I find myself spending more
time reading mail that comes in via distribution lists than I do
reading the same requests over and over again on Usenet.  (I think
that the cycle time must be one month sometimes!)

It seems sometimes that the very technology that we wish to push into
the hands of the masses, ends up getting away from the technologists
and is trampled to an early death by the media, the users, and the
abusers.  As the Moderator pointed out, Citizens Band radio was one of
the technologies.  Amateur radio is quickly going down the same path
and Usenet will probably be another one to be trampled. Of course, we
can always hope that the technology is a phoenix and will rise again
in a mutated, but useful form some time in the future.

(Philosophical Irony: This reply itself, while complaining of the
tendency toward more noise and less light, ends up contributing to the
noise (griping and moaning) rather than light (useful telecom-related
items and discussion).  Perhaps the TELECOM Digest needs an op-ed page :-)


internet     : mvac23![e-mail]  or  [e-mail] (home)
Location     : Newark, DE, USA


[Moderator's Note: Some people contend this entire Digest is one big
op-ed page. :) I think with Usenet now having their own telecom forum
to trash out, it should make a substantial difference in the noise
level here. The real mistake may have been made years ago in agreeing
to interconnect with Usenet, but there was a time I thought that
Usenet showed a lot of potential as a medium for change and good,
valid information. Some people still feel it does have these qualities,
but I am not so sure. Truth be told, I see 'CB Radio' written all over
Usenet as the general public starts discovering it. I've always been
extraordinarily pleased by *how little* moderation/editing on my part
is required on submissions from list members as opposed to what comes
in from 'the net'. A lot of them have an utter disdain for grammar
and spelling and completely resent someone (like a moderator) correcting
if for them.

For those of you unfamiliar with/too young to remember the 'CB Craze'
of the middle to late 1970's and early 1980's, I want you to know that
circa pre-1975, CB was a wonderful communications method.  The users
were courteous, well-versed in radio etiquette and FCC rules, and
helpful, friendly people. They were like ham radio operators but
without the license and knowledge required of hams. And ham radio
operators will tell you that until around the middle 1980's things
were a lot different in that part of the radio spectrum as well. Then
as CB increased in popularity and useage, a lot of the CBer's could no
longer deal with their own messes and quite a few migrated legally or
illegally to amateur radio, joining the true hams in large numbers.
Now a few years later ham radio is still a great thing with lots of
wonderful people, but we see it starting to get tacky and frayed at
its edges. A common complaint is that 'they' (many of the newcomers
to ham radio in the past few years) go up to forty meters and sit
there to horse around, tune up their rigs, key up and play music, etc.

Ditto the written word: the earliest BBS's (Ward and Randy here in
Chicago, others) were super-great things; wonderful community
treasures where the guys were all helpful and pleasant. Fido started
the same way. Soon the 'general public' discovered them, and folks
started migrating to Usenet to avoid the messes of the masses on the
local boards, etc. Now its Usenet's turn to be discovered and
polluted. The anarchists of Usenet did okay when at least everyone
there considered themselves an anarchist and essentially went by the
same rules. Now they've got people there who have no idea what an
anarchist is and have no intention of following someone else's
guidelines in any event. :(  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #812
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26198;
          13 Dec 93 16:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29627
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 13:14:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09980
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 13:13:59 -0600
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 13:13:59 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #816

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 13 Dec 93 13:14:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 816

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    CFP - Home Informatics International Conference (Kresten Bjerg)
    History of Blue Boxes (Dave Emery)
    Nokia M10 Programming Manual Wanted (William Quinn)
    Prodigy-Nynex Online Yellow Pages (Les Reeves)
    Model-Based Diagnosis of Communication Protocols (Marc Riese)
    Comments Wanted From DECvoice Users (Rick Schofield)
    Call Return on Pay-per-Use Basis (David Leibold)
    Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D (Al Varney)
    Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Weiyun Yu)
    Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir (Carl Moore)


TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively
to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email,
in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service
systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited,
complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups.
Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Kresten Bjerg)
Subject: CFP - Home Informatics International Conference
Organization: IFIP WG 9.3
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 14:25:57 GMT


               A cross-disciplinary international conference

            HOME-ORIENTED INFORMATICS, TELEMATICS & AUTOMATION
                From 'State of the Art' through 'Prospects'
                    and 'Blueprints' to 'Implementation'

                    organized by IFIP Working Group 9.3
              in cooperation with the University of Copenhagen

                     University of Copenhagen, Denmark
                          June 27 - July 1, 1994

                                 BACKGROUND

The home offers a great potential for new automation, information and
communication technologies and related services. A wide array of
innovations are already under way, with many more to come. They will
transform the home and everyday life in the emerging information
society. They will condition how private households will be enabled to
function in changing social, economic and political structures.

                               AIMS AND SCOPE

The conference will assess and conceptualize perspectives and options,
which attach to developments of domestic informatics, telematics and
automation across the levels of
    - consumer hard- and software,
    - network infrastructures
    - storage & distribution media,
    - teleservices and
    - socio-cultural & economic structures.

How can these new technologies - seen together - be used to empower
consumers and private households?

How can both users and suppliers get the optimal benefits from the
possible new technologies? - and with which global impact?

Can these technologies contribute to the emergence of a new home
concept, an "Oikos", where the private household can reestablish itself
in an experienced way as a living and production centre, embedded in
and interacting with a larger community?

Addressing such questions requires a multi-disciplinary approach.
Therefore the conference aims to bring together experts from many
fields and disciplines. Researchers and practitioners, designers and
users, policy makers and industrialists, each with new knowledge and
new questions from their experience of recent and expected
development.

The conference will not only serve as a forum to present and exchange
experience, results of research and ideas, but also to explore and
discuss strategic approaches and alliances for product research and
development, and for prototyping and field experiments.

                           MAJOR THEMES

* The social construction of new domestic technologies.

* Bridging between the various disciplinary approaches.

* The changing position and importance of households in the new social
and economic structure of the information and communication society.

* Strategies for creating professional and public awareness of the
converging potentials and implications of constructive innovations for
everyday life and for social, cultural, educational, health, energy,
and economic policies.

* Ways of organizing relations between research and product
development which can further the long-term interest of consumers, and
save producers from waste of investments in development of products
and services which are doomed to failure.

* Relevance for developing countries, cultural diversities and the
general goals of the UN year of the family 1994.

                                 MAIN AREAS

Advanced Home Technologies
  (e.g. Intelligent home - Linking of TV, telephone, computer and VCR -
  Interactive multimedia and domestic virtual reality - Security-systems -
  Household appliances - Environmental control and ecology -
  Bio-electronics and health-monitoring.)

Communication and telematics
  (e.g. Convergence of broadcast and telecom networks - Interactive
  teleservices and teletransactions - Tele-education - Telework - Evolving
  informal networks - Home-to-Home interfacing.)

Economics and politics of HOIT
  (e.g. Interests of industry and service providers - Links between R&D
  and marketing - Prices and tarifs - Legal and regulatory policies on
  national and international level - The future of home economics.)

Cultural and social impact on everyday life
  (e.g. Personal development and knowledge distribution - Intra- and
  interfamily relations - Functions for children, elderly, disabled and
  home-bound people - Community structure - Cultural continuity.)

                         CONTRIBUTIONS

We solicit:
        Research papers;
        Papers on experiments and case studies;
        Policy and strategy papers;
        Opinion and position papers;
which will address State of the Art, Prospects, Blueprints or
Implementation within these general areas. Besides full papers, short
contributions like posters and statements papers may be submitted.

                    SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Notification of the intention to submit a full paper (including title
and subject area) should preferably be sent as early as possible.  Two
page abstracts of full papers are due at latest January 15, 1993.
Notification of acceptance March 1, 1994.  Deadline for submission of
final full papers and short contributions May 1, 1994.

All accepted contributions will be published in the preceedings
available at the conference.  Selected papers will be published in the
conference proceedings.

                              PROGRAM COMMITTEE

Felix van Rijn (Chair), Univ. of Amsterdam, Dept. of Communications
(NL) Kresten Bjerg, University of Copenhagen, Psychological Laboratory
(DK) Gunilla Bradley, Stockholm University, Inst. of Internatl.
Education (S) Valerie Frissen, Univ. of Amsterdam, Dept. of
Communications (NL) Karamjit Gill, Seake Centre, University of
Brighton (GB) Leslie Haddon, University of Sussex (GB) Gisela Lehmer,
Ministry of Telecommunications, Kln (D) Mara Gabrila Macra, IDAT,
Montpellier (Fr) Kurt Monse, IWT, Universitaet Wuppertal (D) Bjoern
Nake, University of Copenhagen (DK) Toomas Niit, Institute of
Philosophy, Sociology and Law, Tallin (Estonia) Gerrit Noltes,
Ministerie van WVC (NL) Yves Punie, Free University of Brussels (B)
Andy Sloane, School of Comp. & Inf. Techn. Univ. of Wolwerhampton (GB)
Alladi Venkatesh, Grad. Sch. of Management, Univ. of Calif., Irvine
(USA) L.E. Zegers, European Home Systems Association, Eindhoven (NL)

                            ORGANIZING COMMITTEE

Kresten Bjerg (DK), Bjoern Nake (DK), Dan Melkane (DK), Poul
Groenhoej(DK)

                            REPLY FORMAT

Please e-mail, fax or photocopy and mail to:

HOIT-94, Kresten Bjerg, Psychological Laboratory,
University of Copenhagen, 88, Njalsgade, DK 2300 Copenhagen S.
Tel.:[phone] Fax: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[ ] I/we consider participating.

[ ] I/we intend to submit a full paper.

Area:


Preliminary title:

[ ] I/we intend to submit a short contribution,
    poster or audio-visual demonstration.

Topic:

[ ] I/we want to exhibit/demonstrate electronic or mechanic equipment,
    taking max.      m2 floorspace.

Subject:


Name:

Institution:

Street address:

City / postal code:

Country:

Voice telephone:

Fax:

E-mail:

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

From: jjmhome!pig![e-mail] (Dave Emery)
Subject: History of Blue Boxes
Date: 12 Dec 93 22:12:33 GMT
Reply-To: jjmhome!pig![e-mail]
Organization: Opinion Mongers Incorperated...


    Someone posted an (unattributed) note to the effect that blue
boxes had been around "10 or 15 years".  This is wrong - try 40 years
or so.

    For what it is worth, blue boxes have been around almost as
long as the underlying MF in-band address signaling that they exploit
(since 1948).  And will probably exist until there is none of this
left (we're getting there).

    The first one I am certainly aware of was built by an IBM
engineer working on some sort of government telephone switching
project in or around 1957.  I have heard rumors of the devices being
built by other engineers in the telephone R&D community significantly
before that time but have never heard any definate proof one way or
the other as to the actual existance of such or to their use for
hacking.  These early devices of course mostly used vacuum tube
oscillators and relays rather than the software and sound board
approach that is common now.

    The famous "Blue Box" which gave the device its common name
was the fruit of a hacking project at MIT and Harvard in 1960 or 1961
and was in fact really a blue metal box.  I suspect but do not know
for certain that that this project which ended in criminal legal
negotiations between the students involved and telephone security
personel was the first time telephone company operating management
became widely aware of the potential of such sophisticated (at least
for its time) toll fraud.  I was told at the time that the president
of the New England Telephone Company was absolutely flabbergasted when
he was told of the technology and given a demonstration -- before that
time operating telco management has no idea whatsoever that such
things were even remotely possible.

    One suspects that the spooks knew of the technology earlier
than this and no doubt kept the secret classified just as they did
many other holes in the security of society so they could exploit them
for "purposes of national security".

    The first public discussion of blue boxes that I am aware of
was an article in the {Boston Herald} in 1964 or 1965 that resulted
from a political fight between the {Boston Herald} and the New England
Telephone Company.  Apparently the Herald felt that the Telco had
screwed them in a legal battle over a story they had published earlier
and got revenge by printing the blue box story which they had known
about for some years (since 1961 or so) in order to damage the telco
since it was known that it would take years to plug the holes that
blue boxes exploited.

    By the time this article was published, the technology of
telephone signalling and automatic billing and its weaknesses was
fairly well know amoung the nascent MIT centered hacker community and
blue box projects were common amoung students there.

    Blue boxes surfaced nationally in the media in 1971 when
{Esquire} published an article about them.  But by that time the
telephone industry had mounted an aggressive campaign to prosecute and
monitor blue box use and the whole matter had become one aspect of the
ever present toll fraud problem rather than a marvel that stunned
senior managment.


David I. Emery  -  N1PRE  -  Lexington   Mass.
Former senior technical consultant (and currently unemployed drunken bum)
Internet: jjmhome!pig![e-mail] (preferred) or [e-mail]
UUCP:     ...uunet!stratus.com!jjmhome!pig!die    Phone + fax: 1+(617)-863-9986

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Nokia M10 Programming Manual Wanted
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 05:26:21 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: IBM Austin


Does anyone know where I can get a programming manual for my NOKIA M10
cellular telephone?  I would like to change the "default" lock code ...
or am I stuck paying my cellular provider to reprogram it.  Thanks.


William Quinn

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 10:45:51 PST
From: Les Reeves <[e-mail]>
Subject: Prodigy-Nynex Online Yellow Pages


Nynex announced plans to team with Prodigy in the first ad-supported
on-line interactive Yellow Pages system.  The database, consisting of
some 300 on-line telephone books, is expected to be available by the
end of next year.  The service will be delivered over Prodigy's
network and will be owned exclusively by Nynex.  The listings can
include photos, maps, menus and up-to-the minute information, such as
interest rates at banks.  Nynex plans for the system to eventually be
interactive, whereby customers could make reservations on-line.
Subscribers will not be charged for the service since it is supported
by advertisers, and businesses would only pay for advertising beyond
their name and phone number listing.  The team plans to push other
regional telcos to join them in listing and selling Yellow Page
advertising on-line.  The value of the agreement was not disclosed.

(Wall Street Journal, "Nynex and Prodigy team up on Yellow Pages that
will provide on-line listings and ads," 12/10/93, p. B1; New York
Times, "So, let your cursor do the walking," 12/10/93, p. C4; USA
Today, "Yellow Pages move on-line," 12/10/93, p. 6B

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 14:36:53 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Marc Riese)
Subject: Model-Based Diagnosis of Communication Protocols


A recent doctoral dissertation entitled:

    "Model-Based Diagnosis of Communication Protocols"

is now available by anonymous ftp at site: litsun.epfl.ch Once the ftp
connection is established, change to directory:

                pub/Protocol_Testing_and_Diagnosis.

Please feel free to contact me at: [e-mail] if you have any
problems.


Marc Riese
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology     [e-mail]
EPFL-LIT IN-Ecublens CH-1015              tel [phone]
Lausanne, Switzerland                     fax [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Would you be so kind as to submit a copy of the
paper for the Telecom Archives as well?  Thanks very much.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Comments Wanted From DECvoice Users
Date: 13 Dec 1993 14:26:22 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In all the time I've been following this group, I've seen no mention
of Digital's DECvoice product.  Has anyone had any experiences with
this product set?  What were your impressions?  Are you using it now?


Rick Schofield
DECvoice Product Support
Digital Equipment Corp.
Merrimcak NH

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

Date: Sun, 12 Dec 93 16:49 WET
From: [e-mail] (woody)
Subject: Call Return on Pay-per-Use Basis


[from Bell News, Bell Ontario, 13 Dec 93]

We get thumbs up for two pay-per-use services:
Last Call Return and Busy Call Return

Last Call Return and Busy Call Return -- two calling features normally
available on a subscription basis -- are now available on a
pay-per-use basis to individual-line residence and business customers.
The features were offered on a three-week, free-trial basis starting
November 8, in Belleville and Trenton, Ontario and Sherbrooke and
Magog, Quebec. They became available in Ottawa-Hull and Quebec City as
a full service on November 29.

A charge of 50 cents applies for each use of last call return or busy
call return, up to a maximum limit, or cap, of $6.00 per month (plus
tax).

Both capabilities have been available to Bell customers on a
subscription basis. Customers can use Last Call Return and Busy Call
Return for local or long distance calls within or between areas where
the features are available.

The features will be introduced in other Ontario and Quebec
communities where calling features are now offered, on a phased basis
during the first six months of 1994.

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 08:14:11 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D
Organization: AT&T


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

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

>> According to radio ads being heard by a friend in Rochester NY,
>> Rochester Tel will change over this week from 1 + 7D for long distance
>> in 716 to just 7D.

>> This poses a few problems.  First, almost any LD call from the
>> Rochester exchanges is inter-LATA. 716 is divided into two LATAs.
>> The Buffalo LATA encompasses all of 716 except the Roch Tel areas and
>> a few other areas inside the Roch Tel zone which are still served by
>> indies (including Ogden Telephone and a few Contel exchanges.)  I
>> suspect LD carriers will be upset about this one ... especially if Roch
>> Tel tries to default customers to its own RCI long-distance service.

   Since the LATA boundaries aren't changing (only the dialing), why
would the LD carriers be upset (assuming no IXC defaults are changed).
Won't the same calls to the same inter-LATA numbers still use the same
IXCs?  The IXC sure can't tell that you dialed a '1+' at the beginning.

> After divestiture, NJ Bell chose to continue to support the abbrevia-
> tion of 7D (instead of the full 1 +609 + 7D) to place a DD inter-LATA
> call, now with one's default LD carrier ... of course, to support
> equal access, they also had to implement 10xxx + 1 + 609 + 7D (I am
> guessing that Bellcore decided from the beginning to never permit
> seven or eight-digit abbreviations after 10xxx).

   Bad guess -- first of all, Bellcore didn't exist when the 10XXX
dialing plan was devised, but many folks from AT&T that worked on the
plan became Bellcore employees in 1984.

   Secondly, 10xxx can validly appear in front of any standard numbers
of 7, 1+7, 10 or 1+10 digits, assuming you could dial them without the
10xxx prefix.  I just tried calling myself using:

              NXX-XXXX  (IBT oops, I mean Ameritech)
        1+708+NXX-XXXX  (ditto)
 10288+ 1+708+NXX-XXXX  (AT&T)
 10222+ 1+708+NXX-XXXX  (you know who)
 10333+ 1+708+NXX-XXXX  (ditto)
 10288+       NXX-XXXX  (AT&T)
 10222+       NXX-XXXX
 10333+       NXX-XXXX

   These all rang the "second line" on my ISDN set.  No form of
1+NXX-XXXX worked -- IBT intercepted.  But if IBT permitted it, 10XXX
could precede it.  All the forms with 1+708 could also be 0+708.  IBT
doesn't support 0+NXX.  The only form of 10XXX access that doesn't
work are those where your presubscribed carrier would not be selected,
such as 1+800 or 1+900 calls.  Note these shorthands:

  00 = 10XXX+0#  IXC operator
  0# = LEC operator

   Also, 10XXX+# is cut-thru to IXC dial-tone (sorta like 950-0XXX).
There is no shorthand for this access, since '#' by itself is an
error.


Al Varney

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

From: [e-mail] (Weiyun Yu)
Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite
Organization: Information Services, Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 12:50:00 GMT


Stewart Fist <[e-mail]> writes:

> In Australia we use the access code 0011 for voice calls, and 0015 for
> fax calls.  The difference is primarily in the fact that the fax call
> will always be placed via cable if cable is available.

Correct me if I am wrong. Exactly the opposite happens. The 0015 lines
primarily use the satellite route while the 0011 numbers has the cable
route when ever possible to provide better voice quality (no echoes).
Apparently the fax machines are immune to echoes. I got these from a
telecom rep.

> There are also some differences in the fact that bit-stealing is
> turned off, and some modification to the time-out of the echo
> cancellation.

Can't comment :)


Dr Weiyun Yu "Why Me?"               | Internet: [e-mail]
Dept of Surgery, Uni of Sydney, Australia  | Voice:          61+2-692-3851
Let there be light! And there was light!   | Fax:         61+2-692-4887

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 13:06:21 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir


I don't know what would be displayed if I had to call 911 from my
present phone on 410-287; my mail (including my phone bills) goes to a
PO box in another town.  Utility companies need to know where you
live, because that is where the physical connections for service
(electricity, phone, etc.)  go, even if the bills don't.  (Perhaps
you'd want to find out what exchange serves 820 Old Apex Road.  I did
find Apex Road and Street listed for zipcode 27707, and Apex Hwy.
listed for zip code 27713, both in Durham.)

Question: What about foreign exchange service?  An old example in
Maryland was someone in an area served by 287 prefix who brought in
642 Perryville (the next exchange to the west) as a foreign exchange
because it is local to Aberdeen (272,273,278) and Havre de Grace
(939).  Another case (glaring because a state line is involved, and I
recall seeing this at least once in the Wilmington, Del. directory),
would be someone in the Wilmington or Holly Oak exchange area bringing
in Chester Heights (Pa.) as a foreign exchange; that choice:

 -Keeps Wilmington, Newport, Holly Oak as local calls
 -loses local service to other parts of New Castle County, Del.
  and part of southern Chester County, Pa.
 -GETS LOCAL SERVICE TO ALL OF PHILADELPHIA METRO AREA

Remote-forward, which I set up in Delaware, would not be involved in
911.  No calls can originate on my Delaware number; it can only be
activated by an incoming call, and can only automatically call the
number I am forwarding to.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #816
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26658;
          13 Dec 93 17:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26549
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 22:57:25 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04703
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 22:57:03 -0600
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 22:57:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #813

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 11 Dec 93 22:57:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 813

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations (David Breneman)
    Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations (Hoyt A. Stearns, Jr.)
    Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment (Alan Levy)
    Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment (Erik Ramberg)
    Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Steve Taylor)
    Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Mike Yang)
    Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Robert Berger)
    Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Steve Jones)
    Re: Sprint Modem Offer :-( (Alan L. Nelson)
    Re: The Coming of the Information Age (Dennis G. Rears)
    Re: The Coming of the Information Age (Peter Gregory)
    Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers (Carl Moore)
    Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly (David A. Kaye)
    Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly (Wil Dixon)
    Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly (Glen Ecklund)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively
to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email,
in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service
systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited,
complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups.
Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Breneman)
Subject: Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations
Date: 11 Dec 93 20:40:54 GMT
Organization: Digital Systems International, Redmond WA


niall gallagher ([e-mail]) wrote:

> In Telecom Digest #724 (Wed, Nov 24) [e-mail] wrote:

>> I am stumped with how I can demodulate modem communications
>> in-progress.  My project includes displaying the originating AND
>> answering data, though not both at the same time.  I envisioned
>> recording it, and piping it into my modem.  Not so.  How would I go
>> about convincing a modem to listen to a tape recorded conversation or
>> "tapped" in realtime. (Problems there include messing up the current
>> conversation).

> Unfortunately (or should that be fortunately) it is very difficult to
> "tap" modem calls. The basic problem is that high speed modems (V.32
> and above) use the full bandwidth of the telephone channel in both
> directions for simultaneous transmission and reception of data.

> The modems at either end can extract the Rx data because they *know*
> what they have transmitted and using echo-cancellation techniques can
> determine what the Rx data is. At any point in between the modem and
> the CO, there is a two-wire circuit and anybody listening in would
> pick up the combined Tx and Rx data -- ie. garbage.

> If you have access to the circuit after it has been through the hybrid
> at the CO which separates the combined channels into distinct transmit
> and receive, the problem becomes more manageable and I'm sure that
> some enterprising government agency somewhere has built the required
> decoding equipment.

One of the problems is that most modern modems exchange information
during the handshake.  Older modems, however, did not.  The calling
modem waited for the answer tone of the called modem, then sent out
its tone and the communications began.  These modems can be tricked
with a tape recorder.  I used to test ASR33 Teletypes by recording
their output (through the phone line) and playing it back in answer
mode.  The trick is, in send mode the TTY needs to hear an answer tone
before it sends out its town.  Easy.  Just record a couple seconds of
answer tone at the head of the tape.  Put the TTY in send mode, play
the tape, switch the tape machine to record and start recording.


David Breneman                        Email: [e-mail]
System Administrator,                 Voice: 206 881-7544  Fax: [phone]
Software Engineering Services
Digital Systems International, Inc.        Redmond, Washington,  U. S. o' A.

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

Subject: Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations
From: isus![e-mail] (Hoyt A. Stearns jr.)
Organization: International Society of Unified Science
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 03:32:19 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> niall gallagher <niall@
bnr.ca> writes:

> In Telecom Digest #724 (Wed, Nov 24) [e-mail] wrote:

>> I am stumped with how I can demodulate modem communications
>> in-progress.  My project includes displaying the originating AND
>> answering data, though not both at the same time.  I envisioned

> Unfortunately (or should that be fortunately) it is very difficult to
> "tap" modem calls. The basic problem is that high speed modems (V.32
> and above) use the full bandwidth of the telephone channel in both
> directions for simultaneous transmission and reception of data.

I think it could be done by means of two taps a distance apart.  I
thought about this when the necessity arose to decode ISDN 2B1Q U
channel signals, but the same principle would apply.

Ideally you'd have a delay line with multiple taps feeding a forward
and reverse correlator (shift registers + adder).  One way of looking
at this is that the cable is sampled along its distance, and each
sample is delayed by the amount of time it takes for the signal to
propagate along the cable, and summed.  Signals going the other way
will not sum up.


Hoyt A. Stearns jr.|[e-mail]
4131 E. Cannon Dr. |     .com  OR
Phoenix, AZ. 85028 |enuucp.asu.edu!
voice 602 996-1717 |stat.com!wierius!isus!hoyt OR [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan Levy)
Subject: Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment
Organization: Logica Space & Communications Ltd
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:47:58 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> There has been quite a bit of CDMA vs TDMA debate with respect to the
> cellular carriers migration from analog to digital technology as well
> as equipment to be used in emerging market for PCS.  But who will be
> providing the infrastructure equipment and what is the time frame for
> availability.  I've heard some announcements from Ericsson, Hughes
> Network Systems and Motorola but not from AT&T.  I'm specifically
> interested first in the United States followed by other parts of the
> world.  Can any one help me by either posting an answer on the digest
> or to me directly?

TDMA networks -- in the form of GSM and to a lesser extent DCS-1800
(aka PCN) are already widespread throughout Europe and are arriving in
parts of Asia Pacific.

GSM infrastructure equipment is already being manufactured by both
Motorola and Ericsson amongst others (I don't know about Hughes or
AT&T).

As far as the provision of GSM services is concerned, the situation is
changing rapidly as new licenses are issued, new services come
on-stream and existing ones expand.

Takeup varies enormously between countries.  For instance, in the UK,
where existing analogue cellular services are still very influential
(with millions of users), GSM user numbers are in the low thousands.
In Germany, where the existing analogue service was limited and very
expensive, there are around 1 million GSM users.


The above opinions are all my own work.
Alan Levy, Logica Space and Communications Ltd
E-mail: [e-mail]  Tel: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Erik Ramberg)
Subject: Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment
Date: 12 Dec 1993 02:13:03 GMT
Organization: ESL Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, Alex Cena <acena@lehman.
com> wrote:

> There has been quite a bit of CDMA vs TDMA debate with respect to the
> cellular carriers migration from analog to digital technology as well
> as equipment to be used in emerging market for PCS.  But who will be
> providing the infrastructure equipment and what is the time frame for
> availability.  I've heard some announcements from Ericsson, Hughes
> Network Systems and Motorola but not from AT&T.  I'm specifically
> interested first in the United States followed by other parts of the
> world.  Can any one help me by either posting an answer on the digest
> or to me directly?

 From what I know about the current players in the North American
market regarding digital standards:

  TDMA - Ericsson
  E-TDMA - Hughes
  CDMA - Motorola and AT&T
  No commitment or I just plain don't know:  Northern Telecom, Seimens


Erik
Nothing that I say can be construed as the opinion of my employer.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Taylor)
Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless?
Organization: Grand Valley State University
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 14:21:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Bill Berbenich <bill@
wabworld.atl.ga.us> wrote:

> Both are advertised as 900mhz, spread-spectrum models.

Does anyone else have experience with spread-spectrum models?  I just
purchased (and then returned) Vtech's Tropez 900DX.  The reception was
extrememly poor and it would not hold a charge in stand-by mode for
more than 12 hours.  I then purchased Southwestern Bell's cordless
phone with built in digital answering machine.  The reception was
horrible and the answering machine didn't work.  I am now looking at
the new AT&T 9100 900 MHZ cordless phone.  I know none of these are
spread spectrum, but I would be interested in any opinions on 900 MHZ
phones in general.  Thanks for the advice!


Steve


[Moderator's Note: The Radio Shack 900 mhz phone seems to be a very
good quality instrument. If anyone has tried it out or purchased one,
I would appreciate a review of it here.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Yang)
Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless?
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 10:18:46 GMT


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

> I have the Cobra CP-910 cordless and it looks like a repackaged
> version of the Escort/CM 900mhz cordless.

> Bottom line: I have found that sound quality on my Cobra is very
> consistent and good, but not of a "corded" quality.  The versatility
> of getting consistent cordless signal quality within about a one block
> radius of my home is worth the minor degradation and loss in audio
> quality in that model.

I got a Cobra CP-910 a couple days ago but I'm planning on returning
it because it's not "corded" quality.  There is a noticable background
crackling that sounds sort of like that of a long-distance call.  Both
you and the person you're talking to can hear it.  Since my Sony 46/49
mhz phone has virtually the same quality as a corded phone, I find the
Cobra quality unacceptable.  I guess I'll wait and see if the AT&T
spread-spectrum model is any better.

On the plus side, I like the Cobra looks and echoing of DTMF tones to
the handset earpiece.  However, I found the varying tone volumes of
the keypad strange (the tone is the same, so why bother making the 1,
4, and 7 tones softer than the 3, 6, and 9 ones).

The range-until-failure of the Cobra was about twice that of my Sony,
though the Sony degrades well before the limit while the Cobra shows
no degradation until the limit.  The new Sony 900mhz phone I tried out
a month ago had a shorter range than the Cobra, though still longer
than my Sony 46/49mhz.  I returned that one, too, because it's range
was only about 1.5 times and since it was analog, degraded well before
the limit too.  I don't remember hearing the background noise that the
Cobra has.

I was disappointed that there was no "standby" mode on the handset to
further conserve battery power by not ringing.  My Sony handset gets
charged every couple weeks in this mode; I can hear the ring from one
of the other phones just fine.  Besides, the Cobra ring is really
shrill and somewhat obnoxious.


Mike Yang        Silicon Graphics, Inc.
[e-mail]        415/390-1786

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Berger)
Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless?
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:09:31 GMT


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

> I have the Cobra CP-910 cordless and it looks like a repackaged
> version of the Escort/CM 900mhz cordless.

Or maybe the Escort is a repackaging of the Cobra; Cobra has been
making cordless phones for a while, and it seems more likely that they
are the original manufacturers.

In any case, the Radio Shack one also appears to be the same unit.

My officemate bought an Escort, and I bought the AT&T unit ($249 at
Service Merchandise). Both give good sound quality; the AT&T phone had
a bit more range in side by side comparisons.

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

Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless?
From: [e-mail] (Steve Jones)
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 18:56:00 -0500
Organization: CRS Online  (Toronto, Ontario)


Rich Skrenta <[e-mail]> writes:

> Features I'm interested in:

> o  Security.  If it's all-digital, doing some simple scrambling
>    should be easy.  Going digitial is enough to weed out the
>    neighbors with scanners, but I don't want someone to be able
>    to plug in another 900mhz phone and hear my calls.

If you've been watching the rec.radio.scanner group, several people
have found the audio in the clear somewhere in the UHF region.  I
believe the Tropez was the model in question.  I'd guess the handset
radiates more than just the 900Mhz signal.  Not sure how far away the
signal was accessible but I doubt it would travel too far.


Cheers,

Steve Jones         !Amprnet : VE3SDJ@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CAN.NA
General Delivery    !Internet: [e-mail]
Stayner, Ontario    !        : [e-mail]
Canada              !        :
L0M 1S0             !Phone   : [phone]
                    !  Fax   : [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan L. Nelson)
Subject: Re: Sprint Modem Offer :-(
Date: 12 Dec 93 00:24:31 GMT
Organization: Network Systems Corporation


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
calpoly.edu (Chris Ambler - Fubar) writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: By the way, did you *sign* for the packages they
>> sent you? Have you opened the packages and installed/used the modems?
>> Sorry to make it rough for you guys, but under the Uniform Commercial
>> Code -- which will be the prevailing law -- you may have waived any
>> further claims.

Hmmm, I thought the UCC only applied *between* merchants???  Not
between a vendor and a retail customer/consumer.


Al

[Moderator's Note: No, not necessarily. Just some parts of it. Speaking
of which, I haven't received any mail from Fubar and his housemates
recently. I wonder how their suit against Sprint is coming along?   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 20:46:54 EST
From: Dennis G. Rears <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Coming of the Information Age


Paul Barnett <[e-mail]> wrote:

> As I said before, welcome to the real world.  It's a jungle out here,
> and if you don't have what it takes to survive, then I suggest that
> you take the civil service exam and get a job with the federal govern-
> ment.

Paul:

  With this comment you malign every Federal Civil Servant.  You also
show an ignorance of the Civil Service.  Few positions require the
civil service test.  Those positions that require the test are
generally clerical or low graded.  Contary to public belief, federal
employees are just as competent if not more so than the private
sector.  The problem with federal workers is we work under arcane and
inefficient laws and regulations.  The workers at my site (US Army
Armament Research and Development Center) are just as productive and
competent as anywhere else.


dennis

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Gregory)
Subject: Re: The Coming of the Information Age
Date: 11 Dec 1993 17:21:10 GMT
Organization: Asix, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> The Telecommunications Revolution

> How Union Jobs Are Being Lost In an Expanding Industry

>     -- by Kim Moody

>          PHONE COMPANY ACQUISITIONS 1993
>
>     AT&T-McCaw (cable)                           $12.6 billion

Uh, 'scuze me, but McCaw is not cable, but cellular, the parent
company of Cellular One and the North American Cellular Network.


Pete Gregory   [e-mail]
Senior Consultant. ASIX, Inc., Seattle, WA
on-site at Wireless Data Division, McCaw Cellular Communications, Kirkland, WA

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 13:14:53 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers


What kind of access?  10xxx?  If the calls are short, I'd have the
Orange Card available for consideration if I were making them.  I call
an 800 number when originating an Orange Card call.


[Moderator's Note: Ah yes, the Orange Card. I think I've heard of that
one somewhere before ... :)   Its still available; applications are
taken through my office as before. Its not a bad deal, with rates of
25 cents per minute (with a thirty second minimum) and *NO* surcharge
for its use. It works like any other calling card (except for the
absence of a high surcharge I guess); you dial an 800 number, get the
tone, then enter your card number, the number you are calling and your
PIN. And now I am a dealer for one even better (depending on who you
ask and the precise application) called the 'Gold Card'. It incorpor-
ates voicemail and a fax mailbox as part of the deal. I'll have a
more detailed message about it here in a day or two.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:33:01 PST


Said by: A. Padgett Peterson

> My concern is that I often go through my LDC to make a local call when
> at a pay phone and do not have change (it is less than the U$1.00-U$1.25
> charged to make a collect local call). I called Southern Bell and was
> told that the ruling only affects residences but have not verified
> this as yet.

How do you circumvent the local company?  In PacBell territory, they
will not allow you to select a long distance company on a local call.
I can, however, use my long-distance calling card (AT&T, haven't tried
with another company) for local calls.  These calls are billed by AT&T
at PacBells rates and the bill reads "Local Calls Charged to Your AT&T
Card."

If there is a way (besides the 1-800-CALLl-ATT method) to get AT&T for
local calls, I would rather do this, as their rates are lower than
those of Pacific Bell.


Steve  [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly
Date: 11 Dec 1993 17:15:43 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access   [phone]  [login: guest]


Marc Sira ([e-mail]) wrote:

> couple of months that this phone makes a little beeping-ticking sound
> every night at exactly 4:46 AM (Eastern time).

Though I have not heard these myself, the local power company in the
SF Bay Area, PG&E, sends several tones down the electric line.  One is
a command to turn street lamps on at dusk and another to turn them off
at dawn for those areas which still use synchronous relays instead of
photocells.

Also, PG&E sends a tone at 10:00pm to set the 60 cycles back on track
in case of extreme power loads which may have caused their system to
slow down.  This allows synchronous clocks to stay on time.  Anyhow,
power transformers with loose laminations or power supplies with
60-cycle hum problems could likely pick up these kinds of things.  If
your phone plugs to AC wiring it could possibly be picking up this
kind of thing from your own power company.

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

From: [e-mail] (Wil Dixon)
Subject: Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly
Date: 11 Dec 1993 14:44:44 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


[e-mail] (Marc Sira) writes:

> every night at exactly 4:46 AM (Eastern time). Yeah, I should be
> sleeping at this hour instead of waiting around for my phone to tick.
> No, it's not particularly loud enough to keep me awake, but I am
> curious about it.

> The ringer on the phone does seem to be sensitive to the line
> condition; taking my modem off-hook or putting it on-hook while it's
> on the same line produces a similar, louder noise from the phone. I
> imagine a second extension would have the same effect. So presumably
> there's a small glitch in the line voltage or something at 4:46 AM
> nightly.

> Any ideas what the phone company is doing to the line every night that
> would cause this behaviour?

> [Moderator's Note: Telco is doing line testing of the phones on your
> exchange. Your phone is sensitive enough that it notices this when
> it occurs. Roll over and go back to sleep. :)  PAT]

The Telco is doing Automatic Line Insulation Test (ALIT).  If the
phone has an adjustable spring on the ringer (bias spring) you can
increase the tension on the 'clapper' and cure your problem.


Wil Dixon    [e-mail] 217-244-1321
University of Illinois   CCSO Telecom Engineering

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen Ecklund)
Subject: Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly
Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 19:19:03 GMT


Wrap it in a clean diaper (nappy) every night at bedtime.


Glen Ecklund     [e-mail]   [phone] Office, 262-1204 Dept. Sec'y
Department of Computer Sciences        1210 W. Dayton St., Room 3355
University of Wisconsin, Madison       Madison, Wis. 53706  U.S.A.


[Moderator's Note: Hey, I wake up and go tinkle every night also but
that is not the kind of tinkle he was referring to. I think this issue
of the Digest had better come to a close now. :)   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #813
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26922;
          13 Dec 93 18:07 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10029
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:10:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16220
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:10:01 -0600
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:10:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #814

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 12 Dec 93 00:10:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 814

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line (Bruce Sullivan)
    Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Gary Breuckman)
    Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Brett Frankenberger)
    Re: What Is Switched 56? (Neil R. Henry)
    Re: What is Switched 56? (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies (Charles Mattair)
    Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies (E. Castedo Ellerman)
    Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Info Wanted on ISDN Centrex (Ed Goldgehn)
    Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs (John R. Levine)
    Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs (Will Martin)
    Re: New Archives Files (Per Helmersen)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively
to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email,
in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service
systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited,
complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups.
Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks.

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 12:38:35 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line


[e-mail] (Neklan Brozensky) wrote:

> I'm a systems administrator in a branch office. We have currently 30
> terminals/printer unit attached to our head office's AS/400 in
> Colorado Springs across a leased analogue line. The remote controller
> unit is attached to an IBM 5866 9600 baud modem.

> We are planning to totally upgrade the connection because our office
> is growing rapidly and even more terminals will be required. However
> in the mean time I was thinking that changeing the modem to say a
> v.32bis type modem would be a fast inexpensive way to increase
> throughput untill the issues around a more permanent faster solution
> got sorted out.

> The people in the head office aren't enamoured by the temporary solution.
> Their chief arguments are:

> 1. The are uncertain that the line will support a faster line speed.
> That there may be problems with the line that only manifest them
> selves at the faster rate. and if they occur, too much time will be
> spent fooling around tyring to solve that.

It's not likely to be a problem.  Neither Vancouver nor Colorado
Springs is out in the middle of nowhere.  The line is likely to be
digital all the way.  In any case, any reasonable communication
protocol (like SNA) will do error checking/retry/recovery.  Do keep in
mind that you need a modem with a synchronous interface on the RS232
side, that is the modem needs to be able to supply clocking to the
terminal equipment, and not require any Hayes-style async ASCII
commands to put it into the right mode.

You might also look into using an end-to-end digital link.  You can
get a Dataroute<->DDS (the US equivalent to Dataroute) connection at
19.2 or 56 kBPS at a price that is probably competitive with an
analogue line and with a lower error rate.

> 2. They don't think that the solution will result in the antiscipated
> payoff of increased response for keyers at dataentry terminals. The
> guy cites a test that he did a while back measuring response times for
> a 9600 baud modem link and the a 56K link.(The kind with the DSU/CSU).
> At that time he only got a 10% increase in resposiveness.

Responsiveness is not the same as throughput or bandwidth.  SNA has
all sorts of buffering and pacing options that need to be set
appropriately for the line speed in use.  Certainly the time to fill a
screen with data should decrease significantly when you go from 9.6 to
56kBPS.  If it doesn't, something is very wrong with your configuration.
How fast the system responds when you hit enter is another and much
more complex issue.  You should be sure that the host system is not so
constrained that it can't handle the higher transaction rate that
might result from higher bandwidth.

> What are people's thoughts here about this ... what reply would you
> guys make to these claims.

> Are they resonable technical objections?  Are they being intransigent?

You need to look at what you are trying to accomplish, and the cost.
Is response time already so bad that "something must be done"?  Or
are you just anticipating how things will be when you add more terminals?

Does "head office" have some longer term solution that they think will
work in a way that your faster modem idea won't?  Perhaps you should
ask *them* some hard technical questions.


Tony Harminc

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 17:27 EST
From: Bruce Sullivan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line


In TELECOM DIGEST V13 810, [e-mail] (Neklan Brozensky)
writes:

> I was thinking that changeing the modem to say a v.32bis type modem
> would be a fast inexpensive way to increase throughput untill the
> issues around a more permanent faster solution got sorted out.

> The people in the head office aren't enamoured by the temporary
> solution.

And for pretty good reason: It won't work. You may not have meant
this, but you cannot simply swap a leased-line modem for a dial-up
modem.  While they both do the same basic function -- modulate and
demodulate -- they are otherwise very different animals. The dial-up
modem has no means for 'grasping' the leased circuit. It expects to
dial first.

Secondly, a v.32bis modem is *asynchronous*, while the SNA/SDLC
protocol is *synchronous*.  While many dialup modems *can* be strapped
for synchronous communications, it's often at a lower speed. Even so,
you're now faced with long-distance charges to Colorado Springs. And,
you'd be subject to the idiosynchrasies of the Public Switched
Telephone Network.

> The guy cites a test that he did a while back measuring response times
> for a 9600 baud modem link and the a 56K link.(The kind with the
> DSU/CSU).  At that time he only got a 10% increase in responsiveness.

Depending upon the nature of the traffic, this could indeed be true.
Generally speaking, I would probably have expected a somewhat greater
improvement in response time, but I'd need to know a lot more about
the application and data. In any case, just because you're increasing
the line speed roughly 5.8 times, response time does not decrease at
the same rate.

All of that said, the cheaper solution, which *should* work, is to
replace the 9.6K leased line modem with a 19.2K leased line modem.
"Most" analog circuits will run up to 19.2. I have done this with many
circuits which were originally provisioned at 9.6 with no special
conditioning.  Because the circuit was not engineered with that
conditioning, however, the telco will likely be of no help if you do
have problems. Frankly, it's something of a crapshoot.  Sometimes I
can bump them to 14.4, sometimes 19.2.

One final thing to think about: It's the users you're supporting: If
your 'solution' is fraught with problems, you're not doing them any
favors.


Bruce

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Breuckman)
Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 13:39:38 GMT


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

> I just purchased a new computer.  I have 2400 baud modem and cable
> that works just great with my old computer.  With the new one, the
> computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from
> the modem.  For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a
> number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light),
> but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem.  (Echo
> does not work at all either).

> Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the
> instruction manual, to have any dip switches.

This is an external modem, the first think you want to do is test the
serial port on the computer and determine if that can receive or not.
The modem might be working fine, but the port not showing any of the
results.  Receiving is often interrupt driven, and the interrupt for
the port might not be set correctly (if it is in fact something that
can be set separately), or it might not be working.  You might also be
having a problem with the control lines, but with a port that usually
affects SENDING rather than RECEIVING.

So, what you need is a breakout box or a loopback plug, you can make
a loopback plug, jumper the following pins together ... 2->3 (transmit
to receive), 4->5 (request-to-send to clear-to-send), 20->6 and 8
(terminal-ready to modem-ready and carrier-detect).  Now, anything you
send out the port with your comm program should be echoed back - if
not, the port has a problem.  These are the pins for a 25-pin serial
port, for the 9-pin it would be 3->2, 7->8, 4->6 & 1.

If that works, and you know the modem works elsewhere, you might try
setting the modem settings back to the factory defaults.  It just
might be some problem with flow control, but I suspect the port.  For
Hayes compatible modems that store the settings (ie, no dip switches,
the command is AT&f&w.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brett Frankenberger)
Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 17:08:32 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> I just purchased a new computer.  I have 2400 baud modem and cable
> that works just great with my old computer.  With the new one, the
> computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from
> the modem.  For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a
> number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light),
> but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem.  (Echo
> does not work at all either).

> Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the
> instruction manual, to have any dip switches.

Typically this indicates a problem with interrupt settings.  While
interrupts can be used for all aspects of serial communications,
typically they are used mainly for receiving data.  If the card you
have has lost the ability to generate interrupts when data is
received, or if it is configured for a different interrupt than your
comm program expects, you will be able to send fine (assuming your
comm program doesn't require interrupts to send), but it will not be
able to receive any data, since almost all comm programs require
interrupts to receive data.

The standard interrupt (IRQ) numbers are 4 for COM1: and 3 for COM2:
(and 4 for COM3: and 3 for COM4:).  Figure out which COM port you are
using (i.e. which comm port is selected in the COMM program) and then
make sure than both the card and/or the comm program are set for the
correct interrupt.  (If the card has no switches, you will have to
hope it's the default and just set the comm program to the correct
interrupt.  If that doesn't work, try all sorts of different
interrupts from the COM program).


Good luck ...


Brett  ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Neil R. Henry)
Subject: Re: What Is Switched 56?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 13:54:20 GMT


How are switched digital lines "dialed"?  Is it a seven or ten digit
address like switched analog calls?

While I am asking, what is the proceedure (dialing requirement) for
ISDN calls?

Thanks for the emlightening summaries.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: What is Switched 56?
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 03:20:19 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]2.
dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes:

> Service Unit (CSU) compatible with your serving CO.  It "dials" the
> call digitally, but it tends to take a while.

I was looking at the practice sheet for a switched 56K card a couple
of weeks ago.  They actually used the A/B signalling leads to outpulse
the the dialed number.  Seemed rather quaint in this day and age.
That would explain why, "it tends to take a while!"


Bill Mayhew        NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-9995  USA      phone: [phone]
[e-mail]       amateur radio 146.58: N8WED

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 10:48:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (The
CyberMonk) writes:

> Perhaps this is a stupid question (it would not be the first time),
> but *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access?

and PAT responds:

> [Moderator's Note: Cable companies don't want competition any more
> than the local telco wants competition. Like telco, the cable companies
> have friends in high places.  So Clueless, given that clue, now do you
> have an idea what is going on?   PAT]

You can also add in the vertical integration of a number of the cable
operations.  A situation arose in California several years ago
regarding a wannabe cable competitor.

I can't remember the specific companies so the example is illustrative
and does not constitute a condemnation of the companies named.

   . Time-Warner owns HBO and Warner Cable.

   . I want to wire west Houston (which is Warner) and contact HBO.

   . HBO either refuses to sell feed, having signed an exclusive contract
     with Warner, or agrees but at rates which are significantly higher
     than those charged to Warner.

   . In any case, I am effectively blocked from competing.

I _think_ the Cable act addressed some of these problems.


Charles Mattair      (temporarily - work)    [e-mail]
<standard.disclaimer>
In a mature society, "civil servant" is semantically equivalent to
"civil master." - Robert Heinlein, _The Notebooks of Lazarus Long_

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

From: [e-mail] (E. Castedo Ellerman)
Subject: Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies
Date: 11 Dec 1993 20:07:12 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


[e-mail] (The CyberMonk) writes:

> Perhaps this is a stupid question (it would not be the first time),
> but *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access?

> I also don't understand why the courts (I think it's them) don't seem
> to be moving faster in allowing competition for the local dial tone.

I think in both the local cable and local telco markets, even without
regulation you would have a natural monopoly. The initial capital is
very costly and there is a fixed number of consumers. Because of this
government jumps in a regulates the situation since a natural monopoly
is sure to form.

That's my guess.


Castedo

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 00:20:36 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Will Estes <[e-mail]>, writes:

> James R Ebright ([e-mail]) wrote:

> JRE> In article <[e-mail]>
     > [e-mail] (John Eichler) writes:

> JRE>JE> [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl) wrote:

> JRE>JE>CO> I should think that New York Telephone, which fills the
           > front pages of every telephone directory with glowing
           > talk of up-to-date digital technology, would be
           > embarassed at its apparent failure to deploy ISDN
           > beyond a handful of Manhattan exchanges.
> JRE>JE> It's almost a 'catch-22' proposition.  The phone companies
        > are slow to implement ISDN because there is little demand
        > for it and the demand is waiting for the service to become
        > available.
> JRE> Huh?  ISDN was originally a way to get 56KB service ... but
     > modems on regular analog lines can almost do this today.
     > ISDN vs market forces.  ISDN 0, Market 1.

> I think you are missing the big picture here.  Within one
> year, people are going to be able to buy unlimited 10 Megabit
> per second connections to the net via existing cable TV cable,
> with a V.FAST or similar channel going upstream.  This is
> going to cost $99/month or less for unlimited network use.

> If the phone companies had even the slightest bit of
> technology vision, they would understand what a serious threat
> to their future market growth this really is, and they would
> be offer ISDN at or below cost until they can get the fiber
> optic cables in.

And one more thing.  How long until someone figures a way to do
real-time compression of voice onto a modem data stream and do
"telephony over internet"?  If I want to talk to someone in Dallas or
Los Angeles, so I would put a microphone on my computer, have it
digitize my voice and send it as a TCP/IP packet stream to someone
else's computer where his application is listening on a port, and his
computer receives it as a TCP/IP connection who then decodes it and
sends it to a sound card and receives my message.

I think that the least expensive dial voice service is running at
least 6c per minute if you buy huge quantities of time, e.g. thousands
of hours of time per month.  The cost to send information over the
Internet is effectively zero.  It's only a matter of time until
someone figures out that all it takes for an Internet connection to
pay for itself is to be able to use it to reduce long distance traffic
by 1 1/2 hour a day even at these low rates.  If the other places you
call are on the Internet and their computers have the means to do
voice reception and transmission, how long before people discover that
if they are paying 15c a minute per trunk for conference calls, that
they can set up a multicast group and everyone involved can hear and
speak and the net cost per minute is zero?  If it ever becomes easy to
do real time digitizing and compression of speech with decompression
and playback, it's going to cause people to reconsider the high cost
of long distance service.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Sys. Express Corp)
Subject: Re: Info Wanted on ISDN Centrex
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 02:58:54 GMT


System Operator (ftgcorp![e-mail]) wrote:

> I'm looking for information and experiences with ISDN Centrex
> operations, especially from Chesapeake and Potomac (C&P) Telephone
> Company (now Bell Atlantic).

I work with a company that is an authorized Bell Atlantic Reseller.
I'll be happy to have them get in touch with you to assist in
determining your needs.  I've found them to be good at what they do.


Ed Goldgehn            Internet:    [e-mail]
Technical Sales Engineer    Voice:        [phone]
Systems Express Corporation    Fax:        [phone]
Distributors for Data/Voice/Video Communication Equipment Manufacturers

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 14:15 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> Anyone have information where I can get thinks like the old Telecom
> Talk Tickets?

Most of the convenience stores around here sell Sprint's prepaid FON
cards.  They're not cheap, 33 to 50 cents a minute, but they're
convenient.  At a truck stop I also saw another brand of card, Liberty
something, a little cheaper, and with the possibility of refilling the
card over the phone and charged to a MC/V credit card.

If you have a few weeks to plan, AT&T still issues calling cards not
tied to a particular phone.  You need to make a full credit
application, like the one for a bank credit card, so it takes a while.
(For that matter, there's also the AT&T Universal card which is both a
bank card and a calling card.)  If you already have a bank card or
Amex, MCI and Sprint probably still have the deals that let you use
your credit card as a calling card without extra credit or billing
complexity.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 8:17:40 CST
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs


> [Moderator's Note: I think Western Union sells them via currency ex-
> changes and other outlets.

I didn't mention this before because I felt it was a competitor to our
esteemed Moderator's income, but, since he himself now referred to a
different source, and no longer is a dealer in these, here is the
info:

Another source for these was recently (Nov. 1 93) advertised by the
populist newspaper, {The Spotlight}. They are selling these type of
prepaid telephone cards in $30, $50, and $100 denominations. They say
they're good in the US and Canada, but not Alaska. Calls are charged
against the card balance at 25 cents per minute at all times.  The ad
does not state the 800 number you call to use the card.

They imply the card can be "recharged" by calling and giving a
credit-card number to restore or increase the credit balance against
which calls are charged, but they do not state this number or go into
any detail on that process in the ad I have. Also, the only way to buy
these, according to this same ad, is to write them and order cards
with a check (payable to "The Spotlight"), or a Visa or MC number,
with expiration date and signature. The address is:

The Spotlight
300 Independence Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20003

(I find it rather strange that they don't give an 800 number to call
to buy cards via credit card, but that's the way it appears. Maybe
later ads have added this feature -- this ad is the only thing I have
with me about this product.)


Regards,

Will

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

Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 01:39:09 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Per Helmersen)
Subject: Re: New Archives Files
Organization: Norwegian Telecom Research


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

> Several new files have been added to the Telecom Archives today.

Are the archives accessible by means of WWW?


Per Helmersen                     E-mail: [e-mail]
Norwegian Telecom Research        Phone: [phone]
P.O Box 83 / N-2007 KJELLER       FAX: [phone]
NORWAY


[Moderator's Note: I believe someone told me they were, but I have no
first hand knowledge of it, or really, how WWW works. Maybe someone
with knowledge of WWW will write to explain it more, and let me know
if Telecom Archives is obtainable that way. Generally when asked, I
refer people to the anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu facility or I send them
a help file for use with the Email Information Service. If anyone
wants to use the Telecom Archives but does not have the help file to
properly phrase their commands, etc, let me know and a copy will be
sent out to you right away.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #814
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa27364;
          13 Dec 93 19:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28225
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:13:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17882
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:13:04 -0600
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:13:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #815

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 13 Dec 93 02:13:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 815

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    ISDN in Huntsville, AL (Hunstville Times via Dwayne Blumenberg)
    Newspapers Want ?11 Numbers; So Do Hearing-Impaired People (Nigel Allen)
    PC Pursuit vs America Online (Earl R. Hall)
    Book Review: "Managing UUCP and Usenet" by O'Reilly/Todino (Rob Slade)
    Bell Canada Invests in Jones Intercable (David Leibold)
    Phone Line Teaming ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dwayne Blumenberg)
Subject: ISDN in Huntsville, AL
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 20:10:47 GMT


The following article appeared in the Dec. 12, 1993 edition of _The
Huntsville Times_ newspaper Business Section (Huntsville, AL).  I
thought it might be of interest to Digest readers.

NETWORK CAN CONNECT AREA TO ECONOMIC FUTURE WORLD
    By Connie H. Dykstra
    For The Times

    Amidst the current climate of economic uncertainty among
Huntsville's traditional space and defense operations, an unseen but
extremely powerful force has been building a new foundation for future
economic growth.

    Huntsville stands at the forefont of the challenge to greet the
dawning information age not only with open arms but with ready
technologies to satisfy emerging customer demands.

    Through vision and partnership with area businesses and the U.S.
Army at Redstone Arsenal, South Central Bell has built in Huntsville
and Madison one of the world's most advanced telecommunications
networks.

    Just the bare statistics of what's been happening here on the
high-tech telecommunications front are staggering.

    This is the nation's first large metropolitan area to have 100
percent digital network switching and transmission facilities,
according to telephone company executives.

    Huntsville is the first, and only, major city served by Bell in
the U.S. to have a metro area-wide Integrated Services Digital Network
(ISDN) service -- the most advanced telecommunications network
technology available anywhere, according to Gary Pledger, South
Central Bell's district manager.  The operation has more than 1,100
ISDN lines now in service.

    Huntsville was SCB's first AccuPulse customer, the Central Office
Local Area Network (C.O. LAN) customer, the first city in Alabama to
have both major universities connected to C.O. LAN, first to use
wideband switches, and the location where many first-time services
were made available to Army and NASA customers.

    SCB has in services more than 4,000 miles of fiber optic cable
throughout Madison County.  The list of telecommunications triumphs
goes on, but the bottom line is the South Central Bell has invested
more the $60 million here during the past five years to offer the most
advanced intelligent network capabilities of any U.S. city.

    What this means for Huntsville's future includes diverse
advantages that range from businesses expansion to remotely
transmitted medical services to improved pizza delivery, Pledger says.

    "Basically what we have come to realize is that the public network
is really to commerce and industry today what rivers and railroads
were in the last century,", says Pledger, "Commerce is carried over
our network and we have a profound role to play in facilitating that."

    The movie, "Field of Dreams," features actor Kevin Costner who
carves a baseball field out of a corn field guided by the notion of
"build it and they will come."

    Similarly, with the high-tech in formation services already in
place here, the right players will follow.

    "We're sending more than voice and data signals, we're sending a
signal to the world that we're ready to meet any telecommunications
needs of existing businesses or anybody looking for a great place to
locate," Pledger says.

    With the U.S. Army as the first customer for ISDN here, the
leading-edge technology was able to be rapidly developed and tested.

    BellSouth operates an ISDN laboratory at Redstone Arsenal, serving
as a testbed to keep the company -- and Huntsville -- at the forefront
of ISDN research.

    "The Army was looking for ways to find efficiencies in their
business and one way was through a single line concept.  If you have a
telephone line for a fax machine, another line for voice
communications, a line for a modem and a line for whatever else, you
wind up with three and four separate telephone lines to serve someone
who performs those functions," explains Pledger.  "The Army realized
it was costing a lot of money to maintain all those lines, and they
said there's got to be a better way.  And the better way, naturally,
was ISDN which allowed the Army to fold all those services into one
telephone line."

    Based on digital technology, ISDN represents a major breakthrough
in telecommunications by providing a "digital pipeline" for moving
voice, data, telemetry, video and facsimile separately or simultaneously
all over one telephone line.  Data can be transmitted up to 60 times
faster than a normal modem.  More than 1,000 pages of information can
be faxed in 30 minutes.  "With digital you get speed, reliability and
tremendous efficiencies," say Pledger.

    In addition, SCB has installed more than 4,000 miles of fiber
optic cable in Madison County.  Fiber provides tremendous band width,
or capacity, to quickly and accurately deliver enormous volumes of
data.  Pledger proudly points out that fiber is not only deployed to
specific customer's offices, but is 100 percent in place for routing
between all SCB central offices.

    While fiber optics continues to capture attention, Pledger hastens
to add that copper is being used to display some phenomenal
capabilities, as well.

    "People never dreamed 100 years ago that copper was able to carry
what it is.  Now we're even experimenting with delivering 35-millimeter-
quality over copper.  So, we're continuing to push the copper technol-
ogy at the same time we're deploying fiber."

    SCB's investment appears to be paying off.

    Pledger says people from other cities and states are now coming
here just to talk with him about what's been done and learn from
Huntsville's experience and how these elements work together in
economic development.

    "When Nichols Research outgrew their buildings on South Parkway
and needed to add a facility in research park, they came to us and
said we want to link that new site with out current site so employees
have a virtual co-location," recalls Pledger.  "We were able to
facilitate that and in so doing, helped them expand in such a way as
to contribute to the continuing success of their enterprise."

    Nichols Research Corp.'s Vice President of Computer Systems, Mike
Solley, says his company is perhaps unique in wanting to get as close
as possible to their customers.  The telecommunications equipment
required to achieve that is available in Huntsville.

    It's really a combination of all the manufacturers in town,"
Solley says, pointing to the fact the Nichols is a beta test side for
Adtran which manufactures electronic transmission equipment for
telecommunications.

    UDS Motorola of Huntsville designs and manufactures data
communications equipment such as high-speed digital modems
facilitating remote applications for advanced telecommunications
services.


FITS GROWTH STRATEGY

    Brian Hilson, senior vice president for economic development at
the Huntsville-Madison County Chamber of Commerce, knows well the
advantages of having advanced telecommunications services in place
throughout this area.

    "It fits well with our economic growth strategy.  We've targeted
several industry sectors to bring to this area based on the labor
attributes and industry support services we offer, and
telecommunications is one of those," Hilson says.

    According to an economic development specialist with GTESouth, 80
percent of corporations say telecommunications is important, or very
important, in facility planning.  Ten years ago, that number was only
30 percent.

    Hilson says Huntsville is well-positioned in the current
nation-wide trend for companies to decentralize from larger cities to
smaller cities, taking advantage of lower operating costs but still
looking for advanced technologies.

    "There is not a significant office operation or business that is
dependent on quality telecommunications which our community can't
compete for," Hilson asserts.

    While the feral government plans to consolidate Defense Department
finance and accounting operations at a central location has been more
or less shelved for the time being, Pledger discovered that Huntsville
stacked up well in the recent competition to win the proposed
facility.  Again, the telecommunication network was one of the area's
strengths.

    Pledger says sometimes there are direct hits where people who have
heard of this area's network come here because they have a telecommun-
ications-sensitive operation and believe Huntsville to be a prime site
for them.

    "Unfortunately, I can't tell you about one of these yet," he
hints, "but in the near future was expect to make a major announcement
than an organization that is telecommunications-intensive is coming to
Huntsville.  They will locate here and provide a worldwide service."

    This area's telecommunications capabilities are making possible
numerous other significant advances for future development
opportunities.


HELPING EDUCATION

    Pledger believes their network will play a role in resolving the
equity in education problem currently plaguing Alabama.

    "If we can link schools, as we are, for distant learning -- for
remote access to CD ROM and other applications -- then students in a
remote location can have access to lectures and learning opportunities
that students in urban areas already have," he explains.

    Mike Solley at Nichols Research is working closely with the
Alabama Supercomputer Authority, South Central Bell and local
telecommunications equipment providers to hook up Johnson High School,
and other local schools, to the supercomputer facilities in Cummings
Research Park.  Dozens of high schools statewide have now been
similarly connected via high-speed, dedicated data circuits for
classroom instruction and other applications.


MEDICAL APPLICATIONS

    At Crestwood Hospital, neurosurgeon and chief of staff Dr.  Ira
Denton has been breaking new ground with ISDN.

    He uses the high-speed, high-volume data transfer capabilities to
send, receive and annotate x-rays and video images while talking with
other medical professionals on the same line.  He has also partici-
pated in physical examinations and has observed microneurosurgical
procedures taking place at a remote location.

    "ISDN has tremendous potential for cost-savings by providing
access to specialists for practitioners and hospitals remotely
located," Dr. Denton says.

    Dr. Denton has been using ISDN with the latest video compression
technology for videoteleconferencing applications using two-way audio
and video.  He is conducting a study to determine which bandwidths are
most effective for this type of effort.  When completed, the study
will serve as a guide to further the development of similar systems
for use by medical professionals worldwide.

    Videoteleconferencing via ISDN technology was employed last year
when back surgery prevented superintendent Dr. Ron Saunders from
attending a Huntsville Board of Education meeting.

    Using three ISDN lines, video equipment and a personal computer,
both video and voice were transmitted between Dr. Saunders' home and
the board's administrative officers, enabling everyone to meet as if
they were all in the same room.

    The efficiencies of advanced telecommunications services can even
be felt these days when calling many local pizza carry-out
establishments.  Once a caller's name and phone number are given, the
employee automatically knows their location, thanks to specialized
caller ID services.

    Pledger says he's talking with the Board of Realtors to explore
real estate applications allowing on-screen walk-throughs of homes or
buildings that can be constantly updated as data changes.

    "Certainly real estate is an integral part of economic
development.  If we can facilitate information flow about sites, than
can help fuel economic growth," add Pledger.

    Like any state-of-the-art technology, telecommunications advances
have a life cycle often eclipsed by emerging capabilities.

    Pledger says this is good news for them because it means companies
like South Central Bell have to be constantly looking as far down the
road as possible.

    "We have five-year plans, ten-year plans, and even fifteen-year
plans for how we're going to continue tow build and enhance the
network.  We're constantly doing analysis of what our customers will
need."


Dwayne A. Blumenberg | Internet: [e-mail] IBM
Systems Programmer   | UUCP: ...uunet!ingr!b30!dwayneb!dablumen
Intergraph Corp., M.S. GD3002 | Voice: [phone] Huntsville, AL
35894-0001 | FAX: [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 12 Dec 93 08:24 WET
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Newspapers Want ?11 Numbers; So Do Hearing-Impaired People
Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-3783  Voice: 416-363-8676


Here is a press release from the National Newspaper Association.

I downloaded the press release from the PR On-Line BBS in Maryland at
410-363-0834. I do not work for the Association, and I do not think
that newspapers should be allocated three-digit numbers for their
information services.  Instead, I feel that three-digit numbers should
be reserved for relay services for the hearing-impaired.

 National Newspaper Association Announces Program to Help
Newspapers Apply for Three-Digit Calling Numbers

 Contact: Mark Sheehan of the National Newspaper Association,
          703-907-7900

   WASHINGTON, Dec. 7 -- National Newspaper Association Chairman Sam
Griffin today announced a four-point program to help newspapers
successfully apply for three-digit calling number -- called N-one-one
or N11 numbers -- in their local areas.

   "There's no time to waste," he said, the smartest publishers are
already moving aggressively to protect this vital tool of delivering
news and information."

   He said the NNA Board of Directors had recently reviewed the
developments of N11 numbers in several states.  It concluded that
prompt action by community newspapers may be needed to guarantee that
the maximum number of Nll numbers are assigned for local information
tools.

   Nll numbers are being used in some markets in the U.S. as an
expedited dialing number for electronic information systems.
Consumers dial 311, for example, to access newspaper audiotex systems.
The telephone company collects a fee for the service as a part of
regular phone billing and passes on a share of the revenue to the
newspaper.

   "In the past we tended to think of N11 numbers and audiotex as
concerns for metropolitan newspapers, but we've come to recognize that
they are a key part of community newspaper strategic marketing," he
said.

   "Perhaps the most important point was the board's decision to
support local rather than statewide allocation of such numbers," he
said.  "You can ask the phone company for statewide designation, so
that, for example, 311 is the number all across your state for
information services, but each local exchange should assign the number
on a local basis so that local publishers have access to them.  A
statewide allocation system would simply give one provider a statewide
monopoly."

   The four-point NNA program involves:

   1. An initiative to help publishers make immediate application to
their local telephone companies for such numbers, including a model
letter.  Most of these requests are being refused at the present time,
except in states served by the BellSouth Regional Bell Operating
Company.

   2. Assistance to publishers in preparing for the application to the
state public utilities commission (if the telephone company refuses
the request), including a model application to be tailored to the
publisher's individual situation.

   3. A referral system for more detailed legal expertise.

   4. Continuing policy support to publishers in the N11 effort,
backed up by a resolution passed by the NNA Board of Directors urging
local assignment of the maximum possible number of N11 numbers by
telephone companies to community newspapers and other local
information providers.

   "Make no mistake," said Griffin, who publishes the Post-Searchlight
in Bainbridge, Ga., "NNA believes this should be an all-out effort by
publishers.  At the same time, we realize this is a new area for
community newspapers and we want to provide our members the support
they need to take these steps."

   "Some of us have already begun," said R. Jack Fishman, publisher of
the Morristown (Tenn.) Citizen Tribune and chairman of the NNA
Government Relations Committee.  "I have already filed an N11 number
for both the Morristown Citizen Tribune and our weekly Tullahoma News,
and I've purchased an audiotex system. My readers will receive
electronic information the same way they receive printed information:
from the Citizen Tribune and the News.

   "NNA is providing support to our members for two reasons.  One, we
know that unless local information providers begin to move quickly,
the perception that the electronic highway is only for the big guys
will continue to mushroom.  Two, many state governments are now poised
to figure out bow to handle the N11 requests they are already
receiving.  If we are going to maintain the nature of localism in this
country, states must build localism into their telecommunications
policy.  This is a piece of the puzzle."

   Griffin said the NNA board cautioned newspapers that while prompt
action is essential, newspapers must think strategically about their
electronic future.

   "Newspapers are offering everything from school lunch menus to
horoscopes and soap opera updates in their audiotex systems," Griffin
said.  "We believe there are new revenue sources through the N11
mechanism.  Obviously, before you apply for N11, you have to know what
you plan to sell.  Several vendors are now vying in the marketplace
for your business and that is a welcome new development.

   "And, not so obviously, you may have to persuade your public
utility commission that you are the best candidate for the number.
Newspapers are experienced information providers.  They should be in a
very strong position to make that case.  But it won't be made for
them.  Each publisher has to develop a plan and take these first
important steps into the electronic future."

   Fishman emphasized two things:

   "First, this isn't for everybody.  You've got to determine that
you're going to get into the audiotex business.  Newspapers are
offering everything from business news and sports to horoscopes and
summaries of soap operas over the phone and hoping to make money at
it, but don't expect to get rich overnight.

   "Second, when you make that application to the PUC, you'd better be
prepared to explain, in detail, why your newspaper is the best
available source to have that N11 number, and how you plan to benefit
the public by the use you make of it."

   Note: Copies of the following N11 code application materials are
available through the National Newspaper Association office:

   -- N11 code application instruction sheet
   -- NNA Model N11 Request Letter
   -- NNA Model N11 Petition.  Please call 703-907-7900 for more
      information.

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

Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 06:53:51 -0800
From: Earl R. Hall <[e-mail]>
Subject: PC Pursuit vs America Online


Recent changes at America Online may be behind SprintNet's reported
'reexamination' of PC Pursuit.  America Online is one of the "Big
Three" of Online Information Providers (is that the right term?), the
other two being Compuserve and Prodigy.  America Online recently
announced that it had exceeded 450,000 subscribers.

Unlike Compuserve and Prodigy, America Online does not run its own
private data network.  It instead relies on SprintNet and BT Tymnet to
provide dial-in connections for subscribers.  Connections were
originally limited to 2400bps, but they have now announced the
availability of 9600bps dial-in connections (so far, via SprintNet
only) at no additional charge.  Coincidently, SprintNet is expanding
its dialin network: a few months ago it added 9600 service to 53 new
locations.

I wonder if the America Online traffic negates the justification
behind the forming of the PC Pursuit program.  With this non-Primetime
traffic their network no longer sits idle at night, waiting for the
start of the next business day.  In fact, SprintNet may now consider
PC Pursuit traffic a hindrance in meeting any contractual Level-of-
Service agreement they may have with America Online.


Earl Hall | [phone] (work) | via Peacenet: [e-mail]
Skokie IL | [phone] (home) | CIS: 72746,3244 | AoL: Erhall

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

Date: 12 Dec 93 18:41 -0600
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Managing UUCP and Usenet" by O'Reilly/Todino


BKMANUCP.RVW  931104

O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.
103 Morris Street, Suite A
Sebastopol, CA   95472
800-998-9938   707-829-0515
fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
"Managing uucp and Usenet", O'Reilly/Todino, 1992

Once again an excellent job by the nutshell folks.  Intended for
system administrators who need to set up and maintain UUCP connections
or access Usenet, the book realizes that in the UNIX world many
sysadmins are just plain folks.  The necessary technical details are
here, but presented in a logical and non-threatening manner.

Not limiting themselves to the UNIX software, the authors provide
hardware guidance as well, particularly to those with Intel boxes.
Chapters two and three deal not only with the basic operations and
configuration of UUCP, but also with cabling, ports and modems.  The
material gives enough detail but does not go on to flaunt knowledge of
unnecessary trivia.  Further chapters give information on testing and
troubleshooting, security and management.  The material provides a
functional overview, but assumes a reasonably computer-literate reader
with a small system.  Those completely unfamiliar with data communica-
tions may want to get some assistance from experienced friends; those
with large systems and very active connections may wish for more
suggestions on security, for example, such as may be provided by
"Practical UNIX Security" (BKPRUNSC.RVW).

Chapters seven to ten deal specifically with Usenet and news, assuming
that you have UUCP running properly.  Again, it is a practical and
realistic guide, starting with the selection of a Usenet feed site.

Seven appendices are included covering the working files, modems and
modem setup strings, more details on cabling and RS-232, useful
programs and scripts, UUCP implementation for MS-DOS, Macintosh (and
even VMS), frequently asked questions about Internet mail and Usenet
news, and the inner workings of the UUCP G protocol.

If you are planning to install or use UUCP and Usenet, this book is
undoubtedly well worth the cost: probably many times over.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993   BKMANUCP.RVW  931104
Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of the TELECOM
Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists.

DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters
Editor and/or reviewer [e-mail], [e-mail], Rob Slade at 1:153/733
DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 12 Dec 93 16:47 WET
From: [e-mail] (David J. Leibold)
Subject: Bell Canada Invests in Jones Intercable


[from Bell News, Bell Ontario, 13 December 93; content is Bell Canada's]

Big Step Into U.S. Cable TV

BCE Telecom International (BCETI), a subsidiary of our parent
corporation BCE Inc., has signed a letter of intent with Jones
Intercable, Inc. of Englewood, Colorado.

Following the completion of a proposed acquisition by Jones
Intercable, Inc.  of the assets of Jones Spacelink, Ltd., BCETI will
invest US $275 million for the purchase of approximately ten million
shares of class A common stock representing a 30 per cent equity
interest.

BCETI will also acquire for approximately US $55 million the option to
purchase eventual control of Jones Intercable. In addition, it has
committed to participate in future equity financings up to US $125
million which will increase the original investment to US $400 million
as Jones Intercable continues to grow through acquisitions.

"This investment provides BCETI with a solid entry into the world's
most dynamic telecommunications market and is a major step in BCE's
global strategy," said Derek Burney, BCETI's chairman, president and
chief executive officer.

"The complementary strengths of BCE and Jones Intercable will enable
us and our shareholders to take advantage of the rapidly converging
cable, communications and entertainment markets in the United States."

Jones Intercable ranks among the top ten cable television operators in
the United States, serving 1.3 million basic subscribers in 55 cable
systems. Its major markets include Illinois, Florida, California and
the Washington D.C.  area.

In addition to its businesses in the United States, the company has
interests in cable and telecommunications operations in the United
Kingdom and potential cable operations in Spain.

BCETI will also invest in other assets of Jones International,
including Jones Lightwave, a competitive access telecommunications
service provider and Jones Education Networks, which operates the only
distance education network on basic cable television that offers
academic degree programs.

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 04:19:09 GMT
From: Kentucky Resources Council <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phone Line Teaming


Hi,

I want to use a standard telco line to connect to my local schools --
they will soon have local internet connections (a big deal in the
boonies!).  What I really want is a means to team a second phone
numner onto the standard number. The second number needs a different
ring cadence so I can discriminate between the two numbers -- now
comes the fun part: I want to enable the second number from 4:30 pm to
7:30; that way we can publish the second number and not endure data
calls during the school day.  Anyone who can help me enable such a
system would be a minor hero in my book -- thanks for reading this.


[e-mail] wh


[Moderator's Note: Okay, here is what you do. Get one of the devices
similar to those sold at Radio Shack which uses the ringing cadence
to decide whether to send an incoming call to a regular telephone or
to a modem. Your incoming phone line plugs into this, and from the
two outgoing connections on the back you plug your regular telephone
in one and the modem in the other.  The phone itself will only ring
when the appropriate ringing cadence triggers the device to send the
call in that direction. You'll miss part of the first ring because the
device will absorb it in the process of deciding what to do with the
newly arrived call. But once it has decided, and flipped its little
gate inside one direction or the other, then your associated phone
will ring. You answer it as always.

If the cadence indicates the call is on the 'modem line' then the
device will flip its gate in the other direction and send the ringing
current to the modem instead.  But of course you will have the modem
turned off so the calls to that side of the device will just ring open
 -- never get an answer.  When school is out for the day (is that the
selection of your time of 4:30 ?) then someone has the duty of turning
the modem on before they leave. Perhaps you will instead prefer to use
a timer for the electric supply which feeds the modem and at 4:30 the
electric current feeding the modem will kick in allowing the modem to
answer calls. At 7:30 the timer will shut the current off and the
modem will no longer answer the line. You might want to actually set
the timer for 8:00 PM but *publish* 7:30 as the cutoff time; that way
the modem won't power down right in the middle of someone's call which
started at 7:25 and (would have) ended at 7:31. If the caller is on
the line as much as 30 minutes after the published cutoff time then it
is really their problem. But since reasonable people's watches may
disagree by a couple minutes, you'll want to allow some latitude at
7:30 for the person on line who is trying to wind down his session in
good faith, etc. One problem with this solution is that although you
won't be plagued by hearing the distinctive ringing line ringing all
day long, you may have times when someone is unbeknownst to you
ringing that line (you won't hear it of course) and you decide to make
an outgoing call. As soon as you pick up your phone, naturally you
will trigger an offhook condition for their modem. They'll be sitting
there dead and you'll be on your end waiting for a dialtone which
never comes. That only really matters if you expect the voice traffic
to be heavy increasing the likelyhood that you'll want to make a lot
of outgoing calls and be doing so just after a modem call arrived from
the other direction.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #815
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29995;
          14 Dec 93 3:51 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17068
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:43:29 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08152
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:43:05 -0600
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:43:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #817

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 14 Dec 93 00:43:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 817

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    NYNEX/BAMS Codes, More (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Bravo, Bravo +, etc. Pager Options and Programming? (Mike Gordon)
    Radio Shack 900 Mhz Cordless Phone (Greg Abbott)
    Big Switch Interfaces? (Christopher Nielsen)
    Acoustic Coupler For PCMCIA Modem Wanted (Phydeaux)
    Problems With 911 (Ed Mitchell)
    Some Surveyers Want Exemption From Autodialer Tariffs (David Leibold)
    Mind Games: A New Love Story (Dror Lubin via Mark Brader)
    Layoffs at NYNEX? (Reuters via Sid Shniad)
    Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs (David Appell)
    Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs (Eric Florack)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 13-DEC-1993 14:50:37.92
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: NYNEX/BAMS Codes, More


I recently gave in and got service with NYNEX/NY. I've been holding
out because each time that I've had opportunity to call their customer
service in the past, they have responded so incompetantly that I
figured that their system/service could not be much better.

However, since the summer, NYNNEX/NY finally added Follow Me Roaming
(four years after every other major city got it), and more
significantly, Mobilreach, NYNEX Mobile's automatic call delivery
network which runs from Maine to Virginia. This includes SIDs: 00022
(NYC Metro), 00484 (Star Cell/southern Maine), 00028 (Boston
Metro/RI), 00088 (CT), 00404 (Orange County, NY), 00486 (Poughkeepsie
Area), 00078 (Albany), 00???  (forgot the SID for Pittsfield, MA),
00008 (Southern Jersey, Eastern PA, Delaware), 00018 (Baltimore and
DC).

I think there may be more past Albany, in other NYNEX properties, I'm
not sure. (Note that SID 01516, near Kingston, NY, halfway between
Poughkeepsie and Albany is NOT on the system, nor do they have FMR.
It's some hick system which is only operated by NYNEX, and is an
annoying hole in their NY <-> Albany coverage.) I think that NYNEX
recently purchased the southern VT and NH properties from US Cellular,
so maybe those will be added to the Mobilreach network as well. With
such an extensive system, and with no daily surcharge for incoming
calls, I decided it was time to try to them. (The "A" side still does
not have a similar auto call delivery network which is as extensive,
lacking any connectivity between New England or NY and DC/Baltimore,
and nothing past Boston, so you lose Maine as well. There is a link
between DC/Baltimore and Philly/DE on the A side, but it doesn't go as
far northward or westward as does the B side. Vanguard and SWBell on
the "A" side are supposed to get on the NACN "soon", but that still
means that immediately north of NY (north of I-84) there is no means
for auto-call delivery on the "A" side for the forseeable future.)

Anyhow, the system works quite well -- I am autonomously registered as
I enter a new system, and calls are routed there automatically. The
"please hold on" message is annoying -- I'd prefer that the phone just
rang. The system needs to place the call over an IXC, so the NYC
system has to grab a line and dial out to the visited system, which
takes time, and hence the "hold on" message. (Note that but for the
DOJ's requirements, this would probably be unecessary :( ).

In most of the systems, my call-forwarding features work. I can
activate *71/2 and *73 to clear in all of BAMS, all of NYNEX (NY, MA,
and RI), and Star Cell of Maine. They will not work in CT, simply
because SNET refuses to allow them for some reason. I'll be calling
them about that on Monday, and would encourage others who roam to CT
to call SNET at 800-922-5469 and bypass the front-end customer
service(?) automatons and directly ask to speak to the VP of Network
Operations or something to find out why they don't allow call
forwarding features to be activated/deactivated in CT, when all the
other systems with the same AT&T switches allow it -- it's NOT a
technical reason. (BTW, SNET auto-call delivery also goes to Maine,
and your forwarding features from SNET will work all over New England,
but not NY. SNET customers who roam in NYNEX/NY State properties may
also want to inquire as to why SNET has chosen not to allow them to
use their forwarding features from NY, whereas in Mass and Maine it is
apparently OK.)

One neat feature about forwarding on an AT&T Autoplex is that it is
similar to forwarding on a landline -- if you receive a call while you
have immediate forwarding (*72) set on, your cellular phone will ring
once to let you know that a call was forwarded. This will work in
NYNEX/NY (home system), and throughout BAMS as well. It won't work in
NYNEX/Boston or Star Cell/Maine.  Also, since calls are not being
delivered to you in a visited market when you have forwarding on, it
rings once IMMEDIATELY, which goes to show you how fast call delivery
CAN be if it were not for these IXCs (MCI et. al.)  screaming to the
DOJ about "all that lost revenue from inter-lata, non-waiver cellular
traffic".

Call-Waiting also has a very nice implementation on the Autpoplex - if
you are on a call, and a second comes in, you get the standard two
call-waiting beeps, and then about 20 seconds later, a third one. The
calling party hears a speacial ring (a ring with a beep attached to
the end) to let him or her know that the cellular customer is on a
call. If the calling party hangs up before the cellular customer
answers, the cellular customer gets a stutter dial tone to indicate
that the caller has terminated the call. Call-waiting for NYNEX/NYC
customers works in all of BAMS, I think all of the NY properties, but
not in SNET or the rest of New England. (Its seems as if NY and BAMS
are in one "regime" and New England is in another -- is this in any
way correct?)

Voice-mail works nicely too -- if you are in your home system and have
received a message while you were away from the phone, when you place
or receive a call, you will hear an initial stutter dial tone to
idicate that a message has been deposited in voicemail. This won't
work when you roam in SNET or the rest of New England; it may work in
BAMS and other NYNEX sites, but I haven't tried yet.

Since the DOJ prohibits messages from going back to voicemail from a
visited market unless it goes through an IXC (which most switches
can't seem to handle, I dunno why), if you are roaming and get a call,
and don't answer it, it will NOT go to voicemail. (The "A" side is
similar). I'm not sure how advanced IS-41 Rev (whatever revision will
handle this) is, but it's not here yet, and the US cellular industry
is wasting a good deal of time and effort to deal with a problem which
wouldn't even exist were it not for, in my mind, unecessarily onerous
DOJ requirements for cellular voice (+ messaging?) inter-lata
trafficking. (Hey, anyone have the address for Al Gore's Efficiency in
Government or Competitiveness Committee or whatever it is called? ;) )

In any event, if you need to force your calls back to voicemail (or
designated No Answer Transfer location) while you are roaming, hit
*780. This turns call delivery of and forces calls to stay in your
home system. Hitting *78 will turn call delivery on an have calls come
to the visited market. (Similar to the *35/*350 codes on the "A" side
NACN, or the *28/*29 codes for some Motorolas or ex-Motorola systems
like GTE/SF.)

I noticed that these codes were not working from any BAMS properties,
although BAMS does indeed uses these for roamers from other PA B
systems. (They use *18/*19 -- the FMR codes -- for auto call delivery
for their customers -- foolishly I think. Its too confusing to know if
you are using FMR or auto call delivery, although GTE FMR may be
pushing for this. Don't be fooled, FMR is NO substitute to auto call
delivery!). I called NYNEX/NY, and their inept customer service first
had no idea what *78 was, and then told me it didn't work outside of
NYC (????!!?!), and then one totally self-assured rep told me "It
won't work south of NYC due to DOJ regulations" (really?! Which
ones?!), and finally I called the corporate headquarters (914-365-7200)
and got them to check it out for me.

Seems it IS supposed to work, but BAMS never put *78/*780 in their
translation table for NYNEX roamers! It is supposed to be set up in
Philly (00008) this weekend, and DC/Baltimore (00018) early next week.
What I want to know if why after six + months of auto call delivery
and four + months of having the *78 feature that NO ONE at NYNEX even
noticed this?! Don't they actually send people -- even just ONCE -- to
the markets where these services are offered to try things out to see
if they work? What sort of quality assurance do they have, anyhow?

In general, a very nice network (once the *78/*780 codes are set up in
BAMS),if you can stand the awful NYNEX customer service reps. Unfortun-
ately, it is more the rule than the exception that although technically
impressive, most inter-system call delivery regimes are not very well
supported, by both lower-level technicians and customer service, which
tends to discourage their use.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Gordon)
Subject: Bravo, Bravo +, etc. Pager Options and Programming
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 01:19:11 GMT


   Four years ago, I was on a Bravo, now I see that the paging companies
are pushing a variety of numeric pagers, including the Bravo + (or
2?), Bravo Express, the Freespirit (rounded looking moto pager) and
those CHEAP NEC models.  I'd like to stay with a Motorola, (I hear
nothing but problems about the NEC) but which one?

   I like the time-stamp feature of the Bravo + and Express, and
vibration mode is a must, as I'm often in noisy environments.  What
other features do these newer units have, and how useful are they?
What options can the user set, and what ones can be set by the dealer?
Since I'm sure most dealers don't want to go through the trouble of
programming options, I'm sure they won't tell me about all of them.

   Also, has anyone figured out how to program a Bravo through the 3
contacts near the battery?  (Without having to pay the paging company
big $ to do it?) A buddy of mine wants to change the his beep sound
(no, not his CAP code), and can't justify the $25 his paging company
wants just to plug it in and hit a few keys on their computer.  He has
a PC, and can make a cable / interface if it isn't too overly
complicated.  Gee, could it just be a three wire serial connection?

   On a more serious note, last time I was on a pager, my call-in
number used to be occupied by a "dealer". (And I don't mean a used car
dealer.)  As I worked third shift and often slept during the day, (and
will be again, oh joy of joys) I didn't enjoy the calls at noon from
his old customers.  Does anyone have any little hints on how to avoid
this?  Please don't suggest having my boss call me at home during my
sleeping hours, because that would mean I'd have to plug my phone in
and get woke up by tele-marketers.  (At least they don't call pagers!)

   By the way, the rep from the paging company could only suggest
turning off the pager while I slept.  Kind of defeats the purpose of
having a pager when you're on call around the clock, and missing a
call means losing a shift.

Thanks in advance for any help,


Mike Gordon  N9LOI  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 20:22:58 CST
From: Greg Abbott <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Radio Shack 900 Mhz Cordless


> [Moderator's Note: The Radio Shack 900 mhz phone seems to be a very
> good quality instrument. If anyone has tried it out or purchased one,
> I would appreciate a review of it here.   PAT]

Pat:

I had the chance to play with one at a nearby Radio Shack about two
weeks ago.  After being asked if I would like to try out their new
cordless I picked the unit up and placed a call.  I then, much to the
manager's dismay, walked out of the store with the handset and walked
down the sidewalk.  This Radio Shack is located in a strip mall
constructed of steel and concrete.  I had no problems with the unit
all the way down to the grocery store (about 400' away through all the
concrete and steel).  I was amazed.  I was also able to place calls
all the way out into the parking lot (well over 2,000 feet).  In
short, I found the unit very well built and certainly capable of
living up to all of the statements made about it in the catalog.  I
gave a good report to the manager who was very pleased.  BTW, the
manager is a friend of mine, so don't think I make it a practice to
pick up property and walk out of the store with it!


The comments expressed here are my opinion.  They in no way reflect an
opinion or endorsement by/of my employer.

GREG ABBOTT        INTERNET: [e-mail]
                 COMPUSERVE: 76046,3107
                      VOICE: 217/333-4348
METCAD                  FAX:   [phone]
1905 E. MAIN ST.      PAGER: 800/222-6651
URBANA, IL  61801     PIN # 9541

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

From: [e-mail] (Christopher Nielsen)
Subject: Big Switch Interfaces?
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 21:05:53 GMT


We are looking for a way to interface a PC based voicemail type system
to many types of switches out there. It seems difficult because each
switch has different programming, different T1 specs, etc, etc I'm
sure you've all heard it before ...

It would be great if there some black box that could be used to
interface to 'switch X', and on the other end have a standardized T1
interface that would allow transfers, accepting calls, and perhaps
some other basic functionallity.

Does anyone out there know of the likelyhood of such a black box?

Failing that, does anyone know of (or is) a consultant that is very
good at interfacing to many of the switches out there?

Thanks for any help!


Christopher Nielsen

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 15:35:03 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Acoustic Coupler For PCMCIA Modem Wanted


I'm trying to find an acoustic coupler adapter for a PCMCIA modem
(Intel PCMCIA Faxmodem).  Any solution short of taking apart a
telephone jack each place I go help would be appreciated.


reb

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

From: Ed Mitchell <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 13:40:24 PST
Subject: Problems With 911


In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 811, Charles Hoequist pointed out
the dangers of errors in the telephone company address database when
that database is used for 911 dispatch operations.  911 dispatchers
have told me that they recommend persons who are concerned about this
to telephone 911 during off hours and ask that the dispatcher verify
the address shown on the screen.  What constitutes "off hours" varies
by location so you shouldt first look in the phone book and call the
emergency agency's regular business number and ask. I was told that a
more common problem than having a completely incorrect address is to
have corner lots (at the corner of two streets) reported as facing the
street other than that used for the postal address, eg. 4204 Arastradero
when 4204 Suzanne was intended.

By the way, the dispatchers I spoke with said they usually attempt to
verbally confirm your address while on the phone.


Ed Mitchell
"These opinion are my own and do not reflect the views of Microsoft Corp."

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 23:52:43 -0500
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Some Surveyers Want Exemption From Autodialer Tariffs


[from Bell News, Bell Ontario, 13 Dec 93; content is Bell Canada's]

Market/survey researchers to be exempt from ADADs tariff

Bell has listened to the market/survey research industry and has
informed the CRTC that certain market/survey researchers should be
exempted from our original ADADs (Automatic Dialing and Announcing
Devices) tariff filing.

Of primary concern to markey/survey researchers was the proposed
restrictions related to the hours of calling and random or sequential
dialing.

Representatives of Bell and the market/survey research industry agreed
that placing strict limits on the hours during which they may call
people could potentially affect the quality and accuracy of their
research (e.g., certain types of people would not be available for
interviews during the proposed hours of calling).

The industry recognizes that calling people at unreasonable times
could hinder researchers' abilities to gain the co-operation of the
people they wish to interview. Although most interviews would be
conducted within the hours proposed, in some cases calls could be
placed outside of the proposed hours.

Under Bell's original proposed tariffs, this could have resulted in
the termination of the researcher's telephone service, should a
customer complain to Bell (as per the complaint procedure proposed in
the company's August 6, 1993 filing).

The ability to randomly select telephone numbers is integral to the
market/survey research industry. Industry representatives and Bell
reps agreed that prohibiting the use of random dialing would hinder
their ability to obtain research results that are representative of
the general population.

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 01:29:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Mind Games: A New Love Story


Moderator's Note: Forwarded to the Digest by Mark Brader from the
rec.puzzles group on Usenet where he found it.  Look it over and
think about it; I'll print the answer here in a day or two.   PAT]


  From: [e-mail] (Dror Lubin)
  Subject: A New Love Story
  Reply-To: [e-mail]
  Organization: Chalmers University of Technology
  Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 08:33:39 GMT

A New Love Story

Once upon a time, in a far away land, there was a beautiful girl, who
lived in a big big castle, just like in all the other stories that
begin like this. Alas, the girl had a wicked mother who kept her
locked.  Where? In a red cell. The cell had a combination lock with
three knobs.  On one was written "red" on the other was written
"cell", and on the third, the biggest, was written "nlrrecs". Our poor
girl couldn't find out how on earth could she open this lock. As she
couldn't get out, she decided to make her living in. She was a great
cook, so she opened a road restaurant in her cell, or more properly: A
cell-diner. She put outside a big sign saying: "NIIDSACAL CELL DINER"
(niidsacal means "friendly" in her language). Of course, with such a
name, not many people stopped there, and even if they did, they
couldn't get in because of the lock, so business was rather slow.

One day, a young prince heard about this girl. Nowadays, most princes
are in the racing business, and so was he. Instead of a white horse,
he had a big racing car. People often asked him if he had a white
horse, and he would always say: "NO!, I have a racing car". Then they
would ask him what does his car look like, and he would say: "Nice ...
All RED!!". The registration plate was "ICDIINPNNS". He chose this
plate because these were the initials of his name and title: "Isidor
Charles Darwinski the 2nd, Noble Prince of Norway, Nashville and
Seattle".

Well, as ICDII heard the sad story of the girl in the red cell, he
jumped into his car, and raced towards the evil castle. He was so
furious, he did not see the huge oil truck coming towards him on the
wrong side of the road.  Boy, was that an ill-end-race!! ICDII became
even more ill when he got the bill: $5,172,790.20, you see, it was he
who drove on the wrong side, and without insurance too! After that,
ICDII wouldn't hear anymore of no princesses, so our little girl is
still locked away in her red cell, waiting for *YOU* to call her.

Do you know her phone number??

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

[Moderator's Note: Figure out the right phone number and send it to
me **with an explanation for how you figured it out**.  I'll print
the answer in a day or two after a few replies have arrived.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Layoffs at NYNEX?
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 10:43:28 PST


MASSIVE JOB CUTS COMING AT NYNEX?

Boston -- NYNEX Corp. has declined comment on a report that it will
cut 22,000 jobs over the next three years as part of a plan announced
earlier to cut costs 30%.

  The {Boston Herald} said an internal NYNEX memo showed the telephone
company plans to slash 28% of its 80,000-strong workforce by 1996
through layoffs, attrition and retirement.

  These would include some 7,100 jobs at it New England Telephone
subsidiary, the report said.  The memo called for 2,551 job cuts in
1994, it added.

  The company, which also owns New York Telephone, has already cut one
sixth of its workforce in recent years to compete with rivals that are
merging telephone, cable television and computers.

  "I can't confirm the numbers of workforce layoffs," said NYNEX
spokesman Pete Goodale.  He noted that the Herald report was "based on
a single document and out of context."

  In September, NYNEX announced it would eliminate 1,200 jobs by June
and several thousand more in the next few years.  Goodale said NYNEX's
plans to trim operations had already been made plain.  "But there are
a variety of ways of achieving this.  How it plays in terms of
workforce reductions is not yet determined."

  NYNEX shares closed up 1/8 on the New York Stock Exchange after the
news was released.


  -- Reuter


Sid Shniad

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 12:03 EST
From: David Appell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs


In Telecom Digest V13 #803 [e-mail] wrote:

> Regardsless of any other factor, companies whose primary goal is to
> make money for it`s investors, will always and invariably move to
> operate at a lower cost and a higher profit margin.

   Perhaps this is one of the things they're upset about: the unspoken
assumption that *investor's* rights take precedence over *worker's*
rights.  Investment capital is only one of the requirements for a
successful business -- labor capital is important, too.  Yet, in the
money-crazed, business-first environment of the 90s, those who have
money to invest in a company are invariably treated better than those
who merely give their blood, sweat and tears to it.  There are real
people underneath all those layoff numbers, whose belts are
undoubtably tightened much farther than your average stock holder,
institutional or individual.  Both groups are necessary for a
successful business, and a little perspective, even in this day and
age, can't hurt.


David Appell    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: That's why I like running Sid's commentaries and
reports from time to time; they lend a little balance, a view of the
other side of the coin. But Eric Florack has another rebuttal, so his
article next will close this issue and this thread.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 09:55:09 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs


Eric originally responded:

>> What the article fails to point out is that the unions themselves are
>> responsible for pricing themselves and the workers they claim to
>> represent, out of the market.

Sid replied:

> Eric doesn't adduce any evidence to substantiate this claim.  In fact,
> real, inflation-adjusted wages -- in the unionized telephone industry
> and other sectors -- have been declining for more than ten years. But
> let's not let facts get in the way of a good diatribe.  Let's just use
> this baseless comment as the launch pad for further baseless
> accusations.

Declining in relationship to what, Sid, themselves? Non-union wages?
Either one is a strong suggestion of just how out of line union wages
have been ... and does /nothing/ to dispute my statment. In fact, it
backs it. But let's not let facts get in the way of a good pro-union
diatribe.  Let's just use this baseless comment as the launch pad for
further baseless pro-union spout.

Asks Sid,

> What evidence is there that regulation kills jobs?

Carter. Johnson. Most recently, Clinton, and the reaction of industry
to her agendae. The biggest example is the biggest regulator in the
world; the former Soviet Empire.  Just to name a few examples. Note
that each of these was a friend of big labor.  Then place in contrast,
the deregulation attitude /after/ each of these administrations, and
the well-documented spurt in job growth, after dereg, in each and
every case. (See? I`ve even given you something to watch for, in the
future. Remember, you heard it here first, gang! :->)

Can you deny, for example, the number of newly created jobs that came
along when the federal government allowed competition, by removing the
regulation that established the monopoly of AT&T?

> But if these are confiscatory, as you imply, how is it
> that companies like MCI are finding ways to invest in overseas
> expansion, takeovers, etc.?

I don`t suppose it`s occurred to you that such investment goes to the
places it`s most likely to earn a good ROI. Obviously, they don`t
consider the best investment to be in the CWA controlled telecom
market that we have here in the US.

> But if these are confiscatory, as you imply, how is it that
> companies like MCI are finding ways to invest in overseas expansion,
> takeovers, etc.?

You are attempting to have it both ways.  You complain that they`re
making too much money on vid services, and then you wonder where it
comes from, as if they were making it all from their `cash cow`.
Which is it?

> However, when the normal workings of said Free Market generate
> staggering loss of jobs -- for example, a recent {Wall Street Journal}
> article reported that the Fortune 500 employed 16.2 million people in
> 1990, versus 11.8 million in 1993 -- then this is treated as just a
> natural unfolding of the workings of the world.

What`s your solution, then? Back to the Xbar system, or before, so
that all the operators will have their jobs back? Should we go even
farther ... back to cord boards? What you`re dealing with is not free
market forces alone, but the free market reacting to technology.
You`d best understand, with the rest of us, that making money for the
owners (nee:investors) is the number one goal of any company. Jobs are
nothing more than a secondary function of business, albeit a happy
one, and telcos are certainly no exception.

And by the way, your F-500 comment is quite typical of someone
attempting to prove a point with only half the statistics. There are
lies, damn lies, and statistics, it is said. What your comment /does
not/ indicate is how many jobs were created /outside/ of the F-500 ...
which, in fact is where most jobs in this country are created, and a
higher percentage of non-union jobs, at that.  Being at work, I don`t
have the figures to hand, but look it up. You will find that the
number of jobs created by companies other than the 500 far outstripped
the numbers of jobs lost by the 500 in the same period.

A smaller number of people working under the F-500 umbrella, therefore,
is an indication that free markets are working for the benefit of all,
not that the system is failing.

In short, tell the whole story.  On the other hand, let's not let
facts get in the way of a good pro-union diatribe.  Let's just use
this comment as the launch pad for further baseless pro-union spout.

My regards to Pat, who says:

> [Moderator's Note: Part of -- maybe the majority of -- the 'rabid
> responses seen here come from the Dungheap Net (Usenet).

I`m not on Usenet, so far as I know, FYI.

> As you know Sid, I sent you a separate note a few minutes ago noting
> that most of the readers here like to see two, or three or four sides
> to every story.

I certainly don`t object to such material being placed in here. Not
only is that your call, Pat, but I happen to agree with you, in it. I
simply reserve the right to respond to things when they come through
 ... one you apparently support, having echoed it out in the Digest.

As to Sid`s comment about his post being taken as off subject; no, I
don`t think it is.This is an issue that affects, on a first level, the
future of the telecommunications industry ... the other implications
for other industry and government policy towards labor not
withstanding. In fact, I would suggest it`s those parallels to the
rest of industry that make this an important topic.

All this having been said, allow me to place a little perspective on
all of this; my company (see my address) has just recently announced a
ten thousand or so employee cutback, on a world-wide basis.


/E

Everyone`s entitled to my opinion, but Xerox doesn`t pay me for it....


[Moderator's Note: And I bet you hope you are not one of the 'ten
thousand or so' they choose to eliminate. Hey Sid, better get some
union membership sign-up cards over to Xerox right away!  :)   And
Eric, I never claimed YOU were part of Usenet, although I guess my
message came out sounding that way. Anyway, Usenet is now doing their
own thing with telecom news in an unmoderated forum, as I'm sure will
become obvious before long, even to the untrained eye!  :)    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #817
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa03722;
          14 Dec 93 15:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27831
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 11:42:37 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17249
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 11:42:12 -0600
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 11:42:12 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #818

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 14 Dec 93 11:42:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 818

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Gold Card: New Calling Card For Business Travelers (TELECOM Moderator)
    Businesses Should Beware of Phone Fraud During Holiday Season (Nigel Allen)
    International Internet Association (Alfredo E. Cotroneo)
    New: RADIO-L - Digital Audio Broadcasting - DAB (Ronald Lee Stone)
    X.32 Dial-up Access (Stewart Fist)
    Miscellaneous Questions Before Leaving For China (John T. Ellis)
    Area Codes *and* Prefixes (Doug Krause)
    Caller ID Project in Electronics Now (Feb. 94) (David Leibold)
    Caller ID Terms Can be Confusing (Stewart Fist)
    Cox Cable to Compete With US West (Advertising Age via [e-mail])
    Scaling (Was Re: TDMA vs. CDMA = Betamax vs. VHS?) (Paul Robinson)
    Shared 800 Telephone Numbers (Dave Bonney)
    Wanted: RJ Testing Tools (David Elliott)
    Frequency Tuning Speed (Jae-Soo Kim)
    Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? (Linc Madison)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively
to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email,
in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service
systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited,
complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups.
Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks.

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

From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Calling Card For Business Travelers
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 01:53:00 CST


You who have been around here awhile have heard me mention the Orange
Calling Card from Orange Communications; a telephone calling card with
no surcharge at any time for its use, and rates of 25 cents per minute
with a thirty second minimum billing period. It costs $12 to sign up
and it works like any other calling card (dial an 800 number; get the
tone; enter your card number, the number you are calling, and your
PIN) except for the lack of any surcharge at all.

Now I am offering one called the GOLD CARD. For starters, the rates
are a little different, however there are some additional features
available on it you should find useful.

Rates: 28 cents per minute during the day;
       25 cents per minute evenings and nights;

   As with the Orange Card, *no surcharge at any time*.

So you are probably asking why you should spend 28 cents per minute
during the day on calls when Orange is only 25 cents per minute. Here
is why:

   No fee to sign up. If you qualify, you get it free of charge.
   Qualifying means having reasonably good credit and being a
   regular business traveler;

   You choose your own ten digit authorization code and four
   digit PIN;

   Voicemail is included -- 25 cents per message left in your box;

   Fax mailbx is included -- 30 cents per faxed page left in your box;

   Fraud protection in the form of a daily usage limit which you
   set and you can adjust as required;

   Originate calls anywhere in the USA with domestic *and international*
   terminations. (Orange is still just domestic USA terminations);

   Use # for redial or re-origination of calls;

   Speed dial capability for your frequently called numbers;

   Broadcast voicemail and broadcast fax mail capabilities;

   International origination of calls beginning around the middle
   of 1994. Orange Card has never been useful to readers of the
   Digest outside the USA, but beginning sometime next year the
   GOLD CARD will allow people in other countries to participate;

   Voice prompts make the system easy to use.

Here are some examples:

To make a regular GOLD CARD call:

    Dial 1-800-xxx-xxxx and listen for the greeting;
    Enter your self-defined authorization code and PIN;
    Listen for further instructions which will tell you
      to dial your call (with 011 if international) or
      press * for options.

To pick up voicemail, select option #2.

To pick up fax messages, select option #3 and enter the
      number where your faxes are to be delivered. The
      system will then call that number and deliver the fax(es).

To change your system daily limit, press * from within the
      options menu, and enter your six digit limit code, then
      act according to the prompts given.


To send voicemail messages and faxes using the GOLD CARD:

   Give your associates the 800 number, your ten digit
      authorization code and the special PIN 6245  (MAIL).
      They'll get switched into your voicemail box to
      leave messages at 25 cents each which you retrieve
      from wherever you are at your convenience.

   People also send faxes to you in much the same way. They
      call the 800 number, and certain prompts tell them
      to start the fax transmission once they have gotten
      to your mailbox.

So, if you think this is worth three cents more per minute on daytime
calls (but the same rate as Orange evening and nights along with the
no surcharge arrangement), then drop me a note at [e-mail]
and ask for the paperwork to be mailed out to you to get an account
started.

The GOLD CARD is a service of Corporate Telemanagement Group and is
intended for frequent business travelers. Please include your company
name when you contact me for the application, and the address where it
is to be mailed.

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

The same folks offer 1+ long distance service to businesses at the
rate of 18.4 cents per minute flat rate, and 800 service at the rate
of 18.4 cents per minute flat rate plus a $5 per month surcharge in
the case of 800 numbers. As my existing 800 number customers know,
Hogan was bought out by Corporate Telemanagement Group and your
existing 800 numbers are being serviced by CTG under the terms of the
contract you had with Hogan.

Regards the 1+ dialing noted above, obviously I can only recommend
this to business users with a heavy volume of daytime calls. 18.4
cents per minute is never a bargain at night, and if your long
distance calling is mostly at night from home, don't apply for this.
For many small businesses however, the 18.4 daytime rate might be a
good deal.

Again, for details or to sign up:  [e-mail].

Patrick Townson

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

Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 09:23 WET
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Businesses Should Beware of Phone Fraud During Holiday Season
Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-3783  Voice: 416-363-8676


Here is a press release from AT&T.

AT&T Warns Businesses Against Holiday Hackers and Toll Thieves

David Bikle
201-644-7052 (office)
201-871-0104 (home)

FOR RELEASE WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1993

     BASKING RIDGE, N.J.-- AT&T urges businesses to guard against
increased risk of toll-fraud attempts by hackers, or toll-call
thieves, during the upcoming holiday season.

     Last year nationwide toll-fraud attempts increased by about 50
per cent during the Christmas week.  Hackers "break into" PBX's or
voice-mail systems, obtain passwords or access to outside lines, and
then sell or use the information to make illegal international phone
calls.

     Toll fraud cost American businesses more than $2 billion in l993.

     "Hackers count on being able to steal calls undetected while
businesses are closed during a long holiday weekend," says Larry Watt,
director of AT&T's Toll Fraud Prevention center.  "'Tis the season to
be wary."

     AT&T suggests several steps businesses can take to protect
against phone fraud:

   o Program PBX's to block outgoing calls to foreign
     countries during the hours the business is closed. Also
     consider blocking remote access into PBX and voice-mail
     systems both after hours and throughout the holiday
     weekends.

   o Deactivate or restrict call transfer out of voice mail
     and auto-attendant systems.

   o Institute a regular schedule for changing access codes
     and passwords, and always delete unused codes.

   o Enroll in a fraud-prevention program that will call the
     customer whenever suspicious calling patterns are
     detected--even in the evening and on weekends--so the
     long-distance carrier can quickly block further illegal
     outgoing calls.

     AT&T monitors virtually all of its business customers' calls 24
hours a day, and its NetPROTECT(SM) Services include notification of
fraud attempts even at night and on weekends.

     For example, with NetPROTECT Plus Service a business can
designate three people and their reach numbers after work hours, so
that AT&T can notify the representative and work with him or her to
stop the fraud quickly.

     AT&T is the industry leader in helping companies to prevent toll
fraud.  Businesses that want more information on preventative measures
can request AT&T's free booklet, "Tips on Safeguarding Your Company's
Telecom Network," by calling 1-800-NET-SAFE.

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

Date: 14 Dec 93 02:02:48 EST
From: Alfredo E. Cotroneo <[e-mail]>
Subject: International Internet Association


This is warning for possible fraud involving "free" Internet access
offered to European users by IIA (International Internet Association).

Potential users of Internet and e-mail services in Europe have been
contacted by an alleged non profit organization denominated
"International Internet Associaton (IIA)" based in Washington, DC,
USA, promoting free access to Internet sponsored with funds provided
by the US Administration.  A few days later expressing interest in
IIA's "free" service, companies in Europe were told by IIA that
"International Discount Telecommunication Corp. (IDT)" would contact
them for details on how to connect to the "free" Internet service.

IDT, based in Hackensack, NJ, is a Telecommunication (phone) services
provider, which basically provide a US dial-tone service to customers
outside the USA, giving them access to the US phone networks at
tariffs slighlty higher that the ones normally offered by AT&T, but
cheaper than the ones offered by most European national PTTs. The
invitation to sign a contract with IDT to get access to IIA "free
Internet" must be carefully evaluated by potential users of Internet
in Europe, because even at the discounted phone rates offered by IDT,
Internet access will be quite expensive. There are -- depending on the
particular usage of Internet by the individual companies in Europe --
much cheaper alternatives to be considered.

To the profane, all this is a clear indication that everyone must be
very careful when a service is offered for free. Especially when free
services are offered by a non-profit organization in the US which seem
to have very close ties with a commercial company. Furthermore: IDT
does not indicate clearly the phone tariffs in their contract form,
they ask for a credit card number to activate the service, and they
only indicate that the "users will be billed directly by the American
carriers (???WHO ARE THEY???) at their lowest rate", which one is not
shown. No access to Internet is being offered apparently by IIA
without signing a contract with IDT.

Unfortunately this warning will not reach Europeans in need of an
Internet access, since they would not probably be connected yet to
read this message.


Alfredo E. Cotroneo, PO BOX 10980, I-20110 Milano Italy
email: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 10:31:00 -0500
From: Ronald Lee Stone <[e-mail]>
Subject: New: RADIO-L - Digital Audio Broadcasting - DAB


RADIO-L on [e-mail]
        or [e-mail]

            Discussion of Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB)

The RADIO-L discussion list is a forum for addressing the issues
involved in the transition to a Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB)
standard in the United States and other countries.

Discussion regarding the relative technological merits of various DAB
proposals, as well as the social and economic implications of a
transition to DAB is welcome and encouraged on this list.  Digital
audio broadcasting offers improved sound quality, technical
superiority, and economic efficiency over current AM and FM analog
broadcasting.  The United States is scheduling tests of various DAB
proposals beginning summer 1994.

Anyone can join.  To join the list send a message to LISTSERV@UMINN1
on BITNET or [e-mail] on the Internet with the BODY
containing the command:

       SUBSCRIBE RADIO-L Yourfirstname Yourlastname

   Eg. sub radio-l Marchese G. Marconi

   Owner:  Ronald L. Stone  [e-mail]
           graduate student  :  Scientific & Technical Communication
           Department of Rhetoric  :  University of Minnesota, St. Paul
           [phone]

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

From: Stewart Fist <[e-mail]>
Subject: X.32 Dial-up Access
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:00:00 GMT


What has happened to X.32 as a dial-up form of access to X.25 packet
networks? A couple of years ago it was being hailed as the great break-
through that would allow POTS line and modem users to get two-way-
calling access to ISDN at reasonable rates.

 From memory, the two-way-calling system wasn't integrated into the
first release of the protocol, so it was then little more than a
synchronous form of the X.28 access for people without tie lines.  Was
two-way-calling ever introduced?

I'm interested in this because it occurs to me that the ideal
combination for small business and people working from home, will be
something like X.32 over ADSL or HDSL.  This seems to be the ideal way
to use a POTS line to get reasonable data rates into public-access
X.25, frame-relay and ATM networking services.

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

From: [e-mail] (John T Ellis)
Subject: Miscellaneous Questions Before Leaving For China
Date: 14 Dec 1993 02:31:08 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I will be moving to Beijing, China in late January to begin a two year
assignment training Chinese engineers on Motorola's cellular equipment
(infrastructure).  As I've been preparing to pack up and move out, I
compiled the following list of questions.  I would appreciate a word
or two from anyone who can shed some light.

Thanks much beforehand.  I certainly appreciate it.

(1) I am looking to buy a fully compatible PAL/NTSC video recorder.
When I say "fully compatible", I mean the following -

      : able to record NTSC
      : able to record PAL
      : able to play PAL
      : able to play NTSC

Can anyone offer suggestions on models, brands?  What experiences have
people had with these kind of systems - ie. poor tape recording
quality, poor playing of a tape from a particular signalling system?

Also, I was given the following name and address for a company in
New York that specializes in the above systems.  Has anyone dealt
with them before?

      Appliances Overseas
      276 Fifth Ave.
      Suite 407
      New York, NY 10001-4509
      212-545-8001 - tel
      212-545-8005 - fax

(2) What experience(s) do people have with Fax/Modem/Phone switches?
I have a catalog from DAMARK that has a TT System listed for $79.99.
Does this sound reasonable?  Is this a good buy?  If not, where should
I go?  What should I try to avoid?

(3) What problems can I expect when trying to interface American made
phone equipment into a Chinese phone jack?  I know that I will have to
worry about power, but I'm refering to connectors, line voltages etc.
The equipment I will be bringing in includes: computer modem, fax
machine, ATT cordless phone.

(4) ** This isn't really related to telecom, but I thought someone
might know. **

I would like to bring my tape deck, record player and microwave with
me.  I have been told that I may need to make adjustments to the belts
on the players and some other modifications to the microwave.  Can
anyone confirm this?  If so, what changes are required?  If I don't
make the changes, what problems will I incur?

Again, thanks much for all the assistance.


John T. Ellis 708-632-7857
Motorola Cellular   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Krause)
Subject: Area Codes *and* Prefixes
Organization: Lido 24 Hr. Pizza and Video
Date: 14 Dec 93 12:51:49 GMT


Is there a US-wide list of area codes and prefixes available? If not,
I would be willing to collect this information from people around the
country and post it monthly.


****  Douglas Krause   [e-mail]    One yuppie can ruin  ****
****  University of California, Irvine      your whole day.    ****


[Moderator's Note: Most of what you are seeking is in the Telecom
Archives already. Check out the 'areacodes' and 'country.codes' sub-
directories within the archives. Carl Moore is responsible for much
of the data in that area, along with others who help him. The archives
is accessible several ways: the two most common are anonymous ftp and
the email information service I operate. Use anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu
to connect, then 'cd telecom-archives' and go from there. If you need
a copy of the email information service help file (it is completely
an automated thing) then write me and ask for it.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 06:44 WET
From: [e-mail] (woody)
Subject: Caller ID Project in Electronics Now (Feb. 94)


The {Electronics Now} publication (formerly Radio-Electronics) has a
Caller ID project scheduled for its February 1994 edition, which
should be on newsstands in January. The do-it-yourself folks
interested in number display things might take notice.


David Leibold

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

Date: 08 Dec 93 17:37:49 EST
From: Stewart Fist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller ID Terms Can be Confusing


I'm trying to follow this CLI/ANI discussion in TELECOM Digest and in
other technical publications.  I guess you guys know what you're
talking about, but the welter of casually-used terms and acronyms have
left me rather confused.

I've culled out the following acronyms and terminology.  Would someone
care to explain the distinctions.

> Caller ID
> CID - Calling Identity Delivery
> ID calls - (presumably the same - or does this refer to a post-hoc
      call to the exchange to discover the ID of the last caller?)
> CLI - Call Line Identification
> CLID - (presumably the same)
> CND - Caller Number Display (probably the same)
> CNI - Call Number Identification
> CNID - (is this only between exchanges?)
> CPNI - Customer Private Network Information (is this generic?)
> ANI - (Is this primarily for inter-carrier billing purposes?)
> ADSI - Analog Display Service Interface (aren't all of these analog?)
> STR - Source Telephone Recognition (seems to be on ISDN only?)
> Ad-Hoc call trace (automatic delivery of CLI after, by dialling
          special number, presumably?)

Also, while you are about it, could someone clear up the following:

1. What is CLI called when it is carried over ISDN's D-channel?  Is this STR?
2. What is it called when it is carried in SS7 (CCS#7) packets?
3. How does Delux ID know the name of the caller?  Does it need to reference
some form of X.500 directory?
4. What's the distinction between "CLASS and LASS-based"?
5. What is meant (or implied) by "multi message format". What is single
message format CLI?


[Moderator's Note: Well, that's a big order; I suspect people are
going to be writing with several responses. This is a good time to
remind readers that one of the features of the Telecom Archives Email
Information Service is the GLOSSARY command: When you encounter a
term you are unfamiliar with, send email to the archives in the
usual prescribed format (see the help file) and as your command, you
enter GLOSSARY <term or abbreviation>. All the various glossary files
will be searched automatically and the appropriate text from each
glossary sent back to you in email. Try it and have some fun with
it. I guess a few thousand entries are available.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 05:33:23 EST
Subject: Cox Cable to Compete with US West


The following appeared in the Dec. 6, 1993 edition of {Advertising Age}:

COX CABLE TO COMPETE WITH US WEST IN INTERACTIVE TEST

Cox Cable Communications will test a variety of interactive services
on it's system in Omaha, Neb., starting next June. Cox will use
interactive technology provided by a consortium of ICTV, a Santa
Clara, Calif., interactive services company; IBM Corp., which is
providing digital servers; and New Century Communications, a data
management company. Among the services Cox will test are movies and
music videos on demand, a shopping mall, electronic classified ads and
a local dining guide, said David Serlin, exec VP of ICTV. The
interactive service will compete directly with a similar one planned
for Omaha by US West. The Cox test is the first market test by ICTV, a
four-year old company.

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

Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1993 12:12:08 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Scaling (Was Re: TDMA vs. CDMA = Betamax vs. VHS?)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Brendan Jones <[e-mail]>, writes:

> I don't deny CDMA looks to be a promising technology.  However, you
> can't necessarily scale the experience of a 50 user 5 base station
> system.  Some particular propagation or interference effects,
> negligible under low density use, may become far more important
> under higher density use.

I will concur with this.  There have been major technological
improvements and corrections in design errors of equipment used on the
Internet.  Some of the flaws in the design and implementation were
only discovered after they were put into "live use" on a running
network of hundreds of thousands of sites (then).  The equipment
worked fine under low usage conditions and laboratory tests.  When put
into service in the real world where a "baptism under fire" showed
they needed to be changed to meet the conditions that actual service
would cause.

This is not to fault the designers of those systems; there was no way
to tell until they went into service exactly what conditions would
occur on a real network under actual conditions.  This was one case
where you can't guess at what will happen, the only way you can find
out is to put it up and see why it fails, since no laboratory or
simulation could provide the kind of punishment that real-life actual
use would provide.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 13:46:55 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Bonney)
Subject: Shared 800 Telephone Numbers


Carl Moore <[e-mail]> in writing about changes to local dialing
plans quoted from a Bell letter to customers:

> "We thank you for helping us to prepare for Pennsylvania's new area
> code.  If you have any questions, please call our We Can Help Center
> at 1-800-555-5000, Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m."

and Carl commented:

> [I tried that number from Maryland and got U.S. West Communications
> -- a recording only -- in Denver, Colorado.  Darn, I am not in Del. or
> Pa. now.]

If you try that number in New England Telephone territory, you get the
'New England Telephone Customer Response Center'.

Leading one to believe that despite the TELCO and RESPORG claims of
'One Number -- One User', it's another case of 'Mother Knows Best' and
'Do As I Say, Not As I Do'.

Does anyone have any knowledge of a single 800 number being used for
different customers in different geographical areas??

(Other than Mother and the Children of course ...)

Inquiring Minds Want To Know ...


David A. Bonney  <--->    Telephone [phone]
A Telecommunications Professional Now Available in Westford MA
No Employer, No Disclaimer.    Just My Own Thoughts.
Inquiries to MCIMail 422-4552 or Internet <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (David Elliott)
Subject: Wanted: RJ Testing Tools
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:55:02 GMT


I work for a small software company, and we do our own network and
telephone wiring inside the office.  Our computers are networked
together using 10BaseT Ethernet and our telephone lines are all single
lines.  Everything is handled in one room with a punch-down panel,
though some larger offices have separate Ethernet hubs in them.

Our biggest problems tend to be with broken or incorrectly-made
cables.  Testing these to isolate problems is a big hassle.  The only
real tools we have are a beeper box and a multimeter.  While these are
a start, and we could improve things by creating some special cables
and connectors, time is money.

What I am interested in is a set of tools for testing and analyzing
cables and jacks.  Typical testing scenarios:

* Cable tester - I plug in both sides of a cable (either
  RJ11 or RJ45) and the tester tells me what is connected to
  what, or at least whether the wires are connected straight
  through (though for modem serial cables it would be nice to
  have it work like a standard break-out box, too).

* Line tester - I plug in a loop-back connector on one
  side of a run, plug in a line tester on the other, and it
  tells me whether each wire is good or not (it would be great
  if it could help isolate which one, but one bad wire usually
  means the whole cable needs replacing).

* In-line signal analyzer - I plug this into an existing
  setup, and it tells me which lines have signal on them.

There may be other tools that are useful, and if so, I'd like to hear
about them.  The main goal is to make it so that diagnosing problems
doesn't require taking someone away from their regular work.


David Elliott - [e-mail] - [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jae-Soo Kim)
Subject: Frequency Tuning Speed
Organization: UB
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 01:23:42 GMT


Hello,

I'd like to know the frequency tuning speed of frequency synthesizer
which is in market now.

Any information or any direction to materials will be greatly
appreciated.


Jae

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

From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 09:58:12 GMT


I have a question about the selection of 334 as the new area code for
Atlanta.  In numerous discussions about the generalization of area
codes after "Time T," it has been stated that the first NNX area codes
would all be NN0 (such as 520 for Arizona).  Yet the very first NNX is
not NN0.  Just wondering about this picayune detail ...


Linc Madison  *  Oakland, California  *  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #818
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08486;
          15 Dec 93 5:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20955
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Wed, 15 Dec 1993 02:23:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14127
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 15 Dec 1993 02:23:00 -0600
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 02:23:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #819

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 15 Dec 93 02:23:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 819

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Possible Rate Lowering by NYNEX (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere... (Greg Abbott)
    Re: AT&T's New Facility (Christopher C. Blough)
    Re: Crummy Service in NY (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Looping and Data Looping (Michael Oshea)
    Re: PCS Questions (Kyle Griffin)
    Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice (Glenn Inn)
    Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice (Ray Normandeau)
    Re: Terse 800 Failure ... Oh My! (Randall Gellens)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 19:45:12 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Possible Rate Lowering by NYNEX


{Newsday} (Dec 4, 1993) had an article concerning rate cuts for New
York Telephone subscribers to the tune of nearly 297 million dollars
(US).

"If the Public Service Commission adopts the recommendation of two of
its judges, at a meeting set for Dec. 15, the cost for many New York
Telephone calls and for Touch Tone service could fall starting Jan. 1,
1994.

"A residential customer now pays $1.35 a month for each Touch Tone
line according to New York Telephone."

"The ruling illustrates the tension between NYNEX goals and regulatory
concerns.  On Thursday, NYNEX announced a new marketing strategy and a
planned restructuring for its operations.  NYNEX also reiterated its
determination to be able to offer a full range of interactive and
video services, including cable TV, if it can list federal regularory
restrictions."

I always knew we were being ripped off and this is one of the few
times that the PSC has come to the ratepayer's aid.

NYNEX is also setting itself up for a regulatory battle concerning
video in its service area due to a purchase of a portion of a company
(Teleport I think) which has portions of it owned by some cable
companies.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 20:23:17 CST
From: Greg Abbott <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere...


> I don't know what would be displayed if I had to call 911 from my
> present phone on 410-287; my mail (including my phone bills) goes to a
> PO box in another town.  Utility companies need to know where you
> live, because that is where the physical connections for service
> (electricity, phone, etc.)  go, even if the bills don't.  (Perhaps
> you'd want to find out what exchange serves 820 Old Apex Road.  I did
> find Apex Road and Street listed for zipcode 27707, and Apex Hwy.
> listed for zip code 27713, both in Durham.)

All of the telco's I deal with have billing addresses and service
addresses.  The 9-1-1 Database is not (atleast in Illinois) built from
only billing addresses.  We make a careful review of the database
before the system can be turned on.  Any listings found without a
locatable address (i.e. P.O.  Boxes, Rural Route, etc.) are contacted
and asked for their locatable address.

> Question: What about foreign exchange service?  An old example in
> Maryland was someone in an area served by 287 prefix who brought in
> 642 Perryville (the next exchange to the west) as a foreign exchange
> because it is local to Aberdeen (272,273,278) and Havre de Grace
> (939).  Another case (glaring because a state line is involved, and I
> recall seeing this at least once in the Wilmington, Del. directory),
> would be someone in the Wilmington or Holly Oak exchange area bringing
> in Chester Heights (Pa.) as a foreign exchange; that choice:

> -Keeps Wilmington, Newport, Holly Oak as local calls
> -loses local service to other parts of New Castle County, Del.
>  and part of southern Chester County, Pa.
> -GETS LOCAL SERVICE TO ALL OF PHILADELPHIA METRO AREA

FX circuits are a particular headache, but not impossible to deal
with.  Once they are discovered we can make specific notations on that
telephone number indicating where the actual telephone service is
located at.  Special routing can be set up (if equipment allows) to
send the call to the correct PSAP (Public Safety Answering Point).

> Remote-forward, which I set up in Delaware, would not be involved in
> 911.  No calls can originate on my Delaware number; it can only be
> activated by an incoming call, and can only automatically call the
> number I am forwarding to.

If a telephone number can make outgoing calls (even if it is a fax,
modem or remote forwarding device) then you can be that the record has
been examined for accurate service location information.  If you were
to disconnect your remote forwarding device and plug in a standard
telephone (or hook up a butt set to the D-Marc) you could dial a
number just like a normal telephone line.  Granted, you don't use your
line this way and there probably will never be any other outgoing
calls except those forwarded, but you *could*, if you wanted to, hook
up a phone and dial 9-1-1 from that line.

One more quick example of something we ran across.  One of the local
power companies has some remote telemetry units at their sub-stations.
These units are hard wired into standard telephone lines.  When we ran
across their telephone records with addresses like "SBS36L-W3" we
inquired where they were.  We were told that there was no need to
address these sub-stations since "no one could *ever* make a call from
these lines".  I asked to visit one of the sites with the power
company rep.  I looked at it and indeed the wires come out of the
telemetry unit and go right into the D-Marc.  I pulled out my butt
set, tapped into the line and produced dial tone for the rep and
dialed the time and temperature number.  We immediatly went back to
his office and assigned addresses to each of their sub-stations.

I heard of a similar incident somewhere out west where a 9-1-1 center
was searching for a telephone number that had a service record showing
an address in the middle of a major bridge over a dam.  After several
conversations with the folks who manage the dam, an old-timer
remembered a long time ago when they had had a telephone down in the
base of a maintenance shaft, well under the water level.  Someone (I
don't know if it was a public safety official or an employee of the
water folks) went down in this shaft and someone else up on the
surface dialed the telephone number.  Sure enough, there at the bottom
of the shaft, back behind some old control cabinets was a rusted old
wall phone that was ringing away.  The person answered the phone and
conversed with the surface.  That phone had to have an address since
it would be possible for someone to call 9-1-1 from it.  I should
clarify, it had an address, but it needed a better location added to
the record.

Hope this answers a few questions, though I'm sure it will stir up a few
more comments/questions.

Happy Holidays!


GREG ABBOTT           INTERNET: [e-mail]
9-1-1 COORDINATOR   COMPUSERVE: 76046,3107
                         VOICE: 217/333-4348
METCAD                     FAX:   [phone]
1905 E. MAIN ST.         PAGER: 800/222-6651
URBANA, IL  61801         PIN # 9541

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

From: gnh-starport![e-mail]
Subject: Re: AT&T's New Facility
Date: 15 Dec 1993 02:21:33 -0500
Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc.


> Over the Thanksgiving weekend, I traveled south on I-95 from NYC to
> Washington, DC.  After emerging from the tunnel in Baltimore, the AT&T
> cable laying ships are visible from the "port-side" in the harbor.  On
> Friday morning, both vessels were docked.  However, on the Sunday
> return trip, only one boat was still in port.  Perhaps to Long Island
> is where the second ship went?

     I personally make the trip from D.C. to philadelphia up 95 about
three times a month.  That is the first time in over a year that I
have even heard of either ship being out to sea.  Speaking of which,
those ships are technically amazing. They can lay something like 20
miles of cable in a day (over a straight distance on a level sea
floor).  That isn't fiber optic, so I don't know how fast that goes.


Christopher C. Blough     InterNet: [e-mail]
UUCP: clarknet!gnh-starport!cblough   Starport BBS  703-560-9308
ARPA: clarknet!gnh-starport![e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Crummy Service in NY
Date: 14 Dec 1993 15:17:17 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gordon Jacobson)
writes:

>> Oh, and I cannot get ISDN, either.

> All Business Service NYTel COs south of 57th Street provide ISDN
> PRI/BRI.

> Call Bob Block at [phone].

>> My service comes from the "Second Avenue" central office in Manhattan.

> So does mine -- 2nd Avenue and 56th Street in fact.  And I can
> get ISDN whenever I want it.

No, the "Second Avenue" central office is at Second Avenue and 13th
Street.  I expect they call it that because they don't like to repeat
the number "13" if they can avoid it.

There is ISDN in the Second Avenue CO, but I would only be able to
receive incoming calls on it if I told lots of people to call a
different number than they normally do.  The exchange serving me
there, which is 212-777, has no ISDN.  Indeed only two out of
thirty-six exchanges in that CO support ISDN, I am told.

But another of my exchanges, the Yorktown Heights central office, has
*no* ISDN.  None.  Even if I change my number there.

And another central office I call frequently, 212-787 (West 73rd
Street) has *no* ISDN.  None.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (patent lawyer)
Oppedahl & Larson
Yorktown Heights, NY
voice 212-777-1330

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

From: michael oshea <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Looping and Data Looping
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 00:38:25 GMT


I am familiar with the term looping or data looping in the sense that
it relates to testing a line from here to there to see if it is
functioning properly.  Some looping can also be done at various stages
with the electronics at the distant end to determine if it is
functioning properly.  I do not know how this relates to fraud.

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

Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 11:31:06 CST
From: [e-mail] (Kyle Griffin)
Subject: Re: PCS questions


In response to Roy Thompson's queries regarding PCS:

> what are the likely timeframes we will see for new infrastructure being
> deployed?

Given the FCC's rulemaking, and the congressional Budget Act, spectrum
auctions are supposed to occur in early May, 1994. The FCC's
rulemaking also outlines a build-out requirement that basically
requires licensees to be _offering_ service to 33% of the population
of their license area (either MTA or BTA) within five years of the
granting of the license, 67% within seven years, and 90% within ten years.
Several equipment vendors are saying they'll be rolling out equipment
in the late '94 -- early '95 time frame.

> Is there anything, other than frequency issues, that make the PCS
> infrastructure much different from standard cellular networks?

An interesting thing happened to PCS on the way to the FCC. When it
was first introduced as a concept in the industry (see Bellcore
Framework Advisory 90-1013), it was envisioned as a low-power,
pedestrian-oriented service. A typical "cell" might serve a two to
four block area, would accommodate 50-200 users, and would be designed
for low-speed (<30 mph) traffic. Such a service might someday replace
wireline voice and low-speed data service. But suddenly all sorts of
light bulbs went on and all sorts of warning flags shot up. All sorts
of players from all sorts of industries wanted to get in on this deal.
The cellular industry, perhaps thinking they could "nip this thing in
the bud", started saying, "We already do that. We ARE providing PCS.
There's nothing new here. Cellular IS PCS." Meanwhile, the FCC is
chomping at the bit to establish more competition in the cellular
marketplace. Then they hear "cellular IS PCS", and they think "Here's
the answer. Here's our competition for cellular."  So, with the
Commission's underlying agenda, and the barrage of input from all the
would-be players, PCS evolved into a higher-power, wider-area concept
that looks very much like cellular.

So, in answer to your question, the main differences are that 1) PCS
will operate at a much higher frequency (with different propagation
and fading characteristics) and will require a different sort of RF
transmission hardware, 2) PCS will start out as digital radio
technology (which has it's own unique set of design considerations),
and 3) PCS will be designed from the start to take advantage of
existing and evolving Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN)
functionality, something the cellular carriers are having to try to
"retrofit".

> I suppose the micro and pico cell management will create some
> uniqueness in the network. In that case (with a pico cell for example),
> will more switches be required?

In some major cities it is possible that more than one PCS switch will
be used, but in most cases one switch will be sufficient. In most of
the schematics I've seen, the "cell site" transmitters are referred to
as base stations, and are connected to some sort of Base Station
Controller. The BSC concentrates several base stations, and from what
I can tell has enough intelligence to route calls that are local to
itself without burdening the MSS. (Of course, it still must send the
call information to the switch for administrative and billing purposes).

> What are the unique requirements for implementing at 1.8 GHz?

I'm not an RF engineer, but from what I understand the transmission
characteristics, especially fading, are much more of an issue. This
means that things like terrain, structures, and vegetation (as it
changes seasonally) have much more impact on network design.

> I understand, maybe incorrectly, that GSM uses TDMA ...

You understand correctly. Actually, many of the proponents of using
the GSM standard in the US are proposing a slightly modified version
to take into account 1) the slightly different US spectrum allocation
(utilizing more of the 1900 Mhz band) and 2) different transmission
power and propagation patterns, given that most areas of the US are
more sparsely populated than the areas of Europe where GSM has been
deployed.

> Also, as GSM becomes a defacto standard in the US, what happens to CDMA?

Although there are strong proponents of making GSM (or a modified
version) a US standard, there's no guarantee that will happen. The FCC
has stated that they would rather let the market determine standards
rather than dictate any. There are also proponents of CDMA. I've seen
some of the TDMA-CDMA dialogue in this digest. I'm not on either
"side" of the issue. From what I've read (from people not related to
any company making either type of equipment), as well as an
acquaintance at Bellcore, there is a general feeling that, as far as
capacity is concerned, when all is said and done, they're going to
come out about equal in terms of increased capacity over cellular AMPS
(approximatly 7 to 1).

> Isn't there an FCC regulation on wireless phones to support a dual-mode?

There is no such regulation, at least to my knowledge. As I stated
before, the FCC intends to let the market determine standards. In
terms of cellular, I can pretty much guarantee that whether you buy a
TDMA digital phone or a CDMA digital phone, it will be a "dual-mode"
phone in that it will have the capability to fall back to an AMPS mode
of operation (since it will be a while before digital makes any
serious inroads, and AMPS is everywhere). In terms of PCS, I don't
know that I would hold my breath waiting for a TDMA-CDMA dual-mode
phone. Maybe somebody will make one someday, but I'm guessing it will
be difficult enough to make the PCS handsets lightweight, compact, and
affordable using one technology, let alone two.

At any rate, I hope this has addressed some of your questions.


Kyle Griffin
The Lincoln Telephone Company
[e-mail]

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

From: Glenn Inn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice
Organization: Latitude Communications, Inc.
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 18:00:53 GMT


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

> Because my son is handicapped, he needs a lot of ferrying around from
> place to place.  I'm considering getting a car phone for my wife (who
> does over 50% of the ferrying) just for peace of mind.
> Anyway, I figure there has to be some underlying principals to follow;
> aspects of things that I may not have thought of; so I'd welcome
> advice or being pointed to a FAQ.

This is the second person who's asked a "help choosing cellular phone"
question.  I'm going to write my choice/decision process because I
sympathize with just how painful it is to pick a phone. (I spent over
a year choosing).

It sounded like you prefer a vehicular phone.  When I searched, I was
in the market for a portable -- I ended up with the Oki 900.  Why?  I
found that All the "hi-end" portables were the same (clarity, and tx
signal).  It all boiled down to "software" features -- and the Oki (at
that time) beat everyone else hands down.  200 number Alpha-memory, 189
speed dial's, paging, online help, to name a few.

Now for vehicular, Oki has its "800" series of car phones.  Many <not
all> of the 900's features are in the 800-line.  The Oki 830 is the
top of the line.

Another kicker:  the Cellular-1 salesman who helped me? He had an
Oki car phone and swore by it.


gLENN Inn    Latitude Communications   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 14 Dec 93 12:58:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


> Because my son is handicapped, he needs a lot of ferrying around from
> place to place.  I'm considering getting a car phone for my wife (who
> does over 50% of the ferrying) just for peace of mind.

In Ontario canada there is a special rate for blind users.  See if you
can get a special handicap rate for your area.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 15 Dec 1993 01:41 GMT
Subject: Re: Terse 800 Failure ... Oh My!


[e-mail] (Scott M. Pfeffer) writes:

>  In any event, I got the following:

>    "Click"
>    High-paid male announcer's voice saying
>       "A system error has occurred.  Goodbye."
>    "Click"

>  Weird.  I wonder who the carrier was ...?  I wonder where the problem
>  was ...?
>  I wonder what this world has come to ...?  Reminds me of the old days
>  when terse young men used to serve as operators (way before any of us
>  were cognitive human beings ...)

Every now and then, when I place a call from behing the PBX at my
office there is a long delay wherein nothing happens, then I get:

   *click*
   (Background sounds of a very noisy equipement room)
   Slighly annoyed male voice: We're sorry; your call did not go
   through.
   *click*

It sounds so different from the usual telco breathless-woman
intercepts, that when I encounter it I always get a mental image of a
switchroom with a very harried technician, trying to fix some problem,
but constantly interrupted by misrouted calls, which he picks up,
barks at, and hangs up.


Randall Gellens             [e-mail]
A Series System Software
Unisys Corporation          [Please forward bounce messages
Mission Viejo, CA           to: [e-mail]]
Opinions are personal;  facts are suspect;  I speak only for myself

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #819
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16698;
          16 Dec 93 4:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23059
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:06:51 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21260
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:06:27 -0600
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:06:27 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #820

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Dec 93 01:07:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 820

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Ecolinking" by Rittner (Rob Slade)
    Executone CPI - Far Too Expensive? (Harry Skelton)
    Need Information on T1's and Equipment (Lee Havemann)
    Dedicated Line Provivsioning Systems (Yohan)
    5ESS Questions (Tom Ace)
    NEC Information Needed (Antonio Saponaro)
    Cellular Phone on a PC Board (Filippo Tripiciano)
    Low-Bandwidth Speech (Ulrich Neumann)
    Magazine Contacts Wanted (Brian Combs)
    Help Wanted Restoring WECO '64 Six Button Set (Thomas P. Brisco)
    Call For Papers and Panel Session Proposals (Bing Gao)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

Date: 16 Dec 93 15:22 -0600
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Ecolinking" by Rittner


BKECOLNK.RVW  931117

PeachPit
2414 6th St.
Berkeley, CA   94710
510-548-4393  fax: [phone]
"Ecolinking", Rittner, 1992, U$18.95/C$23.95
[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

Working in computer virus research, I can have a lot of sympathy with
those involved in the environmental movement.  Both fields can be
relatively unpopular.  Both suffer from the fact that a "critical
mass" of concerned individuals cannot often be gathered in one place.
Both fields are multi-disciplinary, and require input from experts in
a variety of fields.  The only reason the virus research community has
survived at all, is because of computer communications networks.  It
is quite reasonable to assume that computer networks would be of help
to the environmental activist, wherever located.

Rittner's book, indeed, gives numerous examples and case studies of
computer links giving victory to the environmental side -- sometimes
just in the nick of time.  It is both introduction and resource for
those who are interested in using the new computer communications
tools in their ecological work and study.

Part one (or, more accurately, chapter two) is an introduction to "The
Basics" of getting online, dealing briefly with modems, communications
software, and communications functions.  Very briefly.  As noted in
chapter one, those involved with computers will find nothing new here.
Newcomers, however, are advised to take the advice of chapter one and
find a local friend for help.  You are unlikely to get online
successfully, with only this as your guide.  As far as it goes,
however, it is a reasonably good primer, with only a few idiosyn-
cracies such as "8-0-1" for what most online people would call "8N1".

I was happy to see a mention of virus checking, although, since most
ecological researchers would be primarily interested in information,
some discussion of data versus program files might be in order.
Still, I suppose it's best to err on the side of caution.  I was also
pleased to note the brief discussion of online etiquette.  Given the
strong emotions involved in the environmental movement this could be
quite important.

It is difficult to see why parts two, three and four are separate
parts.  Certainly there are differences in price, interface and
availability, but functionally, the similarities are greater than the
differences between bulletin boards, networks and commercial services
in regard to communications and access to information.  Quarterman's
"The Matrix" (cf. BKMATRIX.RVW) is obviously admired: its structure
has also been copied.  This is appropriate to a technical reference
work, but, for the computer communications neophyte, a structuring of
features, with discussions of the differences, by system, might have
been more helpful.  As it is, the VAX and Mac specific references may
occasionally confuse the reader using other systems.  To be fair,
though, Rittner has obviously worked hard to try and keep technical
matters as generic as possible.  The US-centric listings of systems
and access may be more of a problem for international readers.

Part five, "Libraries That Never Close," demonstrates to a certain
extent the enormous quantity of information now available either
online or on disk.

The appendices are rather odd.  The first lists communications
software, and states that many are cheap or free.  Kermit, however,
which is available (basically) free for any system, is listed only for
the Mac.  Appendix B is a list of Internet mailing lists with an
environmental bent.  Very useful -- but the Fidonet, BITNET and Usenet
lists are printed within their respective chapters.  Appendix C lists
gateway services that provide access to the nets, this time
*definitely* US-centric, while D is a sample BBS session.

The most useful part of the book will likely be the listings of
various environmental Fidonet "echoes," BITNET "listservs," Usenet
"newsgroups," and Internet distribution lists.  While these tend to be
somewhat ephemeral, the wealth of research done here will quite
possibly save you years, in getting linked into the proper channels.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993   BKECOLNK.RVW  931117
Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of TELECOM
Digest and associated mailing lists only.

DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters
Editor and/or reviewer [e-mail], [e-mail], Rob Slade at 1:153/733
DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harry Skelton)
Subject: Executone CPI - Far Too Expensive?
Organization: USS Enterprise
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1993 22:30:03 GMT


A bit ago our Executone rep. gave us a quote of $17,000 for
software/hardware to allow our computer to access and control the
Executone system directly via a Computer Port Interface (CPI).  This,
in my opinion, is far too expensive.  This considering that it cost us
$20,000 for the system.

I was told directly that the cost involved is more involved in
granting us permission to access and control the system than it is for
software or hardware to allow this.  Not being of a deep telcom
background, the company found this cost ludirous.  Especially since we
OWN the system and it only cost us $20k in the first place.

My questions are:

1. Is there a way I can gain control over the CPI without Executone's
'help'.

2. Is there an inexpensive, T1 capable, 30 phone system available that
would allow us to control it?  Something cheaper than the $17k?

3. Has anyone delt with Executone on this issue? If so, what happened
in your environment?

4. Are there other Executone offices that might give me a better price
or is this a case of proprietary schemes raised to the limits? i.e.
I'm SOL?

Many thanks!!


Harry Skelton - 1848 Beaver Dam Lane - Marietta, Georgia - 30062
404-590-7100 or 800-366-8181 Work -- 404-578-8085 Home
          [e-mail]

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

From: Lee Havemann <[e-mail]>
Subject: Need Information on T1's and Equipment
Date: 15 Dec 93 12:54:33 EST
Organization: HSH Associates


We are faced with the possibility of having to install a T1 on our
premises, and as I am not familiar with this technology, I thought I
would turn to the net for help.

We would be averaging approx 50,000 minutes/month over a T1, of which
12 lines would go do a dedicated fax broadcast system. The system
(using gammaLink hardware) is supposedly T1 ready.  The other 12 lines
would go into a Premier 24/60 phone system which is not equipped for
T1.

Our phone carrier says we need two channel banks, one at their POP,
and one at our location to make this work.

My questions:

 Where can I get some more info on T1's and related equipment?

 What do these channel banks do? Are they just a kind of digital to analog
 converters?

 Why do I need _2_ channel banks?

 Can I buy these channel banks from another source (preferably cheaper than
 paying $500/month lease from our LDC?)

Does anybody else out there have any T1's installed who can answer these
(and other :-) questions for me?

Any info would be gratefully appreciated!


Lee Havemann, Comp Ops Dir.    HSH Associates      [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]    Compuserve: 70410,3507    AOL: HSH Assoc
"Any opinions expressed are not necessarily those of anyone else,
including myself."

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

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 14:30:00 PST
From: Yohan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Dedicated Line Provivsioning Systems


I am doing a study on dedicated line provisioning systems (Fractional
T1, T1, T3 ). I am looking for information regarding relevant services
offered by IXCs, RBOC or CAPS, the cycle times involved for provisioning
and some information regarding the underlying provisioning processes
and systems.

If anyone can answer some of these questions or point me towards some
sources I would appreciate it.

Thank you in advance.

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

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 16:30:57 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Tom Ace)
Subject: 5ESS Questions


A recent article (in a magazine not noted for thoroughgoing and
authoritative reporting) discussed the White House phone system, and
included the following statement:

 Now, stuffing a 5ESS in the White House basement would have been
 impressive and it would have given the Clinton Administration the
 telecommunications power of a city roughly the size of New York,
 give or take a couple of boroughs.  Sensing overkill, the Clinton
 administration went with the cheaper Definity G3R PBXs.

Could someone knowledgeable about the 5ESS please tell me:

1)  I assume that a 5ESS can be had in different configurations,
    suitable for different numbers of subscribers.  What's the
    minimum number of lines appropriate for a 5ESS installation,
    and what's the maximum number of lines a 5ESS could be
    configured for?

2)  Does it even make sense to suggest a 5ESS for a PBX application
    like the White House?


Tom Ace       [e-mail]

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

Subject: NEC Information Needed
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 1:50:37 CET
From: Antonio Saponaro <[e-mail]>


I'm looking for technical informations about Nec cellular telephones,
like service manuals and programming tips. Can anyone help me?


Antonio Saponaro

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

From: [e-mail] (Filippo Tripiciano )
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 11:49:34 MET
Subject: Cellular Phone on a PC Board


I'm looking for a PC board (possibly AT compatible) that provides a
direct connectivity to a cellular phone line.

In fact, what I'm really trying to do is to build a system that
connect to a remote site (using cellular phone network) without having
a modem connected to a cellular phone device.

Any help would be appreciated. :-)

Please answer by  e-mail. My correct e-mail address is:

    [e-mail]

Filippo Tripiciano
BULL HN Italia          Voice: [phone]
Via del Parlamento 33     FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ulrich Neumann)
Subject: Low-Bandwidth Speech
Date: 15 Dec 1993 20:31:38 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill


Does anyone have knowledge of very low bandwidth speech communications
systems?  I'm looking for <10K bits/sec technology for toll-quality
speech.  Please email pointer to algorithms and/or hardware to:

                         [e-mail]


Thanks,

UN

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Combs)
Subject: Magazine Contacts Wanted
Date: 15 Dec 1993 22:19:21 GMT
Organization: Quadralay Corporation


If anyone has any information about the following magazine (i.e.
contact info, whether they are still publishing, etc.)  I would be
very grateful if you would e-mail the information to me.

The list is as follows:

Sun World
PC Week
Communication Week
Communications of the ACM
Computer World
Data Communication
Datamation
Information Week
EDN
Electronic Design
Electronic Products
Electronics
EDN News
ECN
Electronic News
EE Product News

I would prefer e-mail over a response posting as I do not normally
read TELECOM Digest.  However, I am perfectly willing to forward
information I receive to interested parties.


Thanks,

Brian Combs             Tel:  [phone]  Fax:  [phone]
Quadralay Corporation   FTP Address:  ftp.quadralay.com
combs @ quadralay.com   WWW Server:   www.quadralay.com

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas P. Brisco)
Subject: Help Wanted Restoring WECO '64 Six Button Set
Date: 15 Dec 93 21:30:48 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


    During a "rotary unit decom" sweep last summer (yes, we're just
getting rid of all of the old rotary units) I managed to get my paws
on a six button rotary set -- the bottom is marked "565HK 2-64" -
presumably 1964 unit, and some of the guts bear this out.  (BTW: Can
anyone fill me in on the 565HK bit?).  What is odd (or odd to me)
about this unit is that the push button/lights are round -- not square.

    Anyway, I just (today) came across a "harmonica" to RJ11 converter
for this beastie (one Radio Shack claimed to not have them, another
had it on the wall -- go figure) so I can hook my conventional home
lines into it.  I get tone and can dial fine, but the bell and
appropriate light doesn't work.

    I took off the shell, and the internals had been modified (pretty
badly -- it's hard to tell if it's Bell work or not :-) for a RJ11.
(I can't get anything if I plug my line into that - but I'm not
concerned there).  There appears to have been about four wires moved
off of the wiring block in there -- does anyone know where I can get
schematics for this puppy?  I'd dearly love to hear that old jangle
again, blinkey lights are, of course, a thrill.

    I've got an old 30-or-so button set also, which I can cannibalize
if necessary (though I'd like to get that working -- if only for
kicks).

    While I'm here; the unit is a bit dirty, and has some of the
required "911/Emergency" sticker on it (which gives you a clue how
recently it was used :-).  Any hints on cleaning this thing?  I'm
reluctant to throw chemicals on it.  Additionally, I'd like to get new
paper inserts for the dial and buttons -- any clue on those?  (BTW: I
just took apart the handset, it looks like wax paper in the speaker,
and the inside of the speaker cap is marked 2-64 also -- so I don't
believe it's been refurb'd).

    From the top:
    1) Schematics for WECO '64 era 6 button set?
    2) Suggestions on cleaning the plastic/metal?
    3) Where to get new paper inserts?  (Maybe I'll
        just ask my local repair person)

    Thanks for any pointers/tips ...

The dial and face-plate are metal, but the handset and casing are
_heavy_ plastic -- was this at the beginning of the "plastic era"?  Can
anyone recommend any books that might detail the construction of the
phones over the years?  While this one is pretty nice, I think a '50's
period piece would be even nicer.  It adds a nice bit of charm to my
den.


[Moderator's Note: All the six button (five line plus hold) phones
until sometime in the 1960's had round buttons rather than square
ones. I think your phone is made of very hard rubber rather than
heavy plastic. Does it have a curly cord between the handset and
the phone or a straight cord? Straight cords were used until about
the same time, and cloth cords (as opposed to rubber covering) were
also common until during the 1950's. The phone you have also requires
a control box (a rather big, ugly unit) which hangs on the wall nearby
*if* you want the hold button to work and the lights to flash when the
phone rings or a line is put on hold. Obviously you can wire five lines
into it if you don't mind doing without hold and the lights.

The other thing you can do is modify it a little so you use the six
buttons to handle *three* lines with a hold button for each line. i.e.
line one, line one hold; line two, line two hold; and line three, line
three hold.  You don't need the control box for that, just re-arrange
the wires in the phone itself so each of three lines goes to two
buttons, but with every other button terminated right there and *not*
getting back to the receiver. Then, you also have to do a little
surgery and castrate the phone -- cut those balls out from up in front
under the buttons.  See the little ball-bearings under the buttons
which slide back and forth, forcing one button to rise when another is
pressed down, and see how the hold button on the left end is spring
loaded so it comes back up anyway when pressed? Maybe button six has
the same spring loading in it in the event the former owner was using
one of the lines for ICOM and the last button for the ICOM signal.
Fix those so that *two* or more buttons can be made to stay down at
the same time, i.e.  line 'x' hold-path and line 'y' talking-path.

Basically what you will then have is the GTE (Automatic Electric) ver-
sion of a multiline phone from the 1940-50 era since theirs had three
lines and three hold buttons. For extra points, pick up a DC transformer
at Radio Shack and fix things so those buttons at least light up when
you are off hook on one of them (or on hold on one of your three lines
if you go that way) even if you can't get them to flash in rythmn with
the ringing cadence lacking the control box. If you prefer, get a few
neon test lamps; they'll sit there on the line without causing any
disturbance since they don't illuminate until they get 90 volts or
so. Squeeze one behind each of the six buttons or at least behind the
buttons with lines. That will cause your buttons to flash when the
associated line rings (but not stay lit while you are talking).  Have
fun and report back to us, y'hear? Those old phones can make such
great hobbyist kits on their own merits.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bing Gao)
Subject: Call For Papers and Panel Session Proposals
Date: 15 Dec 1993 22:00:22 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept.


            CALL FOR PAPERS and Panel Session Proposals

                           COMPSAC 94

               The Eighteenth Annual International
          Computer Software and Applications Conference

                Conference:  November 9 - 11, 1994
             International Convention Center, Taipei

     Professional Development Seminars:  November 7 - 8, 1994
             Science and Technology Building, Taipei


The conference is a major international forum for researchers,
practioners, managers and policy makers interested in computer
software and applications as well as software industry.  Original
papers and panel session proposals on various research and practical
aspects as well as future trends are invited.  It is anticipated that
leaders and experts from industry, academia and governments will
participate in the program.  The following topics are examples of
sessions planned for the conference.  Special sessions facilitating
the presentation of timely results from the industry will be arranged
for those papers with presentation material only.


* Software Development and Maintenance Paradigms and Environments

* Software Quality Assurance, Process Improvement and Maturity Models

* Software Reliability, Security and Safety

* Risk Assessment and Management of Large-Scale Software Projects

* Re-engineering, Reverse Engineering, Reuse and Customization

* Software Metrics and Modeling

* Software Development for Distributed and Parallel Processing systems

* Co-design of Hardware and Software for Application Specific Systems

* Interoperability in Systems and Tools

* Large-Scale Software System Integration

* Formal Methods

* AI Tools and Techniques

* Data and Knowledge Bases

* Computer-Aided Support for Document Preparation

* Advances in CASE

* Interactive Computing and Groupware

* Multimedia Systems and Virtual Reality

* Software Engineering Education

* Applications:  Government Services, Telecommunications, Banking
  Systems, Health Care, Entertainment, Consumer Electronics.

* Industry Trends:  Downsizing, Outsourcing, Off-Shore Software Support.

* Legal and Social Issues of Computer Software


Information for Authors for formal papers (included in the proceedings):

* Mail six copies of an original (not submitted or published elsewhere)
paper (double space) of 3000-5000 words.

* Include the title of the paper, the name and alliiation of each
author, a 150-word abstract and no more than 8 keywords.

* Include the name, position, address, telephone numbers, and if
possible, fax numbers and e-mail address of the author responsible for
correspondence of the paper

Information for Authors for providing presentation material only:
                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^
* The presentation material of all accepted papers in this category will
appear in a bound conference record.

* Mail six copies of an original paper with the title and a 300-word
abstract to the Program Chair.

* Include the name, position, address, telephone number, and if
possible, fax number and e-mail address of the author responsible for
the correspondence of the presentation.


Information for Panel Organizers:

* Send six copies of panel proposals to the Program Chair.

* Include the title, a 150-word scope statement, proposed session chair
and panelists and their affiliations and locations, the organizer's
affiliation, address, telephone and fax numbers and e-mail address.


IMPORTANT DEADLINES:

* March 1, 1994 all papers and panel proposals due

* April 1, 1994 panel organizers notified of acceptance

* April 20, 1994 organizers of accepted panel proposals provide final
information on session chairs and panelists

* May 16, 1994 au;thors notified of acceptance

* July 12, 1994 camera-ready copies of accepted papers and panelists'
  position papers to be included in the conference proceedings due

* September 20, 1994 camer-ready copies of presentation material of
  accepted paperd to be included in the conference record due


Program Chair

C. V. Ramamoorthy
University of California at Berkeley
Department of Electrical Engineering
  and Computer Science
Berkeley, CA 94720, U.S.A.
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail]

Conference Chair

Yun Kuo
Institute for Information Industry
11th Floor, 106 Hoping E. Road, Sec. 2
Taipei (10636), Taiwan

For further information, contact:

Stephen S. Yau
COMPSAC Standing Committee Chair
University of Florida
Department of Computer and Information
  Sciences
301 Computer Science and Engineering Building
Gainesville, FL 32611, U.S.A.
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail]

Sponsored by IEEE Computer Society, the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, Inc., and hosted by the Institute for Information
Industry.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #820
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17214;
          16 Dec 93 5:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05686
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 02:17:26 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24167
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 02:17:02 -0600
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 02:17:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #821

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Dec 93 02:17:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 821

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    When is the BFI Flag Set by the Radio Subsystem in GSM? (Vartan Narinian)
    Calling Cards and Privately Owned Pay Phones (Javier Henderson)
    Portable Satellite Phone System (Paul Coladonato)
    Digital Phones of the Past (Bob Smith)
    Check From AT&T: Here's What to Do! (Robert A. Book)
    Re: New 411 System in Atlanta (Charles Hoequist)
    Re: Double Hunt Group - Possible? (Danny Burstein)
    Re: Ethernet Over Laser Link (John R. Levine)
    Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Jay Hennigan)
    Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (Mark Brader)
    Re: A New Love Story (Solution) (Dror Lubin via Mark Brader)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 18:43:18 GMT
Subject: When is the BFI Flag Set by the Radio Subsystem in GSM?
Organization: Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine
From: [e-mail] (Vartan Narinian)


Hello experts,

Could someone tell me when the BFI (Bad Frame Indication) flag is set
by the GSM radio subsystem? This is in GSM 05.05 which, unfortunately,
I don't have. I'm mostly interested about the Speech traffic case,
because this flag is used in the substitution and muting of lost
frames section (06.11).

My understanding is that the BFI is set when, after deinterleaving and
decoding, the CRC on the 50 class 1 bits indicates that there are
errors in those bits. However, I'm not sure about this and would like
someone to confirm it, if that's possible.


Thanks,

Vartan Narinian <[e-mail]>
Electrical Engineering Department
Imperial College, London

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Calling Cards and Privately Owned Pay Phones
Date: 15 Dec 93 11:44:54 PST
Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA


Hello,

Some time ago I posted about the problems I had using my Orange
calling card with some privately owned pay phones. Basically, some
phones appeared to be programmed so they would drop the connection
after a certain number of numbers have been punched. When I complained
to one of the operators, I was told that it was to help law
enforcement in the war against drugs (yeah, right ... more like force
you to use their operator $ervice$).

So I called one of the operators today from a payphone that was giving
me that trouble. This time I told her "I had problems using the
voicemail system at work". She suggested to push the keys slower and
to leave a longer pause each two or three keystrokes.

It worked. I dialed the target number leaving three second pauses
between the phone number and the calling card number and waited five
seconds before pushing in the PIN.

Hope it works elsewhere.


Javier Henderson     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Interesting theory. If anyone else tries this and
has success (from a phone at which previously they were unable to
continue pressing buttons) please write and let us know.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Coladonato)
Subject: Portable Satellite Phone System
Organization: Hong Kong Internet & Gateway Services Ltd.
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 06:44:08 GMT


Hello all,

Does anyone know if it is currently possible to have a portable
satellite phone system useable anywhere in the world?  That would
allow reliable modem communications from areas poorly served by land
lines?  What companies provide this equipment/services?


Thanks,

Paul

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Smith)
Subject: Digital Phones of the Past
Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 15:32:06 GMT


The term digital phone today seems to be interchangable with ISDN
phone.

However, I seem to recall a time in the past (70s) when a digital
phone had a bunch of digital circuitry in it and talked to a pre-ISDN
digital hook up.

My memory may be failing but I seem to recall DTMF digitized voice and
Bell's DSDS being tied to gether.

Please help staighten out my graying brain!!! Am I on track or is this
an erroneous recollection of an old {Popular Science} article?


Thanks,

bob

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

Subject: Check From AT&T: Here's What to Do!
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 23:56:17 CST
From: [e-mail] (Robert A. Book)


I got one of those $50 checks from AT&T, and (separately) a $20
"credit voucher" good toward payment of my AT&T Unversal MasterCard
bill with the same conditions (sign it and get switched to AT&T).  I
found a perfectly legal, ethical way to get the face value of the the
voucher, the check, and then some.

My primary carrier is MCI.  I called MCI and told them what I had
received.

For the "credit voucher," they gave me a credit to my account for the
face value ($20), in exchange for my sending them the voucher.

For the check, the told me to write "Void" across the check, and send
it to them, in exchange for which they would send me something called
a "Customer Appreciation Bond" with a face value equal to the value of
the check ($50).  I could either send this check back immediately for
a $50 credit, or hold on to it, in which case it would *gain* $5 per
month every month for up to one year.  I could exchange it at any time
for the total value, which after a year would be $110.

Gee, these guys are getting desparate!  :-)

NOTE: I got the idea to call MCI (which, I admit, I should have
thought of myself) from another posting to this Digest in which
someone with Sprint called them, and they exchanged the check for
face-value credit.  So ...

        ***** THE MORAL OF THE STORY *****

If you receive a check or similar instrument, negotiable on the
condition that you change carriers, and you don't want to change, call
you current carrier.  They will probably match, and in the case of
MCI, beat the offer, to keep you as a customer.  This is a legal,
ethical, and risk-free way to redeem these offers without switching
carriers.


Robert Book  [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 12:20:00
From: Charles Hoequist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New 411 System in Atlanta


In the Digest Issue 772 Les Reeves requested information about the new
411 service in the Atlanta area (it's also now in service in a couple
of other areas in Georgia). Here are some details.

The service is called ADAS (Automated D.A. Service). It does not use
any voice recognition, just store and and playback. Its virtues are
(1) saves telco money, because the front end of the call (querying
city and listing) is automated and so not occupying an operator
position; (2) saves operators from having to say, "This is <name>,
what city?" 1000-1200 times a shift (which is the average range).  (3)
increases throughput by discouraging callers who either just want to
abuse an operator or want something other than DA (I listened to a
couple of hours of recordings from an operator position, and I was
amazed at the variety of information requests that came in).

As Les noted, the application prompts for city name and listing name,
then (if everything works right), a subscriber hears the Automatic
Response Unit giving the desired number. From the operator's
perspective, there is first a special tone announcing the arrival of
an ADAS call, then the recorded city name, then the recorded listing
name (i.e.  what the subscriber said in response to the prompts).  If
the recordings aren't satisfactory, the operator opens a call path to
the subscriber and collects the information, but this is infrequent.
Normally, the operator does the database search and hands the call off
to the ARU.

Hope this helps.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: Re: Double Hunt Group - Possible?
Date: 16 Dec 1993 01:38:42 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


While Pat explained the process, he was a bit, ahem, wordy. So to clear
this up in just a few paragraphs:

Problem: Customer has a mix of computer modems and lines, wants to
rearrange them so that hi-speed callers (who presumably pay extra) get
high speed modems, but low speed folk get the low speed. He also wants
teh high speed folk to kcik into the low speed modems when all high
speed are busy.

<note: I'd suggest just having them busy out, but that's personal choice>

Solution:

(Bear in mind that the numbers you get will -not- be sequential, nor
need even be in ascenidng order, but I'm writing them this way to
simplify matters.)

You currently have a hunt group with 25 lines, with the numbers
starting at xxx-y101 and going to xxx-y125. You only "give out" the
main number, xxx-y101 and when that's busy, calls hunt over to y102,
y103 ... y125.

What you should do now is get an additional ten numbers (or, perhaps,
exchange the xxx-y116-y125 ones) in the sequence:

  xxx-y091 -> xxx-y100. These ten numbers/lines should be hooked up to
'hunt' as well, and when all are busy, should continue the hunt into
the old numbers, xxx-y101.

  You give out the super secret high speed main number xxx-y091 to
your extra value customers, and do NOT give it out to the low speed
folk.

  For good measure, you might also get an additional line xxx-y090
which you give out to NOBODY except yourself for dial-in.

  So, again, you will now have the following:

  xxx-y090   <- super secret number known only to you

  xxx-y091   <- start of hi speed hunt sequence *
  xxx-y092
     ...    <- the hunt sequence for hi speed
  xxx-y100

  xxx-y101 <- start of low speed hunt **
  xxx-y102
     ...
  xxx-y125 <- end of low speed hunt

* is the high speed start, you give out this number to your valued cust-
omers.

** is low speed start (-and- is hunted over when high speeds are busy).


[e-mail] adds: all the usual disclaimers regarding liability,
intelligence, accuracy apply. spelling disclaimer is doubled.

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

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 10:42 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Ethernet Over Laser Link
Organization: I.E.C.C.


Bob Lummis ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I am looking for a way to send Ethernet across a public street. Somebody
> told me there is a $2500 pair of laser devices that can do that. Another
> person in this newsgroup said $5,000 but gave no brand names. I know of the
> LCI brand of device that costs more like $15,000 per link (both ends).

I'm surprised that nobody's mentioned NCR Wavelan.  It's a 2 mb/sec
wireless Ethernet that uses 900 MHz spread spectrum transmission.
It's good up to about 300 feet with the included omnidirectional
antennas, several miles line of sight with outdoor yagis.  They're
really cheap, list price $800 per node, dealer price about $600.  (NCR
sells only to distributors who in turn sell only to dealers; I found
that the easiest way to get my hands on them was to become a dealer.)
For the security minded, there's an optional link-level DES encryption
chip, though it's pretty hard to intercept already unless you know
which of the 50,000 possible scrambling codes a particular network is
using.

The main complaint is that they're packaged as ISA or MCA cards to be
plugged into your PC, so if you use any other kind of computer, you
lose.  On the other hand, at that price, you can throw in an old 286
PC and a generic Ethernet card, run PCROUTE or PCBRIDGE, and still
have an Ethernet bridge or router for $1000 per end.  I use a pair
with PC route to connect my home Ethernet to the Internet.  At 300
feet, it works adequately (except when it's raining heavily) but if I
ever get around to installing the outside antennae, the rain problem
should go away.

If you call NCR headquarters in Dayton OH, there's a guy there who can
send you some information.  If you can't find a dealer and don't want
to become one, I suppose you could buy them through me.

Regards,

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

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

Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem
From: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 15 Dec 93 18:17:40 GMT
Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc.


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

> I just purchased a new computer.  I have 2400 baud modem and cable
> that works just great with my old computer.  With the new one, the
> computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from
> the modem.  For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a
> number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light),
> but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem.  (Echo
> does not work at all either).

You may be able to solve the problem with software.  It is possible
that the "connect" line is not connected to the card, so your computer
is assuming that there is no data, but that software can override.

Also, I've discovered that modem cables are not quite standardized.
Check the manual for your modem and computer to see if you need a
non-standard cable to connect the two.

(Posting this on the newsgroup/forum for your specific computer and/or
modem may be more helpful.)


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] (Jay Hennigan)
Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem
Date: 16 Dec 1993 20:50:03 -0800
Organization: Regional Access Information Network (RAIN)


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

> I just purchased a new computer.  I have 2400 baud modem and cable
> that works just great with my old computer.  With the new one, the
> computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from
> the modem.  For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a
> number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light),
> but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem.  (Echo
> does not work at all either).

> Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the
> instruction manual, to have any dip switches.

> Any ideas what I need to do?  Get a new card?

You'll probably wind up getting a new card, but you can find out for
sure by making a simple loopback adapter from a DB-25 connector that
plugs into the card.  Connect together pins 2 and 3.  Also connect
together pins 4 and 5, and lastly connect together pins 6, 8 and 20.
Plug this into the card and you should get echo.  If so, the card is
probably OK and the trouble is in the modem or cable.  A similar
connector of the opposite gender can be plugged into the modem.  If it
is set to auto-answer, then an incoming caller will get echo if the
modem is OK.  The pin 2-3 jumper loops the transmitted and received
data.  The 4-5 and 6-8-20 jumpers may or may not be required, and are
used in some cases for "handshaking" signals between the computer and
modem so that each device can determine if the other is present and
ready.

 From your description of the problem, it sounds as if the card is
defective.

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

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 11:16:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized


David Esan ([e-mail]) writes:

> The 905 NPA went live on 15 October, the pages were not filed until
> 22 November. ... sloppy work on the part of BellCore. ...

Even worse.  The official date for 905 was actually October 4.

I just did some experiments with a friend in area code 905 who is a
local call away from me here in 416.  As expected, he can still reach
me by dialing NXX-XXXX or 416-NXX-XXXX.  If he tries 905-NXX-XXXX,
which is wrong, the recording he gets says "The number you have dialed
is a 10-digit local number.  Please dial 416 plus NXX-XXXX" -- which
is right, but maybe a bit confusing.  As noted previously, Call Return
here announces the last number that called you before giving you the
option to return the call, and it has always given the area code.  His
calls to me are still given as being from 416, irrespective of which
way he dials.

Similarly, I can dial his number as NXX-XXXX or 905-NXX-XXXX.  If I
try 416-NXX-XXXX, I get fast busy (reorder).  I tried a number that is
in 416; I can dial it as NXX-XXXX or 416-NXX-XXXX.  If I try 905-NXX-XXXX,
I get a "cannot be completed as dialed" recording.

In the days when 905 and other codes reached Mexico, how many digits
had to be dialed after the pseudo area code?  Our Moderator thinks
that a couple of years out of use is sufficiently long to avoid a
serious nuisance of wrong-language wrong-number calls; I think he
underestimates the number of people who do things like putting an
obsolete code on business stationery or writing down a number and
calling it years later.  But if these calls will fail to complete
anyway, no problem.

Was the answer different for different pseudo area codes?


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


[Moderator's Note: Actually, there were the same number of digits;
they were just parsed differently. And the did not refer to it as
an 'area code', but rather, an 'access code' (I think). What we
actually dialed was '90' plus a 5 then the number in Mexico City
if my memory is correct.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:29:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: A New Love Story (Solution)


[Moderator's Note: The other day this puzzle was printed here without
including the solution so that readers who wanted to work on it could
do so ... I promised to print the answer later on, and here it is
now. The puzzle itself is also being repeated for those who may have
not seen it earlier this week. My thanks to Mark Brader for passing
it along to the Digest.  PAT]

 From: [e-mail] (Dror Lubin)
 Subject: A New Love Story (solution)
 Reply-To: [e-mail]
 Organization: Chalmers University of Technology
 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 08:33:39 GMT


Here is my "official" solution (following the puzzle itself):


A New Love Story
----------------

Once upon a time, in a far away land, there was a beautiful girl, who
lived in a big big castle, just like in all the other stories that
begin like this. Alas,  the girl had a wicked mother who kept her locked.
Where? In a red cell. The cell had a combination lock with three knobs.
On one was written "red" on the other was written "cell", and on the third,
the biggest, was written "nlrrecs". Our poor girl couldn't find out how on
earth could she open this lock. As she couldn't get out, she decided to make
her living in. She was a great cook, so she opened a road restaurant in her
cell, or more properly: A cell-diner. She put outside a big sign saying:
"NIIDSACAL CELL DINER" (niidsacal means "friendly" in her language). Of
course, with such a name, not many people stopped there, and even if they
did, they couldn't get in because of the lock, so business were rather slow.

One day, a young prince heard about this girl. Nowadays, most princes are
in the racing business, and so was he. Instead of a white horse, he had a
big racing car. People often asked him if he had a white horse, and he
would always say: "NO!, I have a racing car". Then they would ask him
what does his car look like, and he would say: "Nice....All RED!!". The
registration plate was "ICDIINPNNS". He chose this plate because these
were the initials of his name and title: "Isidor Charles Darwinski the 2nd,
Noble Prince of Norway, Nashville and Seattle".

Well, as ICDII heard the sad story of the girl in the red cell, he jumped
into his car, and raced towards the evil castle. He was so furious, he did
not see the huge oil truck coming towards him on the wrong side of the road.
Boy, was that an ill-end-race!! ICDII became even more ill when he got the
bill: $5,172,790.20, you see, it was he who drove on the wrong side, and
without insurance too! After that, ICDII wouldn't hear anymore of no princesses,
so our little girl is still locked away in her red cell, waiting for *YOU* to
call her.

Do you know her phone number??

***************************************************************************

Solution:

The puzzle is based on the kind of arithmetic puzzles in which you
have to solve an arithmetic equation in which digits are represented
by letters. The same letter stands for the same digit, different
letters for different digits. Leading zeros are not accepted (that
is 'abcd' is strictly four digits, 'a' may not be 0). These puzzles
used to be very popular in weekend papers. In the above story, four
such puzzles are hidden:

The combination lock ---   red*cell=nlrrecs
The restaurant sign ----   cell*diner=niidsacal
The racing car plates --   nice*all*red=icdiinpnns
The accident report ----   ill*end*race=517279020

All four has a unique solution, the same to all:

n=2 i=1 c=3 e=4 a=8 l=5 r=7 d=6 p=9 s=0

The best way (IMHO) to solve here is to factorize the only given number:

517279020 = (2^2)*3*5*31*71*3917,

so that 'race' can be either 3917 or 3917*2=7834. We next look for 'ill',
a 3 digit number in which the last one repeats. There are not many
possibilities: 31*5=155 and 71*5=355. Both are inconsistent with 'race'=3917,
so we are left with 'race'=7834, 'ill'=155, and we can check that 'end'
comes out correct! The first three equations can be used to verify the result,
and to determine s and p.

Now, how to get a phone number??  There are four emphasized phrases:

"In a red cell" "A cell diner" "Nice all red" "Ill end race"

These are all "...Another boring anagram request...." posted by ...

Cinderella!

(Acknowledgement: Anagrams of 'Cinderella' found using a program
 by James A. Cherry)

Now we have a name, and a letter-digit key, so the number is obviously:

(312)6474558

And now you know that Cinderella lives in Chicago ... (If I am not
mistaken, it is more than fifteen years since I have been working
night shifts at the international telephone exchange).

 Dror

P. S. I picked this number quite arbitrarily. If there is a BBS or anything
else behind this number, my apologies. I did not think anybody will actually
call there.


Dror  Lubin                            E-mail: [e-mail]
Department of Applied Physics          Tel:    +(46)(31)7723186
Chalmers University of Technology      Fax:    +(46)(31)416984
412 96 Goteborg, Sweden.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #821
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa27063;
          16 Dec 93 18:26 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20136
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:25:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10717
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:25:00 -0600
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:25:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #822

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Dec 93 14:25:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 822

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Combinet Users Mailing List (David E. Martin)
    Need Help With Ancient Western Electric 1A2 KSU (William L. Roberts)
    Information Wanted on Leewah Datacom Securities (Curtis Kundred)
    Is There a Good Cordless Headset Phone? (Lawrence D. Sher)
    Two Cellphones With Same Number - a Service? (Michael V. Murphy)
    Two Cellphones With Same Number? - Not Permitted (John Landwehr)
    Cordless Phone Questions (Patricia A. Dunkin)
    ZEnith, ENterprise, Fred & Ethyl (David A. Kaye)
    Satellite Link Questions (Gerry Palmer)
    FAX Modem Needed For Disabled Worker (Charlie L. Eyster)
    Re: AC 520 for Arizona in March 1995 (Carl Moore)
    Re: Only Two "Operating" IXCs in DC (Mark Roberts)
    Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Bob Olson)
    Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Barry Lustig)
    Re: What Happened to "811" Numbers? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: 5ESS CentraNet Question (Russell Sharpe)
    Re: Wiring a New Home - Suggestions? (George Zmijewski)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

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

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 10:45:41 CST
From: David E. Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Combinet Users Mailing List


Combinet Users Mailing List

I have established a mailing list for discussions among users and
potential users of Combinet bridges.  The list is open to anyone. To
subscribe send e-mail to [e-mail] with the single
line:

SUBSCRIBE

You will then be sent an acknowledgement and a list of instruction.  To
submit a message to the list send to [e-mail].  It will be
reflected to all subscribers.  The list is not moderated.

I expect the list volume to be fairly low.  Some topics for discussion:
- use of NI-1 with Combinet bridges
- Combinet bridge security
- Interesting applications of remote bridging with Combinet
- Connection set-up times with Combinet bridges
- Anything else you want to disucss

Please contact me with questions or comments.


David E. Martin
HEP Network Resource Center                    Phone: [phone]
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory            FAX: [phone]
P.O. Box 500, MS 368; Batavia, IL 60510  USA  E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (William L Roberts)
Subject: Need Help With Ancient Western Electric 1A2 KSU
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 15:09:09 GMT


I have an old mechanical relay 1A2 KSU installed at my home and a
slightly newer version which uses modular cards which I have salvaged
from an old building.  Can anyone point me to tech data concerning
configuring one or the other for such items a common ring, hold
circuit, etc.

It would also be helpful to have some information on the six-button
keysets which go with this system, particularly the differences in
their internal configuation with and without the added speakerphone.

Also, any thoughts on how a modem can be set up to provide A-A1
support for this sytem, possibly with some exclusion feature so
unsuspecting family members cannot inadvertently pick up the line in
use?

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

From: [e-mail] (Curtis Kundred)
Subject: Information Wanted on Leewah Datacom Securities
Date: 16 Dec 93 02:09:59 PST


Does anyone have information on a company Leewah Datacom Securities?
I am looking for anyone who might have worked with or for the company
and any information you might have on their products.  Please reply by
E-Mail to [e-mail].


Curt

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

From: [e-mail] (Lawrence D. Sher)
Subject: Is There a Good Cordless Headset Phone?
Date: 16 Dec 1993 14:45:53 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman (BBN)


I know of only two cordless telephones that are headsets.  Both have a
belt pack for batteries, electronics, and buttons.  One is sold by
Hello Direct and has (at least) the fatal flaw that you cannot answer
calls using it alone.  The other is new from Radio Shack; it has no
local ringer, a very poor range (easing the problem of no local
ringer), and cuts off the connection in the presence of noise.

Are there any high-quality cordless headset phones?


Internet email: [e-mail]
Larry Sher  US Mail: BBN, MS 6/5B, 10 Moulton St., Cambridge, MA 02138
Telephone: [phone]    FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (michael.v.murphy)
Subject: Two Cellphones With Same Number - a Service?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 23:37:17 GMT


I am looking for a way to have two different cellular phones use the
same number. Does any company offer this service? I would be willing
to pay more if only for the simplicity of having a number to give
out/remember.


Thanks,

mike m


[Moderator's Note: There are companies which say they will reprogram
your phones to do this, but note they are not service providers, just
hardware modification people. In the next message John Landwehr will
discuss this further.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Landwehr)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 17:35:00 -0600
Subject: Two Cellphones With Same Number? - Not Permitted


Ameritech and Cellular One in Chicago claim that you cannot have two
cellular phones with the same phone number.  (This would be a nice
feature if you have a car phone, and a handheld!  But they claim the
FCC doesn't approve. Translated -> they make more money this way).
Their suggestion is call forwarding and no-answer-transfer.

So what's the TELECOM Digest way around this?  Couldn't you reprogram
your second phone based on registration info stored on your first
phone?  Isn't this what those crooks are illegally doing by pulling up
next to you in a van full of electronic goodies to steal your registration
information as it goes over the air?

(And as a side note, did anyone get a copy of the Motorola Technical
Training Manual yet?)

'Inquiring minds want to  know...'


John Landwehr


[Moderator's Note: You can reprogram your cellular phone to anything
you like; that does not mean it will work when you try to transmit
with it. The catch is, the tower matches the ESN (electronic serial
number) of the phone -- over which you have NO control unless you are
really knowledgeable about working on the innards of the phone -- with
the 'phone number' of record for the instrument being used. If they
do not match, then service is denied. There are exceptions which have
been discussed here in the past. If you can change the ESN, and there
are people who know how to do it as a hardware mod for example, then
you are all set. You swap the ESN *and* the phone number, making the
two always match with cell company records and you are all set. The
trouble is, this defeats the fraud controls established by the carrier
and you have no one to blame but yourself if later on you get stuck
with a bunch of calls halfway around the world on your cellular bill.

I think it is too bad the cellular carriers insist on one or nothing
where the ESN is concerned. It seems like they could change that field
in their records to allow for two or three ESNs to all be valid per
'number'; that would offer a compromise between security and user
convenience.  Having two or three eligible ESNs for users who wanted
that many would still for all intents and purposes provide the same
level of security as exists now. The cell companies might want to have
users who request this sign off on something agreeing to accept
liability for some amount of fraud should it occur in order to protect
themselves. Naturally only the original ESN would be valid for calls
unless a second or third ESN was specifically entered in the records,
and I would probably hold the line at three; no one needs more than
that if that many.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 10:33 EST
From: [e-mail] (Patricia A Dunkin [phone])
Subject: Cordless Phone Questions


1) On phones with several channels, is autoselect or do-it-yourself
preferable for the average user?  Autoselect sounds like a good idea,
but does it work as advertised, or are most people better off having
direct control over which channel is in use?

2) My sister's family has been noticing an increase in the amount of
crosstalk they get.  The last straw was overhearing a conversation
that sounded as clear as a normal telephone connection.  When she
called U.S. West, they said cordless phones (not her corded phone, but
other people's cordless phones) were probably causing the trouble.
This was not much help to her.  Is there anything she can do, or can
get U.S. West to do?


Thanks,

Pat Dunkin ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Cordless phones are becoming so common and widely
accepted that those ten channels allocated for their use around 46.6
mhz are pretty busy in some areas. Perhaps the cordless phone
manufacturers and the FCC never figured that a day would come when
more than ten people living in the same apartment complex would all
have cordless phones and want to use them at the same time.  It used
to be assumed that even if the cordless phone had only one channel
(out of the ten channels allocated), as long as the phones were sold
randomly around the country it was unlikely any two users living next
to each other would wind up with a phone on the same frequency as
their neighbor. Of course that's not the case any longer. With cordless
phones in many households and baby monitors or children's walkie-talkies
in the rest, the 46/49 territory is starting to get crowded. Add in a
few Radio Shack remote-controlled toy cars and airplanes for your
listening pleasure (many are in the 27 megs area squeezed between the
CB channels but others are up there in 46/49 with the phones) and you
can get a real zoo. Telco understandably takes the position that once
they deliver the dial tone to you in good working condition to your
'demarc', the rest of the problem is yours.

You don't mention if your sister's crosstalk problem is on her wired
phone or her cordless phone. If on the latter, she's stuck. Tell her
to buy one of the new 900 mhz phones from Radio Shack. If the
crosstalk is on her wired phone *and she has her cordless phone
plugged in, even if not using it* it still might be her problem rather
than telco. For instance, I have around here somewhere an *old*
cordless phone from the days when they were in the 27 megs/11 meter
area. Some guy living a couple miles away has a CB radio he runs like
a house afire, running illegal power all the time. His signal splashes
so much it makes the relays in the base of the cordless chatter
regardless of if it is being used or not. When he keys up his radio,
the cordless base gets confused and goes off hook, busying out my
phone line, and his modulations come right on down through the base
and into the phone line. Two miles away ... that's how strong that
signal is from his CB.

Tell sister to unplug (from the power line and the phone line) any
cordless phone she has. If the trouble is gone, good for her. She can
go get a new improved bang-up 900 mhz cordless and have some peace in
her life again. If the trouble does *not* go away at that point, *then*
call telco to complain about crosstalk. She should tell them it was
'tested at the demarc' (not quite, but for all intents and purposes
that's where she tested it) and the trouble persists. Then it becomes
telco's problem; not before what with the nutty and overzealous CB
operators in the world and babies who squall all day long into their
monitors, etc.  For further reading on the way in which radio signals
interfere with each other and household electronic appliances, etc see
the article in TELECOM Digest from a few years ago "Praise the Lord
and Pass the RF Filters" which discussed the citizens of Hammond, Indiana
and their battle with the very strong, improperly modulated signals
of WYCA Christian Broadcasters, a local FM station which was irradiating
them day after day.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: ZEnith, ENterprise, Fred & Ethyl
Date: 16 Dec 1993 00:50:13 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access   [phone]  [login: guest]


David Cornutt ([e-mail]) wrote:

> vice versa. I think Zenith was largely the independent telcos where
> Enterprise was mostly for the Bell System. [....]
> Fred & Ethyl Enterprises   Birmingham
>     Ask the Operator For..... WX-9999

Here in the SF Bay Area the universal California Highway Patrol (state
police) number was ZEnith 1-2000, though this state is 90% Bell.
There were also numerous ENterprise numbers.  In addition, for mobile
phones there were XY numbers in the format above (Ask operator for XY
1-9000).  Of course, there was a time when there really was a "Z" on
the phone dial where the zero is.


[Moderator's Note: I wish someone from the old Bell System who was
around the company in those days would write and explain precisely
the difference between Zenith and Enterprise. Was it just the telco's
choice which one to use, or was there some technical reason in the
accounting/revenue office that one was used some places and the other
in the rest of the country, or?  Come to think of it, besides seeing
Zenith as the automatic reverse charge prefix used a lot by GTE, I
think I saw a few sheriffs whose jurisdiction included people who were
a toll call to reach him on Zenith. What was the real story?   PAT]

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

From: Gerry Palmer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Satellite Link Questions
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 15:16:17 -0500
Organization: ION Publishing Systems


Can anyone help answer these questions?

1) Is the time delay on a bidirectional satellite link to great to
allow LAN traffic (WAN traffic, that is!)?

2) For unidirectional satellite links, is a low-speed flow control line
always necessary in the other direction?

3) Is there anyone out there that sells a canned satellite solution so
that I can drop a file on a shared directory and have it appear at the
other end (unidirectional link preferable).


Thanks very much,

Gerry Palmer                Phone: [phone]
ION Publishing Systems, Inc.  Fax:   [phone]
4915 St. Elmo Ave. #500     Bethesda, MD  20814

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

From: [e-mail] (Charlie L Eyster)
Subject: FAX Modem Wanted For Disabled Worker
Date: 16 Dec 93 18:05:35 GMT
Organization: Pacific * Bell Knowledge Network


I am looking for a fax modem with easy to use software for a
physically disadvantaged employee. Does anyone know, or have
experience with a product that is easy to use.

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

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 05:56:14 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AC 520 for Arizona in March 1995


Notice that one of the ideas (accurate or not) which has floated
around concerning the NANP is that Mexico could become reachable with
area codes of form 52x where x is not 0; the current history file
refers to "not necessarily 0" and I will have to delete the word
"necessarily".  I see no Mexican city codes listed which start with 0.
As you know, Arizona borders Mexico.

There was also the idea that the first NNX area codes would be of form
NN0, which fits 520 (but does not fit 334, which was announced for
Alabama).  Would some people get confused and try to "correct" 520 to
502?  (502 is in western Kentucky, including Louisville.)

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Roberts)
Subject: Re: Only Two "Operating" IXCs in DC
Organization: Tyrell Corp.
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 04:58:01 GMT


Paul Robinson ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I was asked:
<portions of quote omitted>

>> I am sure there is some technicality in the word "operating" that
>> I am not educated about.

> This comment is correct and I used the wrong term.  Rather than use
> the term "operating" I should have said either "domiciled" or
> "headquartered".

> As far as I know, only two long distance companies have their
> headquarters in Washington, DC.  Mid Atlantic Telecom and MCI.  Sprint
> is in Shawnee Mission, KS if I remember, and AT&T is in Basking Ridge,
> NJ.  Number 4, which is Wiltel, if I'm not mistaken, is domiciled in
> Tulsa, Oklahoma, I think.  Anyone care to name who number five is?

Can't name number five, but can clarify Sprint's location.

It is in Westwood, Kansas, just across the Missouri border from Kansas
City, MO.  Sprint actually is domiciled in office buildings all
throughout the area, including some in KCMO and some in Overland Park,
KS.

Westwood actually is a small bedroom community.  The only other major
business there that I'm aware of are radio stations KMBZ and KLTH
(ex-KMBR-FM).

BTW, there is no such thing as "Shawnee Mission, KS" -- that is a
fiction of the U.S. Postal Service's imagination (and the name of the
largest school district in Johnson County, KS).


Mark Roberts -- Kansas City, MO -- in an orbit of mine own....
E-Mail:  [e-mail], [e-mail]   V-Mail:  coming sometime?!


[Moderator's Note: While the names of the 'big three' are never disputed
where long distance is concerned (AT&T, MCI and Sprint in that order) who
comes in fourth and fifth is subject to a lot of bickering among all the
players. Wiltel is one candidate, but LCI (the carrier for the Orange Card)
is another for fourth place. I guess it depends on how you cook the books
each time Dun and Bradstreet comes looking around. :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Olson)
Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk
Organization: Math and Computer Science, Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:52:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Comroe-CDCS37 Rich
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> However, when I recently moved residences (just three months
> ago), I was surprised when Illinois Bell Telephone refused to offer
> ISDN to my new house.  When I asked how come, they told me that it was
> only tariffed for business, and consequently not available for a
> residence.

That's very odd. In an ad glossy I recently received from Ameritech
they hype ISDN as a solution for home offices. Perhaps you should ask
again.


bob

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Lustig)
Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk
Organization: ICTV, Inc., Santa Clara, CA [phone]
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 09:13:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Robert L. McMillin
<[e-mail]> wrote:

On Thu, 25 Nov 1993 02:45:41 GMT, [e-mail] (Will Estes) said:

>> I think you are missing the big picture here.  Within one year, people
>> are going to be able to buy unlimited 10 Megabit per second connections
>> to the net via existing cable TV cable, with a V.FAST or similar channel
>> going upstream.  This is going to cost $99/month or less for unlimited
>> network use.

> And who will be willing to pay $99/month for that?  I certainly
> wouldn't.  Talk to me when you have it down to $20/month or less.

  I for one, would be more than happy to get Internet access for
$99/month.  You have to remember that, currently, Internet access (I
don't mean just an account on an Internet attached machine) can cost
as much as $800/month for a 56Kb pipe, depending upon you location.
$99/month is cheap by comparison.


barry

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

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 00:48:50 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: What Happened to "811" Numbers?
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


> Another reason to do away with 811 numbers is the similarity to
> 911. While I have not personally experienced it, it is my
> understanding that some switches are programmed with heuristic
> rules so that numbers "sufficiently close" to 911 will be
> intercepted to 911.

Not in my area.  Here's some tests I tried.  (Note when I say
'supervise' I mean the small 'click' the phone company sends back to
tell you it has accepted the dialed number.)

Well, unlike some people's comments, dialing '91' and then sitting and
waiting doesn't cause anything to happen.

Dialing '211' plus most any combination of 4 digits returns busy; I tried
things like the last 4 digits of my number, and that's also busy.

'311' for some reason, goes to directory assistance.

'411' is, of course, directory assistance.

Dialing '511' or '711' *instantly* begins to ring.  At midnight Friday
I tried five rings;  Nobody answers - no recording, nothing.

C&P Telephone has returned to '611' as the number for repair service.

Dialing '811' takes about five seconds to supervise, and about twelve
seconds it goes to a loud 'baw-baw-baw' tone, not the same as reorder.

I just tried it a moment ago.  Dialing '911' takes about four seconds
to supervise, and then it begins to ring.  I instantly hung up as soon
as I heard a ring, which from the last '1' to the ring was about five
seconds.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Russell Sharpe)
Subject: Re: 5ESS CentraNet Question
Date: 16 Dec 1993 10:41:54 GMT
Organization: Wellington City Council, Public Access
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> Presently we can have Call Waiting on No Answer Diversion but NOT on
> Busy Diversion.

It's called a *Service Feature Conflict*, Call Waiting, and Diversion
on Busy both use the same _System Register_ to direct the switch
processor to the correct subroutine program.

It has the same effect as instructing a processor to do two things
simultaneoulsy with the same register ... you will probably get a system
error, or a corruption.

In my eleven years in the business, I have not yet heard of any
switch, (PABX or CO switch) capable of this somewhat impossible task.

In New Zealand, our NEC NEAX61E's will, if you have a Voice Mailbox,
Call Waiting, and No Answer diversion, a waiting call will divert to
the mailbox after the predetermined duration.

If you can preset the time before diversion to between zero and thirty
seconds, if you are maiking an important (or modem call), you can set
your diversion time to zero, thus effectively Diversion on Busy.

If your 5ESS (which I know very little about) has these services, this
may be an answer.


Regards,

Russell Sharpe        UseNet: [e-mail]
                     FidoNet: 3:771/370 & 3:771/160
                   Voice: [phone]
                   snailmail: 171 Holborn Drive
                              Stokes Valley 6008
                              New Zealand

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

From: [e-mail] (George Zmijewski)
Subject: Re: Wiring a New Home - Suggestions?
Organization: MGZ Computer Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 11:27:03


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

> I am having a new home built and would like to install the wiring now
> that I might need for future technologies.  What would you recommend?
> Cable, fiber, copper, etc. Any suggestions welcome.

I wired my house about four years ago. Nothe that this was done in UK
and some things differ ie. one phone = four wires; two for speech, one
for ring shunt, one for earth recall (for PABX); for power we have 240
volts in the socket so our 30Amps = 65Amps @110 volts.

The idea was to put enough wire for next five to seven years.

POWER:
Each room has separate circuit for sockets (30 A - British Standard)
Each room downstairs has separate light circuit (10 A)
3 Bedrooms upstairs have one light circuit (10 A)
Landing/Stairs have separate light circuit (5 A)
Bathroom has separate light circuit (5 A)
Kithchen + Utility room 2 30 A circuits - one above the worktop for
         all the thing you plug in for making food, and second, below the
         worktop for oven , fridge, freezer
Utility room only separate circuit for dishwasher and washing machine (30 A)

Basement (where all wires come to) separate circuit for light, and
separate circuit for sockets

In the basement I have installed two sets for power fail fluorescent
lights (I got them second hand from some shop fitter) they have NiCd
batteries and keep one or two fluorescent tubes on for about 75 minutes;
they switch on automatically on power failure. I found this the most
useful feature in my house; you can take the fuse box to pieces, put
it back again and all with normal light, also when RCB trips the
lights I can get to the fuse box without breaking my legs over the
junk in the basement.

Bathroom light, kitchen "above worktop" circuits are on separate RCB
the most likely to trip, also lower rated RCBs are more sensitive.
Light circuits are on separate RCB from socket circuits -- I don't
want lights going off when there's a fault in my HiFi.  Kitchen "below
worktop circuit" is not protected by RCB -- I don't want my freezer to
be without power when I'm out and RCB falsely trips.  I use basement
circuit for "Computers only" -- it goes through UPS (latest addition).
I have single core 10 A rated cable connected to each light switch and
terminating near the fuse box - this allows me to connect room lights
to timmer switch overrriding the wall switch (an anti burglar device)

OTHER CABLING:

Cables running to two opposite corners of each room:

Two four pair phone cables, two shielded eight core serial cables, one
ethernet, one TV coax, there is ethernet cable linking two oposite
sockets in each room so that I can make loop from the basement, round
the room and back to the basement. Eight core alarm type cable is
terminating in all those places where infrared movement detectors get
a good view of the protected space; also I have magnetic switches
embeded in widows and doors (in addition to alarm use it is handy
indicator that all windows are closed.)

After four years I have found the most redundant is shielded serial
cable (seemed to be good idea at the time second hand terminals were
cheap and ethernet cards were expensive) I use it now to connect my
DOS PC upstairs to PBX programming socket in I want to reconfigure it,
also I have terminal connected to the call logging socket of the PBX --
(it shows me where my money goes :) )

Nowdays ethernet serves all computer related connections.  A lot of
phone wiring is very useful -- I have on average two phones in every
room so when phone rings it is never further that an arm's length (just
my lazy nature).

I have underestimated my need for external telephone lines. I had six
pair cable running to the connection box where telco can terminate
their wires I have replaced that with 20 pair now. (If I get over 20
pair I will get ground cable feed to the basement.)

I wanted to use some of the spare phone wiring to connect speakers
around the house for background music -- now I can have music relayed
via the speaker in my phones (reasonable quality) with the ability to
switch it on/of and volume control at each point. (The switch I have
now for voice extensions is Northen Telecom NortStar Compact; modems
and fax are routed via another switch.)

Total length of cable use I estimated at about 1.5 miles into standard
English Terrace house (three up two down kitchen, utility, bathroom).
Extra cost estimated at about 2000 USD Wall space in the basement used
for connection matrixes 4 ft by 9 ft !


George Zmijewski


[Moderator's Note: Wow!  You are *wired*, no doubt about it.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #822
******************************

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04976;
          17 Dec 93 18:36 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14317
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Fri, 17 Dec 1993 14:33:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12280
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 17 Dec 1993 14:33:00 -0600
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 14:33:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #823

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 17 Dec 93 14:33:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 823

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Public Hearings on Privacy (US Consumer Affairs via Dave Banisar)
    Connecting From Europe to U.S. via ISDN, Help! (Braun Brelin)
    Need Information About Russian Connectivity to Outside (Tomaz Borstnar)
    Schedule Change for Computers in Medicine CFP (Wesley Snyder)
    Book Review: "Internet Passport" (Rob Slade)
    ISDN Availability Data Now Accessible via Internet (Jim Fenton)
    BellSouth Sixth to Sue Over Cable Dereg Act (Wash. Post via Paul Robinson)
    Questions About Identring (Thomas Chen)
    Recourse For Phone Tapping? (Rex Fowler)
    MCI Takes 150M Charge (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    Equal Access Ballots -- Multiple Names for One LD Carrier? (Robert Keller)
    Re: Calling Cards and Privately Owned Pay Phones (Tim Gorman)
    Re: High Speed Links? (Paul Robinson)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

Organization: CPSR Washington Office
From: Dave Banisar <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 13:00:10 EST
Subject: Public Hearings on Privacy


Public Hearings on Privacy

                           NEWS
              US OFFICE OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE              Contact: George  Idelson  (USOCA)
December 10, 1993                           [phone]
                                            Patricia  Faley  (USOCA)
                                            [phone]

PUBLIC HEARINGS ON INFORMATION AGE PRIVACY SET FOR CALIFORNIA AND
WASHINGTON, DC.

Sacramento: January 10-11,  1994;  Washington,  DC:  January  26-27,
1994.  Public Invited to Participate.

     Representatives from the public, private and non profit sectors
will present their views on personal privacy and data protection in
the information age at public hearings of a U.S.  Government task
force in early 1994.

     The hearings will be open meetings of the Privacy Working Group,
chaired by Patricia Faley, Acting Director of the United States Office
of Consumer Affairs (USOCA).  The Working Group is part of a task
force set up by the Clinton Administration to consider how to spur
development of an "information superhighway." officially known as the
National Information Infrastructure (NII), the "data highway" will be
capable of exchanging data, voice and images electronically within a
vast network of individuals, businesses, government agencies and other
organizations around the world.  Ensuring ready access to information
is the goal of the Administrative initiative, but protecting
individual privacy is essential to its success.

     The public meetings will examine privacy issues relating to such
areas as law enforcement, financial services, information technology,
and direct marketing.  The California mooting, January 10th and llth,
will be hosted by Jim Conran, Director, California Department of
Consumer Affairs in the First Floor Hearing Room at 400 R Street in
Sacramento.  The Washington, DC meeting, January 26th and 27th, will
be held at the U.S.  Department of Commerce Auditorium, 14th &
Constitution Ave.  NW.  Registration begins at 8:30am, meetings at
9am.

     The public is invited to attend, question speakers and to make
brief comments, but space is limited.  Concise written statements for
the record should be sent to "Privacy," USOCA, 1620 L Street NW,
Washington DC 20036 or faxed to [phone].

                                  # # #

United States Office of Comumer Affairs - 1620 L Street, NW,  Washington,
D.C. 20036-5605

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

From: [e-mail] (Braun Brelin)
Subject: Connecting From Europe to U.S. via ISDN, Help!
Date: 17 Dec 93 14:54:00 GMT


Hello,

I am facing some real roadblocks in being able to connect from my
office in Paris to my company's headquarters in the U.S.  I am still
very much of a novice when it comes to ISDN and WAN.

I would like to know of anyone who is using ISDN to connect to an
office in the U.S. from France.

I have a number of questions:

1.  I have heard of a company called Bintec that makes ISDN sbus cards
that will allow connectivity from one Sparcstation to another.  I have
a SPARCstation LX on my end.  How does this affect the built-in ISDN
available on the LX?

2.  I understand that ISDN standards in the U.S. are different than in
Europe.  My company is located in Santa Clara, CA.  Does anyone know
how PacBell implements their version of ISDN?

3.  Can I get greater than 64Kbytes bandwidth on one ISDN line?  That
is, what is the best way to use both B channels (I know about inverse
multiplexing but I dont' know if it is standard or is suppported or
what...)

4.  Does any Internet service provider in Europe allow me to use ISDN
to connect to their hubs?


Thanks in advance for any responses.


Braun Brelin    Auspex Systems, Inc.   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tomaz Borstnar)
Subject: Need Information About Russian Connectivity to Outside
Date: 17 Dec 1993 17:21:32 +0100
Organization: ARNES [Academic and Research Network of Slovenia]
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Hello!

    My boss urgentely needs up-to-date information about Russian
connectivity. He is especially interested in situation in Moscow. Can
anybody provide me some pointer to this?

Thanks in advance.


Tomaz Borstnar
ARNES (Academic and research network of Slovenia) News admin
Phone:[phone] ext. 422; fax:[phone]
E-mail: [e-mail] | Arnes, Jamova 39, Ljubljana, Slovenia

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

From: [e-mail] (Wesley Snyder)
Subject: Schedule Change for Computers in Medicine CFP
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: The Bowman Gray School of Medicine
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 20:19:16 GMT


                      CBMS-94
          Advance Notice and Call for Papers
Computers in Medicine -- Two Conferences, one location

ONLY TWO MORE WEEKS LEFT TO SUBMIT PAPER SUMMARIES! DEC 31 IS IT!

The Seventh IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems
Friday-Saturday, June 10 - 11, 1994 with tutorials Saturday evening
and Sunday morning;

and the

12th Conference for Computer Applications in Radiology
    Monday-Wednesday, June 13-15, 1994 with tutorials on Sunday

CBMS Sponsors
    *IEEE Computer Society    *IEEE Engineering in Medicine and
            Biology Society
    *The Winston-Salem Section of the IEEE
    * with local support by the Bowman Gray School of Medicine

The Symposium is intended for engineers and computer scientists in
academia and industry who are designing and developing Computer-Based
Medical Systems (CBMS). Biomedical engineers, computer scientists,
medical residents, physicians, and students who are working on medical
projects that involve computers are encouraged to submit papers
describing their work.

The conference is run this year in coordination with the annual SCAR
(Society for Computer Application in Radiology) meeting, starting on
Sunday, June 13, at the Winston-Salem Civic Center, next door to the
Stouffer.  CBMS attendees will therefore have the opportunity to
combine two excellent conferences in one trip.

The Program:

CBMS combines technical papers, poster presentations, panel
discussions, tutorials and research laboratory tours. Papers covering
the following related areas are requested:

Device Reliability and Safety        Neural Networks and Expert Systems
   fault-tolerance, device testing,       theory, implementations,
   validation and software safety       pattern recognition, applications

Image Processing and Analysis        Prosthetic Devices
 registration, compression,           Environmental control, word processing
 enhancement, restoration,          devices for the hearing and vision
 reconstruction, hardware         impaired, standards

Signal Processing            Cardiovascular Technologies
 algorithms, hardware, real-time     monitoring, imaging, bioimpedance
 processing, monitoring, EEG         measurements, micro-computing,
                     computer applications,
                     cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Information Systems            Clinical Assessment and Risk
                     Evaluation
RIS, HIS, PACS, networks, databases     real-time signal processing,
                     database systems

Submission of Papers:

Contributions in the forms of papers, poster sessions, software
demonstrations, and tutorials in the areas listed above are invited.
Paper summaries should be limited to two pages (typed, double-spaced)
and should include the title, names of authors, and the address and
telephone number of the corresponding author. Send four copies of your
contributions to: (Authors west of the Mississippi and Asia) Nassrin
Tavakoli, Info Enterprises, 3260 N. Colorado Street, Chandler, AZ
85225-1123. or (Authors east of the Missippi and Europe) Paul
Kizakevich, Research Triangle Institute, POBox 12194, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709.

Student Paper Contest:

Student papers are invited and considered for the contest. Winners of
the contest will be selected by the Student Paper Contest Committee
and awards will be announced and made the symposium. Awards will
consist of a certificate and monetary prize as follows:

First Prize: $500; Second Prize: $300; Third Prize: $150.
To be eligible, the student must be the first author of an accepted paper,
and must present the paper at CBMS `94.

Deadlines and Key Dates:

Paper summaries due:    December 31, 1993    Notice of acceptance:
February 1, 1994

Camera ready papers due:    March 15, 1994

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

Date: 16 Dec 93 15:05 -0600
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Internet Passport"


BKINTPSP.RVW  931118

Computer Literacy Bookshops
2590 North First Street
San Jose, CA   95131
408-435-0744   fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
or (bookstores only, please)
NorthWestNet
15400 SE 30th Place, Suite 202
Bellevue, WA  98007  USA
[phone]   fax: [phone]
"The Internet Passport", Kochmer, 1993, 0-9635281-0-6, U$29.95
[e-mail]

This work is a fairly bare bones and no nonsense guide to the
Internet.  The book is orderly, and the explanations and illustrations
are clear.  Each chapter covers a single topic.  Each chapter ends
with additional references, most often online materials or sources.
The work is well researched and highly competent in most cases.  There
is, in the early chapters, a gracelessness to it which lacks any kind
of appeal.  What humour there is tends to seem somewhat contrived and
sanitized: a topic on the hardware that connects computers on the
Internet is subtitled "Router Rooters: 'Go Internet Go!'" Nevertheless,
it is a thoroughly researched and valuable reference for those interes-
ted in using the resources of the Internet.

Section one, which is also chapter one, is a brief introduction to the
Internet.  There is minor mention of the technologies and organizations
involved in the Internet, as well as brief mention of Fidonet and
UUCP.  The bibliography is a very solid list of valuable titles, but
would have had significantly more value with some annotation.

Section two covers the basic tools and functions of the Internet.  The
topics are well chosen, starting with email, mail servers, mail
gateways to other networks and systems, telnet and ftp.  Chapter four
discusses mail etiquette.  This section, I am happy to note, gives
more space to the topic than is usual.  In the end, though, it comes
down to a list of rules that reduce to "keep it short, keep on topic,
be complete and don't mess up."  It would be nice to see one of these
essays tell people how and why flame wars start, which might help to
avoid them.  Chapter eight, following ftp, deals with file compression
and archiving.

Section three moves into the next level of sophistication, in terms of
communications, with group discussions.  As the book puts it, these
are the "Community Forums" of the net.  Chapters nine, ten and eleven
deal very clearly, completely and usefully with Usenet, BITNET,
LISTSERVs and Internet mailing lists.  I am noted for highly critical
reviews: I find nothing of any substance wrong with this section, and
recommend it highly and without reservation.  Once again, the end of
each chapter gives useful directions on how to find out further
information, particularly the specifics of various LISTSERVs and
mailing lists.

Section four starts to look at the resources of the Internet as a
library, with electronic journals, books, catalogues and data bases.
Chapter fifteen is very similar to the catalog section of Ed Krol's
work (cf BKKROL.RVW) with listings of sites and resources by topic.
Section five deals with exploration and retrieval tools, such as
archie, gopher, WAIS, WWW and directory services.  The final section
contains two specialized interests, the use of the Internet in public
education, and access to supercomputing facilities.

The book concludes with several appendices.  The most interesting are
likely Appendix A, which gives suggestions of online sources of
information about the Internet, and, B, which gives a short list of
Internet access providers and methods.  The glossary is very well
done: not overblown with imposing numbers of entries, but good
explanations of the important terms.

The unprepossessing beginning of this work hides a very carefully
researched and well organized reference for those wishing to get into
the Internet and its resources.  Less flashy than Krol, it should
nevertheless have a place on the desk of every serious Internet user.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993   BKINTPSP.RVW  931118

(Postscriptum: this work is being kept up to date.  The edition I reviewed was
the fourth, and a fifth is planned for next year.)
Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of the TELECOM
Digest and associated mailing lists.

DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters
Editor and/or reviewer [e-mail], [e-mail], Rob Slade at 1:153/733
DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 17:12:23 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Jim Fenton)
Subject: ISDN Availability Data Now Accessible via Internet


By popular demand, the Combinet "BBS" providing information on ISDN
availability in many areas of the US is now available via the
Internet.  The information is supplied by Bell Communications Research
and various Operating Companies and is updated periodically as new
information becomes available.

To access the service, telnet to bbs.combinet.com and login as isdn
(no password is required).  After entering an area code and
three-digit prefix, the service displays the availability of ISDN.
Also displayed is information about carrier installation prices and
monthly charges.

For those without direct Internet access, the service continues to be
available on a dialup basis using a 2400 bit/sec modem at [phone].


Jim Fenton <[e-mail]>
Combinet, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA    408 522-9164

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

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 20:57:49 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: BellSouth Sixth to Sue Over Cable Dereg Act
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


{Washington Post}, Page F2, December 15:

BellSouth became the sixth regional phone firm suing to overturn the
Cable Communications Act of 1984, which prohibits BellSouth and other
"Baby Bells" from providing phone and cable TV service in the same
area.  Its lawsuit in U.S. District court called the curbs an
unconstitutional infringement on its freedom of speech.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Chen)
Subject: Questions About Identring
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 23:29:50 GMT
Organization: Hughes Network Systems Inc.


Is there a spec for identring; can someone tell me what is the on/off
duration?

tom


[Moderator's Note: By 'identring' are you referring to the service
available from telcos where separate numbers are on one line, each
with their own ringing cadence?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rex Fowler)
Subject: Recourse For Phone Tapping?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Manufacturing Technology Center, Texas Instruments, Dallas
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 03:25:46 GMT


What recourse does a person have against someone hooking into their
phone line and making long distance phone calls?

A friend of mine has been getting charged for 1-900 numbers for a few
months now.  She lives in an apartment complex so the phone lines all
run together up through the walls to each individual apt.  Her
neighbor had tapped into her lines to make these calls.  They probably
listened in on her conversations as well.

The phone company sent a technician to checkout her lines which is how
they found out.

Now, what can/should she do according to the laws?  Press charges,
file suit, ...?

Please Cc: me on any follow-ups since I will be out of town
until January.

Thanks,


Rex Fowler              Inet    : <[e-mail]>
Texas Instruments       TI MSG  : rfow
Dallas Tx               Phone   : [phone]


[Moderator's Note: She certainly can sue her neighbor for theft of
service. I'm surprised telco is still billing her for the calls if
they are the ones who discovered the illegal connection outside her
premises. Are they still after her to pay? Or did telco write it off
and now the 900 Information Provider is after her?  If she did not
personally have to pay for the calls then her case will be a little
different than if she was billed, paid for the calls and has now
discovered the theft. In any event, she definitly has a case against
her neighbor and should consult an attorney. Telco will assist by
providing records of their service call and the technician's findings
(that her line had been tapped) when they are subpoened to do so.
These records will help her attorney in presenting her case to the
court. I hope she wins her case, and she should without difficulty.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 19:47:44 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI Takes 150M Charge
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


{Washington Post} Dec 16, Page B16

 "MCI Communications of Washington said it will take a one-time charge
of as much as $150 million in the fourth quarter to pay for what it
described as a strategic realignment of its business.  MCI is taking
the charge to cover consolidation costs associated with the streamlining
of its facilities and the relocation of certain operations to cheaper
areas."


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail] (Robert J. Keller)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 23:32:36
Subject: Equal Access Ballots -- Multiple Names for One LD Carrier?
From: [e-mail] (Robert J. Keller)


I am curious to know if the issue has ever come up in which an LD
carrier that may be known by different names (e.g., an official
corporate name and a trade name) has wanted to have _both_ names
appear on a local exchange carrier's equal access ballot so as to
increase the likelihood that its name will be recognzed by potential
subscribers?  If so, how was this handled?


Thanks.

Bob Keller (KY3R)    Tel [phone]
[e-mail]    Fax [phone]
[e-mail]    CIS 76100,3333

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

Date: 16 Dec 93 11:59:59 EST
From: Tim Gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Calling Cards and Privately Owned Pay Phones


[e-mail] in Telecom Digest V13 #821 posted the following:

> So I called one of the operators today from a payphone that was giving
> me that trouble. This time I told her "I had problems using the
> voicemail system at work". She suggested to push the keys slower and
> to leave a longer pause each two or three keystrokes.

> It worked. I dialed the target number leaving three second pauses
> between the phone number and the calling card number and waited five
> seconds before pushing in the PIN.

> Hope it works elsewhere.

This is not too far fetched. It would also be interesting to know if
you held the keys down longer. While you may not have meant to, most
people, when slowing their dialing, also tend to hold the keys down
longer.

As anyone running an operator system usually finds out, one of the
biggest problems is recognizing credit card numbers input from DTMF
station sets.

DTMF was not originally designed for the purposes to which it is put
today. Station set oscillators are not held to the tolerances needed
for trouble free operation. Standard DTMF receiver specifications are
not stringent enough to insure operation under many situations of
noise, loss, and phase shift.

By holding the keys down longer, you give the receiving system more time
to recognize digits as well as the intervals between digits. This
results in much more reliable operation.

I would bet that lots of situations where you think the originating set
has prevented the call are actually situations where the far end has
received something it didn't know how to handle and, instead of
gracefully ending the call with a notice, it just locked up and left you
hanging.


Tim Gorman [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 11:42:07 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: High Speed Links?
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


[e-mail], writes:

> We are in the need for a temporary, high-speed (~ 50-100KBytes/sec)
> link from our offices in Buffalo, to Washington D.C. I'd like to
> get some information regarding how much such a link would cost,
> what is involved in setting up the link at both ends, how much
> would it cost to lease the equipment for the period of time, what
> are our options, etc. etc. As you can see, Telecomm is definitely
> not one of my strongpoints, so I'm just fishing for ideas right
> now!

At the Washington, DC end, you can get a connection to the Internet
for 56K for about $500 a month, plus $500 to install, plus the cost of
the routers and the line from the phone company to a Point of Presence,
say $200 a month.  So call it $700 a month on this end. Routers sell
for about $6000 or so, and most rental companies charge based on cost
recovery after 10 months, so figure $600 a month for the router.  So
figure $1400 a month on the Washington, DC end.  Rates may be more,
less or the same at your end.  The same place will supply a T1 for
$700 a month plus $2000 to install plus telco charges.

Now, if you want to use a private link rather than TCP/IP packets over
the public Internet, you might want to check with some of the smaller
carriers like Wiltel which are hungry for your business.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #823
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07514;
          18 Dec 93 7:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28223
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 03:10:29 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26514
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 03:10:03 -0600
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 03:10:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #824

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 18 Dec 93 03:10:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 824

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Updated Summary of T1 Equipment With Modem Banks etc. (Aninda Dasgupta)
    Re: Two Cellphones With Same Number? - Not Permitted (Robert J. Keller)
    Mobilnet - Do They Know This? (Douglas Adams via Aaron L. Dickey)
    Re: PCS Questions (Samir Soliman)
    Re: Wireless LANs (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: Saudi Arabia NANP Area Code (Tony Harminc)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

Date: Fri, 17 Dec 93 14:20:07 EST
From: [e-mail]  (Aninda Dasgupta)
Subject: Updated Summary of T1 Equipment With Modem Banks etc.


[This is an updated version of a summary I posted a few weeks back.
This article has more recent information obtained from USRobotics.
Also, it gives a "vanilla" solution using DACS and channel banks.

For those who are not familiar with T1 terms and equipment, there was
a nice article on the TeleTech mailing list by [e-mail].
com (Scott Statton N1GAK) on Wed, 15 Dec '93, that explained some of
the T1 terms and equipment.]

A number of people from the net asked me to forward whatever
information I have received regarding equipment needed to connect 24
modems to a T1 line.  Below I have described the main features of
each.  All this information is what I have assimilated from
market-speak and brochures of the vendors.

Summary of my application's needs:

I want to provide two kinds of services to my geographically
distributed salespeople; both services are to be provided from a
workstation-based server.

Service 1: Salesperson dials in from his laptop and on my end I want to
    dump some ASCII and graphics messages on his laptop screen
    - pretty much like a remote terminal server.

Service 2: Salesperson dials in from a POTS telephone, uses DTMF keys to
    choose a service and gets messages played back and/or a fax sent to
    a fax machine - very much like voice-mail systems, banks offering
    credit card balance information and fax-back systems.

I need the two services to be served off one workstation because the
information accessible via the two services (using modems or telephone
sets) is identical and because I want to aggregate my incoming lines
onto a single T1 so that I can get good LD rates from my LD provider.

Vendors that have products that allow offering such services are
listed below.

1) US Robotics - Total Control WAN Hub
   -----------------------------------

This product is offered as a chassis and various options on cards.
They have a dual-T1 card with drop-insert capabilities, frac. T1
enabled, accepts ANI/DNIS and requires no external CSU.  The DSP-based
quad-modem cards have built-in fax-modem (V.32bis) capabilities, can
access DNIS, can load DNIS-dependent modem configuration, will
(someday) route the data to LAN adapters (instead of RS-232 ports) and
can originate and terminate fax/modem calls.  USR also talks about
making LAN adapter cards (Enet and TR) available in late '94, which
will allow direct connections to a Token-ring or Ethernet LAN. They
will also have a LAN Gateway card that will work in conjunction with
the LAN adapters to route data to/from the quad modems to the LAN.

TCP/IP and X.25 will be initially supported on the Gateway cards, and
Appletalk, etc. will be added later. Any application specific protocol
of your choice can be downloaded onto the Gateway card. This will
allow you to use any home-brewn protocols for transactions, data
exchange, etc. between remote applications.  A terminal server card
will be avialable around mid-'94. Voice cards (with RJ11 output, I
guess) will be available "later '94." USR will also have ISDN PRI,
X.25 and Frame Relay cards that go in the same chassis.  The chassis
and most of the cards are controllable/monitorable using SNMP, either
from a PC (with software available from USR) or from any other SNMP
host on the LAN.  Some of the cards are also controllable via RS-232
dumb terminals.

For more (and perhaps accurate) information, contact
US Robotics at [phone].
I spoke with Michael Cashman, Ext. 5636 (Marketing/Sales).
I also spoke with Don Balton - [phone] who used to head the group
that designed this product, and Lauri Lentz in Public Relations.


2) Primary Access
   --------------
I found out about Primary Access from, among others, its founder, Jim
Dunn.  They are reachable by email. They seem to have a larger
installed base of their product as compared to the USR product
described above.

This prouduct is also a chassis based system.  The single-T1 card has
drop-insert capabilities, is not capable of frac. T1 (from what I
could gather from their glossies), needs an external CSU (but only for
loop-back testing) and accepts ANI/DNIS. However, the ANI/DNIS is
accessible to a host computer only if you use an X.25 link between the
chassis and the host.  This means, in order to get the ANI/DNIS, you
need to buy an X.25 card for the chassis and an X.25 card and software
for the host.

The dual-modem cards are V.32bis compatible, can do DTMF decoding, can
originate and terminate modem calls, and they promise routing of modem
data to LANs within the next year.  These cards don't seem to be as
feature rich as the USR cards (e.g. on the fly, DNIS-dependent
configuration download, etc.). They offer X.25 cards and Frame Relay
too.  Network management is done using CMIP. All software on the cards
can be downloaded for upgrades.  Voice call support is provided using
their 8-port FXS cards (something that is lacking in the USR offering
at this time).  They have promised Ethernet support in about a year.
They assured me that they can price their products very aggressively.

For more information call:
[phone]
Fax: [phone]


3) Dialogic
   --------
This is a all-in-a-PC solution.  Dialogic offers a T1 interface card
for the IBM PC bus. This card provides access to ANI/DNIS, has
drop-insert capabilities and requires an external CSU for loop-back
testing.  They have various versions of the T1 card, offering various
options for the number of T1 ports. Also offered is a PC-based
four-channel Voice card that does DSP-based call processing. Combined
with Dialogic's voice-processing software (PCM encode/decode API) and
DTMF recognition capabilities, this card provides an excellent way to
implement voice-based services.  Dialogic also offers fax boards that
will allow you to send out faxes from the PC.  The PC, equipped with a
LAN adapter card can, via the application software route all data to a
network.  I am not aware of network monitoring features (SNMP or
CMIP). Also missing is any V.32bis modem capabilties. One attraction
of going the Dialogic way is the elimination of any cabling which is
needed to connect the USR or Primary Access products to any host
system (e.g. RS-232, twisted-pair etc.).  All the cards use Dialogic's
PEB bus for internal data transfers.

For more information call Dialogic Sales and Technical Support:
[phone].


4) IBM's CallPath Line of Products:
   -------------------------------
IBM offers a uniform API to interface to phone systems, independent of
the the PBX vendor and the host system platform.  e.g. one could use
the same programs to implement CallPath-based applications on MVS,
AS/400, OS/2 and AIX based systems and interface to PBXs from Rolm,
NT, etc.  One requirement is the PS/2 based CallPath SwitchServer/2,
which seems to be a system that has hard-wired links to the PBX and
sits on the LAN and serves all requests for operations from the
CallPath host. The host to SwitchServer link is supported using SNA
LU6.2 (yuk!!). They support DID, DNIS, CLID, ANI etc. and have T1
boards for the RS/6000 (I am not aware if they have boards for the
PS/2 and mid to main frame systems, but I assume they do).  Although
an interesting product with a seemingly rich API to perform all kinds
of call routing etc, the main drag is the PS/2 requirement to
interface to a PBX (what if I don't have a PBX?)

For more information call:
(800) IBM-CALL  and ask for information on CallPath line of products.


A Vanilla Solution using DACS, Channel Banks and CSU/DSUs

An alternative to all the above solutions, and perhaps much more messy
(in terms of writing purchase orders and cabling), is to use a CSU box
to terminate the T1 span. Then, use a DACS+Channel Bank to do the
splitting of the lines into modem and voice calls.  However, I am not
sure how one would use two 800 numbers -- one for modem calls and one
for voice, and somehow have the DACS recognize the DNIS and split them
accordingly. Do they make DACS or Channel Banks that will use DNIS to
split the DSO channels? (I bet they do.)

After the Channel Bank, the modem lines would have to be fed into
v.32bis modems. This might create a nasty cable spaghetti between the
Channel Bank and the modems.  Besides, buying and managing 24 or 48
modems is expensive, right?  Then of course there is the cabling from
the modems to the host's serial ports.  I have seen a Wireless RS-232
box that transmits to 500 ft. But I don't know how 24 of them would
perform sitting next to one another.  The advantage of this solution
is that you can buy used equipment for cheap (there are plenty of used
telco equipment vendors) and get something up and running.

[The following sources were mentioned in an article by
 [e-mail] (Scott Statton N1GAK)]:
Channel Banks: Newbridge, Wescom
DACS: Fredericks' Engineering
CSU/DSU: Kentronics, AT&T etc.

Summary and Wish List:

The Primary Access and USR offerings both look attractive.

I wish Primary Access delivered ANI/DNIS without X.25.

I wish both USR and Primary Access had LAN adapters for their chassis
so that I wouldn't need to run 24 RS-232 cables from the modem cards
to my workstation.  (Getting a workstation equipped with 24 serial
ports is quite difficult.)

The Dialogic product can be neatly packaged in a PC, but I don't trust
a PC to do my important call processing and service providing
functions.  And Dialogic doesn't provide V.32bis modem-banks in their
PC solutions.

Finally, I wish the IBM product didn't need a PBX and a PS/2 to
interface to it.

Disclaimer:
----------
I DO NOT GUARANTEE the accuracy of any of this information.  As I
said, this is what I have understood or guessed from whatever
information I was able to gather directly from the vendors. I might
have misunderstood some deficiencies, or unknowingly embellished some
features.  If so, that was unintentional.  If anybody familiar with
these products finds any inaccuracies, I'd appreciate being told about
it.  If anybody knows of any other such products, I would like to hear
about them too.

Thanks to all those who responded to my queries on this (and other)
mailing-list(s).


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

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

Reply-To: [e-mail] (Robert J. Keller)
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 23:15:09
Subject: Re: Two Cellphones With Same Number? - Not Permitted
From: [e-mail] (Robert J. Keller)


Here is what the Federal Communications Commission has to say on
the subject:

:: Quote ::

    PUBLIC NOTICE

    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    COMMON CARRIER PUBLIC MOBILE SERVICES INFORMATION

    October 2, 1991
    Report No. CL-92-3

    CHANGING ELECTRONIC SERIAL NUMBERS ON CELLULAR
    PHONES IS A VIOLATION OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES


    It has come to the attention of the Mobile Services
    Division that individuals and companies may be altering
    the Electronic Serial Number ( ESN)  on cellular phones.
    Paragraph 2.3.2 in OST Bulletin No. 53 (Cellular System
    Mobile Station - Land Station Compatibility Specification,
    July, 1983) states that "[a]ttempts to change the serial
    number circuitry should render the mobile station
    inoperative." The 1981 edition of these compatibility
    specifications (which contains the same wording) was
    included as Appendix D in CC Docket 79-318 and
    is incorporated into Section 22.915 of the Commission's
    rules.

    Phones with altered  ESNs do not comply with the
    Commission's rules and any individual or company operating
    such phones or performing such alterations is in violation
    of Section 22.915 of the Commission's rules and could be
    subject to appropriate enforcement action.

    Questions concerning this Public Notice should be addressed
    to Steve Markendorff at 202-653-5560 or Andrew Nachby at
    202-632-6450.

:: End Quote ::

The staff has informally opined (although the Commission has not yet
formally ruled) that the foregoing prohibits, in addition to the
direct cloning and/or manipulation of the ESN, many of the other
schemes to get around it by "intercepting" and "translating" the ESN.
They have proposed the following rule which will likely be formally
adopted sometime early next year:

:: Quote ::

    22.919 Electronic serial numbers.

    The Electronic Serial Number (ESN) is a 32 bit binary
    number that uniquely identifies a cellular mobile
    transmitter to any cellular system.  Each mobile
    transmitter must have a unique ESN and must comply
    with the following specifications.

        (a) The ESN must be factory set and must not be
        alterable, transferable, removable or otherwise able
        to be manipulated in the field.

        (b) The ESN host component must be permanently attached to
        a main circuit board of the mobile transmitter and the
        integrity of the unit's operating software must not be
        alterable.  The ESN must be isolated from fraudulent
        contact and tampering.  If the ESN host component does
        not contain other information, that component must not
        be removable, and its electrical connections must not be
        accessible.  If the ESN host component contains other
        information, the ESN must be encoded using one or more
        of the following techniques:

            (1) multiplication or division by a polynomial;

            (2) cyclic coding;

            (3) the spreading of ESN bits over various
            non-sequential memory locations.

        (c) Cellular mobile equipment must be designed such that
        any attempt to remove, tamper with, or change the ESN
        chip, its logic system, or firmware originally programmed
        by the manufacturer will render the mobile transmitter
        inoperative.

:: End Quote ::

As far as staff is concerned, the proposed rule merely clarifies what
is already the law, but they feel that the clarification in necessary
because many in the industry are coming up with so many novel ways to
accomplish the same result in clever ways.

IMO, this is not something to be taken lightly for two reasons:

(1) the FCC has gotten rather aggressive in recent years in the number
and size of forfeitures (read "fines") imposed for (even relatively
minor) rules violations, and

(2) doing something like this when your carrier does not authorizes
subjects you to the risk that your cellular unit will be negatively
listed (and therefore rejected as a fraudulent unit).

Note, however, that the staff does _not_ consider it to be a violation
for the cellular carrier to offer this capability by doing some
programming at the cellular switch that associates a single phone
number with two or more _different_ ESN's.  Apparently some carriers
are starting to do this.


Bob Keller (KY3R)    Tel [phone]
[e-mail]    Fax [phone]
[e-mail]    CIS 76100,3333

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

From: [e-mail] (Aaron L Dickey)
Subject: Mobilnet - Do They Know This?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 21:10:23 GMT


The following is being forwarded for the benefit of Douglas Adams:

[e-mail] (Douglas Adams) writes:

There have been some very expensive and elaborate ads on CNN recently for
Mobilnet. As far as I can divine (the ads are heavier on production values
than on information) they are offering a nationwide cellular service which
eliminates the need for fiddling about with roaming codes etc.

If this is what they are offering then I am extremely interested in it --
definitely a potential customer. Though I 'm British, I spend a great deal
of time travelling round and round the States and 'cell-comms-made-simple'
is exactly what I want.

Right at the end of the ad they flash up a 1-800 number for enquiries. By
the time I've grabbed a pencil its gone and I haven't got the number. This
has happened several times. I suddenly realize it's _that_ ad, (it takes a
while to spot it because it starts out like an ad for shampoo or beer or
something) and have just been too late to get the number.

So I've tried the 800 information service, which has no listing for
Mobilnet.

Now, I can't help wondering if the people at Mobilnet are sitting
manning their phones and thinking 'Hmmmm -- doesn't seem to be much
demand for this service. Maybe the folks out there don't really want a
national cellular system ...'

I think there should be some kind of award for advertising of this
nature.

Incidentally -- if anybody _does_ have the Mobilnet number I'd be glad
to have it -- provided they haven't shut down the business for lack of
demand.


Douglas Adams    [e-mail] (current)
                 [e-mail] (dormant)

(message passed along by)

Aaron Dickey    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I tried 800-555-1212 just now hoping to find an
answer, but 800 directory has nothing listed for the company. Anyone
else know how to reach them?  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 17 Dec 93 20:26:26 -0800
From: Samir Soliman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: PCS Questions


At  11:31:06 CST 12/14/93 Kyle Griffin wrote:

> Although there are strong proponents of making GSM (or a modified
> version) a US standard, there's no guarantee that will happen. The FCC
> has stated that they would rather let the market determine standards
> rather than dictate any. There are also proponents of CDMA. I've seen
> some of the TDMA-CDMA dialogue in this digest. I'm not on either
> "side" of the issue. From what I've read (from people not related to
> any company making either type of equipment), as well as an
> acquaintance at Bellcore, there is a general feeling that, as far as
> capacity is concerned, when all is said and done, they're going to
> come out about equal in terms of increased capacity over cellular AMPS
> (approximatly 7 to 1).

I don't want to argue numbers here.  But keep in mind that GSM is not
designed for capacity or spectral efficiency.  The design objective
for GSM was politically motivated. In the US spectrum is becoming a
very expensive commodity and a need for an efficient multiple access
scheme becomes a necessity. I recommend that every one interested
reads the article published by THE ECONOMIST entitled "Falling to
bits" dated May 29, 1993.  In that article, the author writes "The
ambitious eight fold gain that Europe is aiming for has proved equally
elusive. GSM averages a two-to-threefold gain. In Hong Kong, where the
complicated city-scape tends to disperse the signal, GSM has managed
to improve things by a mere 50%"

The PCS radio environment is similar, if not worse than the Hong Kong
environment (small cells, dense urban, severe mulipath, high traffic
volume, in-building coverage requirements, etc. ...).

I would like to hear from anyone who worked or still working on the
GSM system in Hong Kong. What was (is) his/her experience with getting
the system to work in Hong Kong? What is the capacity of that system
compared to AMPS?.

I would like also to hear how painful was it to replan the frequency
at least once a month or as often as you add one more sector or cell
as the system grows with time.


Samir Soliman   Qualcomm Incorporated

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Wireless LANs
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 08:57:00 PST


Original note:

> I am looking for a way to send Ethernet across a public street. Somebody
> told me there is a $2500 pair of laser devices that can do that. Another

Response:

> John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
> I'm surprised that nobody's mentioned NCR Wavelan.  It's a 2 mb/sec

Another option is Motorola Altair.  They may be above 2mb by now.
They also had some interesting methods of extending distance, combining
both infrared (line of sight) and radio receivers.  Multiple protocol
support's available, too.


Regards,

Lynne

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

Date: Sat 18 Dec 93 00:07:58 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Saudi Arabia NANP Area Code


> [Moderator's Note: Yes, Saudi Arabia had an international country code
> like all other countries, but it also had an 'area code' which could be
> dialed from the USA for the administrative convenience of some people.
> The oil industry?  I dunno. Anyone remember the 'area code' number, and
> does it still work today?   PAT]

I have a business card that I got in 1981 or 1982 from someone working
in Saudi Arabia.  It is laid out like this:

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
                        KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA
                Ministry of Finance and National Economy
        The National Center for Financial and Economic Information

                               <name>
                    Asst Coord for Tech Operations

    USREP/JECOR/NCFEI                              P.O. Box 6902
    APO New York 09038                       Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
    Ph: 404-0544                                   Ph: 404-3945
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

The same (I presume) information is on the other side in Arabic.

There is no area code -- just seven digits for each number, but
perhaps the implication that both are NYC numbers, but one rings in
Riyadh?  Or perhaps both are Riyadh numbers, but one rings in a P.O.
box in New York. :-)


Tony Harminc

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #824
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10373;
          19 Dec 93 1:03 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17012
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 21:23:45 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10315
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 21:23:19 -0600
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 21:23:19 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #825

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 18 Dec 93 21:23:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 825

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Eleventh UK Teletraffic Symposium (Richard Gibbens)
    Namibia Telephone Codes (Carl Moore)
    Paper Needed on Propogation Modeling (Antonio Dell'Elce)
    Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Nathan D. Lane)
    Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Alex Cena)
    Re: Broadband Technologies, Inc. (Alex Cena)
    Re: TDD Software Wanted (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Voice Mail Cards For Home PC (Jon Edelson)
    Re: SMDR Polling Device Recommendation Needed (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: Modem Communication on TTY (Rich Mintz)
    Re: Use of British Answering Machines in the US (Liron Lightwood)
    Re: Use of British Answering Machines in the US (Richard Cox)
    Re: 603-43x-xxxx Switch? (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Listening to Cellular Calls (Eric N. Florack)
    Re: Information Wanted on Unix E-mail Packages (Paul Robinson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Richard Gibbens)
Subject: Eleventh UK Teletraffic Symposium
Organization: DPMMS (Cambridge Univ - Pure Maths and Mathematical Statistics)
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 18:40:53 GMT


                           Call for papers

                   Eleventh UK Teltraffic Symposium

            Performance Engineering in Information Systems

The Eleventh UK Teletraffic Symposium, arranged by Profession Group E7
(Telecommunication networks and services) and C3 (Information systems
and networks), and co-sponsored by the British Computer Society and
the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications, will be held at the
Moller Centre, Cambridge, from 23 to 25 March 1994.

This is an annual event that provides a forum for specialists in the
area to discuss the latest modelling techniques for performance
evaluation of the use, management and structure of the wide variety of
communication networks now being developed.

Contributions are invited that review current techniques, discuss
generic problems, or introduce novel methodologies and results. The
areas of particular interest are:

  *    Mobile communications

  *    Broadband networks, management and control

  *    Feature and service interaction

  *    Local access techniques

  *    Network interworking

  *    Traffic management

  *    Design tools

  *    Traffic characterisation

  *    New mathematical methods and simulation techniques

  *    Software performance analysis

Prospective authors are invited to submit a synopsis of approximately
250 words before Friday, 7 January 1994 to Dr R. J. Gibbens, Statistical
Laboratory, University of Cambridge, 16 Mill Lane, Cambridge, CB2 1SB,
tel: [phone], fax: [phone]. Following acceptance, authors will
be asked to prepare a full paper, not more than six A4 sides in length,
by Friday, 4 March 1994.

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 13:36:31 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Namibia Telephone Codes


Namibia (+264) and South Africa (+27) have city codes that look they
could fit into one list -- similar to an old area code and the new one
just split from it.  In the following message, RSA is Republic of
South Africa.

  --FORWARDED MESSAGE--

 From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Re: Namibia
 To: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 06:11:04 +0000 (GMT)
 Organization: Windhoek Central Hospital
 Reply-To: [e-mail]

> Since the city codes fit in with those of South Africa:  Was Namibia
> once a part of the South Africa phone system?

We were part of RSA until independence :-)-O

The phone system is still integrated with RSA. National phone rates
apply for calls to the RSA, if it were international I could not
afford it.


Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse          Windhoek Central Hospital
<[e-mail]>           Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Private Bag 13215       61 203 2106/7 (Bleeper)  61 224014 (home)
Windhoek, Namibia

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

From: [e-mail] (
Subject: Paper Needed on Propogation Modeling
Date: 18 Dec 1993 09:17:30 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


I am looking for a paper that treats Empirical Model for Urban
microcells, I have a paper about it called "Urban/Suburban
Out-of-sight Propagation Modeling" from various authors (IEEE cm,
June, 1992) but I am looking for an updated propagation modeling
description.

Can any of you point to any paper/article etc about it? Thanks.

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 17:33:23 -0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos


> Joel Upchurch @ Upchurch Computer Consulting uunet!aaahq01!upchrch!
> joel says:

> I read something in the last issue of {Popular Science} about some cable
> company experimenting with providing internet access through the cable
> system. Imagine a local cable company doing something like getting a
> pagesat news feed and providing it to their customers as a premium
> cable channel with a special modem to translate the data.

And the previous post mentioned PSI.  Well, PSI just two months ago
announced the first (I think) venture with a cable company back east
(I think it was Continental in New York).  Their goal is to provide
10Mbps (yes, ethernet speeds) to cable customers, bidirectionally, for
just $100/month.  The equipment is installed and I believe they even
have trial customers now.

Now, I would imagine the 10Mbps is an aggregate load for ALL the cable
customers.  I doubt that each person gets 10Mbps to the Internet.
(PSI would kill their telco business in an instant if they did
that ... or the telco's would lower their prices drastically).

I can dig up the press release if anyone would like it and sends me
e-mail.


Nathan D. Lane, VP Triicon Systems. Lompoc, CA  [phone]

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 09:34:50 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy?


[e-mail] (Gary Huntress) wrote:

> I've been shopping for a cellular phone for my in-law's Xmas gift.
> In fact I just returned a few minutes ago more confused than when I
> left. I had planned on buying one of the smaller style of phones
> rather than the "bag" type.  My in-laws will be travelling between MA
> and FL using the phone almost exclusively for emergency inbound and
> outbound calls (once we get over the "guess where I'm calling from!"
> phase).

I would buy a 0.6W portable.  If you need more oomph, you can always
purchase a docking station with a 3.0W booster, hands free, recharger,
antenna, etc.  I use a Motorola MicroTac PT550, which I have used
driving from Minneapolis, MN to New York City.  I was able to use it
more than 90% of the time.  Moreover, I travel quite a bit (2-3
days/week) around the United States and Canada.  Thus far, 0.6W has
not been a problem for me.


Alex M. Cena, Lehman Brothers [e-mail], Opinions are mine not my
employers

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

Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1993 17:30:12 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Broadband Technologies, Inc.


Randy te Velde <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Is ADSL for real? And if so, how will it be switched?  Can we get
> what we want from it (HDTV, high bandwidth interactive services), or
> will it force us to make due with less?

If you need more info on ADSL, you may want to try the following
companies, which are working on the technology: Newbridge Networks,
ADC Telecom, Amati, Level One, Tellabs and PairGain Technologies.

I hear there is a definite interest by the telephone companies and
there are RFPs for equipment to be used in trials around the country.
Unfortunately, ADSL still costs quite a bit of money ($?,000) due to
lack of silicon.  Some say ADSL must be less than $500/line to be
deployed economically.  Same was true w/HDSL until PairGain designed
its own transceiver, which it used in conjunction with Brooktree's A/D
converter to offer a single card that fit in a standard repeater bay.


Alex M. Cena, Lehman Brothers [e-mail], Opinions are mine not my
employers

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 13:27:00 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TDD Software Wanted
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


> Is there any software that emulates a TDD (Telecomm Device for the
> Deaf?). This ought to be straightforward, but my local phone
> company says that you 'have to buy their TDD hardware'. Say it
> ain't so!

It ain't so.  You can buy hardware for this purpose from anyone.

> I don't care what kind of computer, although UNIX-based sources
> would be helpful.

Modems that will handle TDD are much more expensive due to the limited
market; software alone cannot handle TDD as the standard device uses
6-bit baudot, not 8-bit ascii (although some newer models handle
both).

A modem to handle TDD and standard ascii at 2400 baud will cost
upwards of $200, e.g. as much as a 14,400 baud modem.  I have heard
that there is some inexpensive hardware that, if you have an original
IBM PC with cassette port, can be used to do TDD through the cassette
port.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Edelson)
Subject: Re: Voice Mail Cards For Home PC
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 18:30:47 GMT


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

> It sounds like just the thing you are looking for is from The Complete
> PC.  There is a product called The Complete Answering Machine as well
> as a companion product called The Complete Fax Machine.

> If you go off hook for more than five seconds (this is
> user configurable) without DTMFing or outpulsing, the CAM will
> automatically disconnect the subscriber loop and start reading you the
> voice mail menu, giving you the opportunity to key in your mailbox
> number and password.

I've had a product called the Complete Communicator for about three
years.  It includes the answering machine as well as the fax.  I
bought it after trying out the answering machine card.  The problem
that I found is that it the software release that came with the CCOM,
the auto pickup was lost.  One _must_ use the keyboard to initiate
checking one's mail.

If this feature has again returned, I would appreciate knowing about
it.  If not, then the use of CCOM in a multi extension environment can
get pretty annoying.


Jon   ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Ptasnik)
Subject: Re: SMDR Polling Device Recommendation Needed
Date: 18 Dec 1993 18:39:46 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


[e-mail] (Anthony Palmer Dawson) writes:

> I need to acquire a device that can store SMDR information provided
> from a 5ESS Generic 8 to my premises.  This device must allow polling
> via modem and/or ISDN.  Any recommendations or pointers to vendors via
> email will be greatly appreciated.

Just get an old PC and put in a copy of procomm.  Plug it into the
5ess, you may need a 355A adapter to get from 4 pair to RS232.  Set
procomm to direct connection, set up a "log", and your SMDR will be
automatically stored as an ASCII file.  You can then do periodic dumps
by modem, maybe using something like Carbon Copy to make remote
changes.  We do this on campus, and ship the call records around on
the campus ethernet hub.  It can be set up to send out the calls in
real time over the campus ethernet, should we desire that.


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

Dave Ptasnik     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Mintz)
Subject: Re: Modem Communication on TTY
Date: 18 Dec 1993 04:38:57 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico


> This is all I write or read from the port.  When I run this, all I
> get is \r\nOK\r\n from the modem and then NO CARRIER.

Try using your normal communications program to set your modem to
ignore the carrier detect and DTR leads. You can do this with
something like "AT &D&C&W", the &W saves the settings so they won't be
lost when you reset the modem or power-down. If your modem is an older
one that doesn't support the &D and &C commands, you could physically
tie those RS232 leads high or low as appropriate (only if it's an
external modem). Or, what might be easier if that's the case is to
find the C code for your machine that will set the DTR on. There are
tiny utilities made for running right at the DOS Prompt that might do
the job for you (ie: you just type DTR ON or DTR OFF at DOS).

Good luck!

Rich

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

From: Liron Lightwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Use of British Answering Machines in the US
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 21:02:46 EST


[e-mail] (Jonathan Haruni) writes:

> I sent an answering machine which I bought (and tested) in London to
> someone in Israel and it didn't work there.  He took it to a telephone
> shop where they said British answering machines don't work in Israel
> because Israel "uses the American system of ringing", whatever that
> means, and declined to look at it.  Given that American machines do
> work in Britain, I have doubts.

Israel is an interesting case, because for many/most people, the
ringback tone is different to the ring tone (it was when I was last
there in 1987).

The ringback tone (the one you hear when dialling an Israli number) is
similar to the American ring tone (i.e. ring ... ring ... etc).
However, the ring tone (that rings the bell on the Israli phone) is
identical to the UK ring tone (i.e. ring ring ... ring ring ... etc).

When I was last there in 1987, this was true for most lines.  In some
(older?) exchanges however, the ring tone was the same as the ringback
tone (i.e. ring ... ring ... etc).


Liron Lightwood

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Cox)
Subject: Re: Use of British Answering Machines
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 16:23:00


[e-mail] (Jonathan Haruni) asked:

> I sent an answering machine which I bought (and tested) in London to
> someone in Israel and it didn't work there.  He took it to a telephone
> shop where they said British answering machines don't work in Israel
> because Israel "uses the American system of ringing", whatever that
> means, and declined to look at it.  Given that American machines do
> work in Britain, I have doubts.

That would be about right.  In the UK, there is a master socket with a
single capacitor to filter off the ringing signal, which is
distributed to all sockets on pin 3.  Most UK answering machines ONLY
look at pin 3 for their ringing signal.  Others (and American
answering machines) ignore pin 3 and look across the A/B pair (with
their own capacitor to act as a DC filter).

So either will work in the UK.  However in the US and in Israel there
*is* no pin 3 for the answering machine to look at.  So while non-UK
machines will work, any machine that *only* looks at pin 3 for a ring
signal will think it's having a quiet life.  Slap a UK master socket
across the A/B pair, to "create" a pin 3, and your answering machine
will once again answer calls.


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail address: [e-mail] - PGP2.3 public key available on request

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 13:47:31 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: 603-43x-xxxx Switch?


In TELECOM Digest V13 #786 [e-mail] (Steve Hutzley)
writes:

> Recently, I saw an ad in the (Manchester, NH) {Union Leader} about New
> England Telephone offering Caller ID.  GREAT!  At the bottom of the
> 3/4 page ad in the paper was a list of exchanges that had this
> service. It would have saved them page space if they would have listed
> the exchanges that DIDN'T have the service. They listed towns in NH I
> didn't even know existed.

> I'm curious, if anyone knows what switch I might be connected to, and
> if this switch has the capability to handle Caller ID . the list of
> exchanges that I am interested in are: area code 603: *421, *425, *426,
> 432, 434, 437. The three exchanges marked by '*', are brand new, and
> have just appeared in the last two years. If anyone really wants the
> list of exchanges that 'DO' offer caller ID, I will post them.

One thing that you can do is try a local number such as 432-XXXX where
XXXX is a number that may or may not tell you what type of switch you
are on.  If it is either a NT DMS-100 or AT&T 5ESS then the switch has
the capability to carry Caller ID.

I use exchange #-9901 (ex: 281-9901) for my read back.  You can try
that but there are probably many numbers that could do this.

Another way would be to call your business office to see if they can
tell you if the switch is capable of handling Caller-ID.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 04:40:35 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Listening to Cellular Calls


> Mr. Fischer, you obviously have no respect for a individual's privacy.
> Is business that bad that you must "prostitute" your product on the
> "net"?  I can only hope that your privacy is invaded in a sufficiently
> grotesque manner to educate you on it's value.

> [Moderator's Note: It sounds to me like you are unhappy with the idea
> of people listening to your cellular calls.   PAT]

Indeed it does, Pat. And I can understand the position. I tend to
agree that such listening devices, meaning those sold specificly to
listen to cellular calls, are somewhat less than ethical. At the same
time, perhaps it`s time we started looking at this in a more realistic
light.

The communications act of 1933 lays all this out, in living color: The
EM spectrum is the property of all the people ... and anything that is
broadcast `in the clear' is fair game for reception, by ANY citizen.
At the same time, it`s a crime to make use of any information gleaned
from listening to things not intended for public consumption...
Business transactions conducted over business radio are an example of
such.

I raise some of these issues in an extended post I wrote about a year
or so ago in response to the paranoia being spread by the CPSR and the
EFF, regards cryptography and the government ... and, if I`m not
mistaken, people can find it in the Telecom and Risks archives by
searching on the keywords "C.P.S.R.' and 'paranoia'.

The short version of the argument is this: We create more damage,
giving the impression that a 'line' is secure (by means of mere law)
than we do by making people on Cell phones aware /up front/, that they
should watch what they say, since the technology is such that the call
can be monitored by anyone with a mind to.

Matter of fact, given that about anyone with a mind could tap even a
hard-wire phone without even a direct connection ... (inductance
pickups ...) Perhaps no such system is secure, regardless of any law.

Clearly, the law prohibiting listening to cellular calls is at best
ineffective, and is, perhaps, counter-productive, to say nothing of it
being in direct violation of the intent of the communications act of
1933. The government, by giving the impression that such law IS
effective, is doing a dis-service to the public, and is perhaps
creating more of a security problem than it`s solving.

Perhaps we should educate the public that anything said on any
electroninc path, particularly on a public access network, is /by
nature/ not secure. That education process, and that shift of
responsibility away from the government, and law, and back to the comm
circuit user, where it belongs, is the biggest, and least expensive
security boost our telecommunications system could ever have.

What we have here is a case where our lawmakers have no idea what it
is they are regulating, but they have to do SOMETHING to justify their
positions of power. The result is predictable.


/E

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 12:43:12 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on Unix E-mail Packages
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Krause <[e-mail]> asked:

> I was wondering what large scale e-mail packages people might be
> running off of their Unix boxes out there.

In probably 90% of all sites, the standard is Sendmail from U.C.
Berkely, mainly because it is free.  The typical release is Berkely
Sendmail with the IDA patches.

For sites that don't need the tremendous power of everyone's beloved
sendmail and the adored "sendmail.cf" configuration files, :) there is
a smaller and less complicated program called "smail".  You can do an
archie lookup and find either of these.  Smail is also free.  I
personally have copies of the sources to both.  Also, CERT has
announced that there is a security hole in one of the latest releases
of Sendmail.

Sendmail can often be run "out of the box" as it is allegedly self
configurable; the real problem is writing the sendmail.cf file which
some sites don't even have to do that, as they can find a prewritten
one.  Smail is considerably smaller and provides less functions, but
also uses fewer resources and less disk space.

> I am interested in receiving information (product and vendor) on
> e-mail packages that can be used in a corporate environment where
> one RS/6000 will act as a central point and other RS/6000's will
> dial into for mail. Mail could consist of regular mail as well as
> binary files (ie. spreadsheets, designs, etc.).

Well, you have four choices.  One is to use a POP mail server, where
sites call into a repository and download mail.  Another is to have
them use sendmail and SMTP if they are directly connected.  Another is
to have them use an IMAP service to request mail from the other site.

Last choice is to install a mail server program which can be executed
as if the user had logged in at a local terminal and read mail.  One
program for this purpose is called "Pine" which is a fairly nice ANSI
full-screen mailer.  You can get it via an archie search also.

If the local sites are directly connected, running Sendmail on the
main server and perhaps SMAIL or POP on the local sites might not be
too bad a choice.  POP is also good for dialup mail too.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #825
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10784;
          19 Dec 93 1:58 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23374
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 22:36:29 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25296
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 22:36:01 -0600
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 22:36:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #826

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 18 Dec 93 22:36:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 826

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Yellow/White Pages Copyrighted? - No! - (Mark Voorhees via Danny Burstein)
    Re: Mobilnet - Do They Know This? (John R. Levine)
    Re: Mobilnet - Do They Know This? (David Leibold)
    Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Wire Types and Crosstalk (Gary Breuckman)
    Re: Telephone Company Rate Survey (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies (Thomas Chen)
    Re: AT&T 9100 Phone Review (Bill Seward)
    Re: Phone Line Teaming (Tony Harminc)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: Yellow/White Pages Copyrighted? - No! -
Date: 18 Dec 1993 14:26:22 -0500


Passed along FYI to the list:

  From [e-mail]  Ukn Dec 18 13:52:16 1993
  Date:         Sat, 18 Dec 1993 13:25:28 EST
  Sender: Computer-assisted Reporting & Research <[e-mail]>
  From: Mark Voorhees <[e-mail]>
  Subject: copy cats
  To: Multiple recipients of list CARR-L <[e-mail]>

  Re: copyright and yellow and white pages

Enough people asked for copies of these articles, I decided to make them
available for general consumption. I don't pretend to know whether
they would apply to duplicating the {Washington Post's} job listings
here.

Source: Information Law Alert

BELLSOUTH PLAYS TOUGH ON COPYRIGHTS (June 18, 1993)

   Two years after the Supreme Court limited copyright protection for
directories and databases, BellSouth Corp. is working harder than ever
to protect its flank.

   The company is vigorously defending its copyrights and trademarks
in at least six suits. "They are taking positions not being taken by
the other Bell operating companies," says Elliot Kaplan of Robins,
Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, who is defending American Business
Information against a BellSouth suit.

   Many directory publishers stopped pursuing copycats in the wake of
the 1991 Supreme Court decision, Feist Publications Inc.  v. Rural
Telephone Co. The court ruled that a telephone book's copyright does
not prohibit a competitor from copying the white pages' underlying
facts.

   The directory served only 7,700 people in rural Kansas, but the
ripples from the ruling have been far reaching, throwing out a long
line of case law known as "sweat of the brow," which awarded
copyrights on the basis of hard work alone.

   SECOND LOOK

   The Feist case has not, however, dissuaded BellSouth, which some
observers say has more directory business to lose than other telephone
companies. After the Feist decision, BellSouth won an 11th Circuit
case upholding copyright protection for its yellow pages. The court
ruled that Donnelly Information Publishing, Inc., had violated
BellSouth's copyright by extracting key information for use in a
competing publication.

   Even that case is now up for grabs. It was briefed and argued
before the Feist decision, but decided afterward. After the issuance
of the Feist decision, Donnelly asked to submit new briefs addressing
the high-court ruling, but the circuit refused.

   The court is now taking a belated, second look. In November,
one-and-a-half years after the Feist decision, the circuit accepted
Donnelly's petition for an en banc hearing. Since the February
hearing, both sides have been eagerly awaiting the outcome.

   Anthony Askew of Atlanta's Jones & Askew remains confident that his
client, BellSouth, will prevail. The Feist decision confirmed
copyrights for compilations, Askew says, so long as there is a modicum
of originality in the selection, coordination, or arrangement of the
facts. "We think there is a lot of creativity that goes in to the
creation of yellow pages," Askew says.

  PICTURE TAKING

   The yellow-page publisher exercises originality in its selection of
headings, placement of businesses under headings, and geographic
scope, according to Askew. In his brief, Askew likens the process to a
photographer snapping a picture of a moving train: "The changing
business population of a city is like the train moving past the
railroad crossing. The instant at which the photograph is taken is
like a directory close date. The camera takes a snapshot of the train
at that instant just as the directory represents a snapshot of the
business population at the time of publishing the directory. The type
of lenses on the camera is like the geographic scope of the
directory."

   Donnelly's lawyers decline to comment on the case. But their
briefs, prepared primarily by David Foster and Theodore Whitehouse of
Willkie, Farr & Gallagher, argue that Askew is simply dressing up
sweat of the brow in fancy clothing.

   Donnelly admits to copying names, addresses, and telephone numbers
from BellSouth's directory. It also says it copied the nature of a
company's business, but not the actual BellSouth headings -- something
that BellSouth disputes. The Feist decision, according to Foster and
Whitehouse's briefs, clearly permits the copying of all those
elements. Even if Donnelly had copied the headings themselves, that
too would be protected.

   BellSouth is trying to protect routine business decisions, such as
defining a geographic region for a directory, according to Donnelly
lawyers. The company "tries to disguise its sweat of the brow premise
by reliance upon a theory of its own invention," according to a
Donnelly brief.

   Under Donnelly's interpretation, it would be prohibited from
actually photocopying BellSouth's yellow pages -- but not much else.

  STAKING THE FUTURE

   If the circuit rules in Donnelly's favor, Bell South has its bases
covered. One of its suits -- against Southern Directories Co. --
alleges actual copying of display advertising. The suit also seeks
common-law trademark recognition of the "walking fingers" graphic.
Bell tried to register the walking fingers but was turned down by the
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. In a footnote, the board left open
the possibility that the walking fingers might warrant common law
protection. There's no harm in trying, as the saying goes.

   ------------------ cut here here----------------------

   BYE BYE BAPCO; 11TH CIRCUIT KNOCKS OUT PROTECTION FOR YELLOW
PAGES (October 8, 1993)

   The 11th Circuit has ruled that the yellow pages deserve about as
much copyright protection as the white pages, which the Supreme Court
has said is not very much.

   And so BellSouth Advertising and Publishing Corp., which has
aggressively pursued copyright infringement cases, must move a marker
from the win to loss column.

   In 1991, BellSouth won a ruling in the 11th Circuit finding that
Donnelly Information Publishing, Inc., had violated its copyright.
Donnelly had copied information from BellSouth's Miami yellow pages in
order to develop sales leads to produce a competitive book (see June
18 issue).

   Between the time that case was briefed and decided, the Supreme
Court ruled in a different case that a company could copy the
underlying facts from the white pages of a competitor. In Feist
Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co., the high court
said compilations of facts deserved only "thin" protection -- and only
when the selection, arrangement, and coordination of facts was
original.

   The case threw out the so-called "sweat of the brow" line of cases
that rewarded hard work in the absence of creative expression. One of
the leading advocates had been Anthony Askew of Atlanta's Jones &
Askew, who represented BellSouth in this case.

   WHITE=YELLOW

   At the time, Donnelly's lawyers tried persuade the 11th Circuit to
take briefs on the yellow pages cases in light of the white-page
ruling. But the three-judge panel refused and ruled in BellSouth's
favor.

   One and a half years later, in November 1992, the court decided to
rehear the case en banc in light of the Feist ruling.

   And in September, it ruled, 7-1, that although the case "concerned
a directory of a different color," the Feist ruling should still
govern.

   BellSouth had tried to casts routine business decisions, such as
the geographic scope of the listing in a book, as acts of originality,
the court ruled.

   Even if Donnelly had copied the subject headings, which it denies
having done, there would not have been a copyright violation, the
court found. "BAPCO can claim no copyright in the idea of dividing
churches by denomination or attorneys by area of specialty," wrote
Judge Stanley Birch.

   FOLLOWING FEIST

   The decision "follows Feist -- pure and simple," says one lawyer
familiar with the case.

   Judge Joseph Hatchett, a member of the original panel, dissented on
the theory that Donnelly had actually copied original elements of the
pages.

   The majority opinion, he says, "transforms the multi-billion dollar
classified publishing industry from a business requiring the
production of a useful directory based on multiple layers of creative
decisionmaking, into a business requiring no more than a successful
race to a data processing agency to copy another publisher's copyrighted
work-product."

   BellSouth intends to ask the Supreme Court to hear this case, which
is highly unlikely given the unanimous finding in Feist.

    Three other copyright cases involving BellSouth had been stayed
pending resolution of the Donnelly case. Those cases involve companies
that compile mailing lists.

   In at least one of them, BellSouth Advertising & Publishing Corp.
v. EKI Inc. in federal court in Atlanta, BellSouth has asked that the
stay be continued.


voorhees reports
411 first street
brooklyn, ny 11215-2507
Mark Voorhees         1-718-369-0906 (voice)
[e-mail]  1-718-369-3250 (fax)

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

[e-mail] adds: all the usual disclaimers regarding liability,
intelligence, accuracy apply. spelling disclaimer is doubled.

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 14:10 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Mobilnet - Do They Know This?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> Mobilnet. .. they are [apparently] offering a nationwide cellular service
> which eliminates the need for fiddling about with roaming codes etc.

There are about five different roaming systems in operation.  The
newer ones operate automatically.  My system (NYNEX Boston) belongs to
MobileReach which is supposed to deliver calls without my having to do
anything.  It runs at least from New Hampshire through Mass., R.I.,
Conn., downstate N.Y., down to northern NJ and probably farther.  I
don't know if it works; nobody's called me in the car yet when I was
down that way.

Based on the info in the {Cellular Roaming Guide}, it'll be a long time
before there's any sort of universal roaming, automatic or not, because
there are so many little carriers outside of large cities that don't
belong to any of the roaming networks.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 18:03:00 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Mobilnet - Do They Know This?


I don't know the Mobilnet number, but a North American arrangement
called Mobilink may be reached at 1 800 995.4000. I don't know if this
Mobilink will be the same as Mobilnet (or maybe it's a competing
group). Bell Mobility (Ontario and Quebec, Canada) is part of the
Mobilink.


David Leibold

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 11:35:10 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


"A. Padgett Peterson" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The following announcemet appeared in my November Southern Bell
> bill:

> "Effective December 1, 1993, Southern Bell will begin blocking
> access by long distance companies to local calls. Under Florida
> law, local telephone calls must be handled by the local exchange
> telephone company only."

Apparently their system is allowing people to use a carrier to make
local calls.  This probably applies to someone dialing 10xxx plus
seven digits or 10xxx plus 1 and the ten digit number which is within
the same LATA.

> My concern is that I often go through my LDC to make a local call
> when at a pay phone and do not have change (it is less than the
> U$1.00-U$1.25  charged to make a collect local call). I called
> Southern Bell and was told that the ruling only affects residences
> but have not verified this as yet.

As long as you are either going through a 1-800 number or 950-xxxx
number, no matter what the local company does (unless they disable the
keypad on payphones or remove it) it should not affect your access.

Further, if you are using a company not in Florida, their rules
wouldn't apply anyway, since you make a 1-800 number call to some
place out of state, which is an interstate terminated call at the
switch operated by that company.  Their connection to the party you
want is a separate interstate call from their switch to the party you
are calling.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 07:35:50 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers


In Volume 13, Issue 814 [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno) writes:

> How do you circumvent the local company?  In PacBell territory, they
> will not allow you to select a long distance company on a local call.
> I can, however, use my long-distance calling card (AT&T, haven't tried
> with another company) for local calls.  These calls are billed by AT&T
> at PacBells rates and the bill reads "Local Calls Charged to Your AT&T
> Card."

This is true in NYTel land also.  However, I can use 1-800-CALL1-ATT
or 1-800-COLLECT (MCI) (1+ not required, yet).  The final option is
10698+0+XXX-YYYY also (698 translates to NYT) which will allow calls
to anywhere that NYT has a presence, including small portions of
Connecticut, Massachussetts and Pennsylvania plus the small local
calling area dialable from AC 212 in Northern NJ.

> If there is a way (besides the 1-800-CALLl-ATT method) to get AT&T for
> local calls, I would rather do this, as their rates are lower than
> those of Pacific Bell.

Have you tried 10288 + 0 + ... ?


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 06:06:18 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Gary Breuckman)
Subject: Re: Wire Types and Crosstalk


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
purdue.edu (Kyler Laird) writes:

> On two-pair cable, I can't remember a time when the colors weren't
> red, green, black, yellow.

> Our house has cheapo flat cable (grrr!) that does a fairly efficient
> job presenting line 1 computer sound to line 2.  The computer room is
> near the telephone cable entry jack.  I was thinking I'd run another
> cable to the box and wire the computer in directly, and leave the
> other (two-line) phones to use the flat cable (for now).  My guess is
> that line 2 would cease to pickup the computer noise.  Is this a bad
> guess?

The green-red-black-yellow cable IS the reason you can hear the
computer on line 2.  There could be other reasons too, like leakage
from one line to the other in some equipment, but crosstalk between
lines is one of the reasons that most new installations are going to
PAIRED cable.  There can also be noise pickup from external sources
with non-paired cable, and it's not good for high-frequency signals
(T1, 10BaseT, etc).  The G-R-B-Y cable is NOT paired, the four wires
are just strung down the cable without twisting them.  If you put the
computer on a separate cable be sure to also not put that line on the
existing cables, you will still have the crosstalk, or replace the
wiring.

The correspondence between the old and new wires is ...

    pair 1    tip    green    white with blue stripe
        ring    red    blue with white stripe
    pair 2    tip    black    white with orange stripe
        ring    yellow    orange with white stripe
    pair 3    tip        white with green stripe
        ring        green with white stripe
    pair 4    tip        white with brown stripe
        ring        brown with white stripe

Larger cables are grouped with five pairs to a group. The groups are
white, red, black, yellow, violet and the pairs blue, orange, green,
brown, slate within each group.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 11:52:33 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Company Rate Survey
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


"Hansel E. Lee Jr." <[e-mail]>, writes:

> I am conducting a rate survey of long distance companies.
> Currently I have contacted:

> All Net   AT&T    Cable & Wireless  MCI  Metromedia/ITT
> Opticom   Sprint  US Long Distance

> If you know the name and customer service number to any other long
> distance companies...

The largest local company is:

Mid Atlantic Telecom
of Washington DC     800 937 6891

I used to use their Voice mail service until the price went up.  Very
good, but I didn't use it enough to justify keeping it.

Another national company is:

  Wiltel             800 324 2222

Here are some ones listed locally who have 1-800 numbers:

  Eastern Telecom    800 448 1301
  EMI Communications 800 456 2001
  LCI International (Also calls itself Long Distance Service, Inc)
                     800 296 0220 / 24 Hr Cust Svc 800 296 7828

  Here are a few local ones:

  Executive Telecard, Rockville:       301 770 2029
  Long Distance Alternatives, Potomac  301 948 2813
  Long Distance Direct, Landover       301 925 8939
  Metrocomm Long Distance, McLean      703 506 6850
  U S Wats, Beltsville                 301 595 3055


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Chen)
Subject: Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 23:48:45 GMT
Organization: Hughes Network Systems Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (The
CyberMonk) writes:

> Perhaps this is a stupid question (it would not be the first time),
> but *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access?
> I read somewhere that in the few communities (in the US) that have
> more than one local cable operator that there are more channels,
> better service, and lover prices than elsewhere.

> [Moderator's Note: Cable companies don't want competition any more
> than the local telco wants competition. Like telco, the cable companies
> have friends in high places.

On top of that, many local governments receive revenue from cable
companies that they don't really want to see true compeitition that
would drive the price down and thus reducing their take.


tom

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 13:59:32 EST
From: Bill Seward <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T 9100 Phone Review


[e-mail] (Bill Pfeiffer) wrote:

>>    out of range notification;

> You mention that you lose sylables at 300 feet, what sort of 'alert'
> does it offer other than the obvious loss of transmission?  Does it
> hang-up when out-of-range?

It has an audible tone for out of range, either on or off hook.  If
you are on the phone and walk out of range, you have about 30 seconds
to move back in range, or it will hang up.

>> I have tested it for range with the following results: I can get about
>> 250 feet from the base with no noticable signal degredation on either
>> end.  I can get about 300 feet with acceptable degredation (the
>> occassional lost syllable).  At 375, I lose about every other syllable.
>> All of these distances are witworld.

> Here, again, I see this as poor.  The Tropez has been tested by a
> friend, in the middle of Chicago, with good trans) in any direction,
> using built-in antennas in a single-story building (frame or brick).

> A friend at a local Radio Shack has tested their phone from INSIDE a
> building (also steel-framed) and could make and receive calls there
> with no noticable interference.

I'm not an EE wizard -- maybe mine is defective.  However, I do know
that battery charge/condition, overhead power lines, and a lot of
other arcane things will have an effect such as a 110v line in the
wall.  If anyone else has a 9100 and has substantially surpassed my
distances, I'd like to know.

To pick a nit:  a mile is 5280 feet.  So could you friend talk in some
distances an actual 1/2 mile (2640')

>> but the handset is designed so that it is not really cradleable in
>> the crook of your neck.  Physically, it resembles a cellular handset
>> in dimensions -- and I suspect they are not cradleable for a reason.

> What reason would that be, Bill?  It seems to me that the phone should
> be as ergonomic (sp) as possible, No?

Let's put it this way -- have you seen how most people drive, with
maybe half the care they should use?  And have you ever seen people
driving, talking on their cell phone, and driving worse than the
average idiot with a license?  (I have -- regularly.)  Now can you
imagine ne, head tilted over (skewing their view) and driving?  No
thank you.

It is thought that cradling a phone is a cause of nerve pinches in the
neck area.  So what is better -- a design that attempts to force you
incorrect or dangerous use?


Bill Seward     [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 00:02:56 GMT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone Line Teaming


Kentucky Resources Council <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I want to use a standard telco line to connect to my local schools --
> they will soon have local internet connections (a big deal in the
> boonies!).  What I really want is a means to team a second phone
> numner onto the standard number. The second number needs a different
> ring cadence so I can discriminate between the two numbers -- now
> comes the fun part: I want to enable the second number from 4:30 pm to
> 7:30; that way we can publish the second number and not endure data
> calls during the school day.  Anyone who can help me enable such a
> system would be a minor hero in my book -- thanks for reading this.

[Moderator's Note suggests using Radio Shack distinctive ringing box.]

Another approach would be to have call forwarding installed on one
only of the two distinctive ringing numbers on the line.  During the
hours you don't want data calls, you forward that number somewhere
that won't bother anyone -- say a trunk or payphone that doesn't accept
incoming calls.  A data caller outside approved hours reaches a
recording "the number you have reached is not equipped to receive
incoming calls".  On the way out the door at 4:30, you unforward the
number, turn on the modem, and data calls are answered.

Problems:

- voice calls (on the non-data number) will be answered by the modem
  after hours.  But maybe no one calls there after the school day?

- Forwarding and unforwarding is fiddly and more error prone than
  turning a modem on and off.  If the phone on that line has programmable
  buttons you could set it up to do the forward.  Or the modem could
  do it.

- Call forwarding is an ongoing monthly cost.  But you don't have to
  pay for a distinctive ringing box.  Make the tradeoff -- it depends on
  rates in your area.

- Call forwarding may not be offered on just one of the numbers on a line
  by your telco.  Here (Bell Canada territory) forwarding can apply to
  the first ("main") number, and any of the other numbers, but not to
  secondary number(s) alone.  But of course what you think of as the
  main number can be what you tell Telco is secondary -- the only difference
  is the ringing cadence.

Probably the distinctive ring box is the overall best solution -- this is
just an attempt at lateral thinking ...


Tony Harminc


[Moderator's Note: The difficulty in forwarding the phone to 'some
other phone which does not have incoming service' is that most inter-
cepts these days do tell you the number you reached or attempted to
reach. The caller would get a message saying, "The number you dialed,
xxx-xxxx is not in service for incoming calls". This would lead to
much confusion by people who somehow thought *they* had dialed it
incorrectly and there would be people calling the operator to ask
why when they dial one number they know is good they are getting
connected to a totally different number, etc. What our correspondent
must do is make this as transparent as possible to the users; they
should not have to get involved asking questions about why the phone
rings one place sometimes and another place other times, etc.  All the
user needs to deal with is that the phone will be answered by modem
after a certain time of day and will ring unanswered at other times.

Quite some time ago, I used to know a number which was on a centrex
system and it (that line) was quite restricted. It could only call
other extensions (no outgoing calls via dialing 9) and it could not
get incoming calls except from other extensions. When you dialed the
number from elsewhere, the intercept was one I have never received
before or since: "The number you dialed, xxx-xxxx cannot be reached
from outside the customer's premises." In other words, the customer
can call himself, and that's it! :) A few times, I forwarded my line
to it just for laughs, and when invariably someone trying to reach me
would ask the operator to intervene and 'see what is wrong with his
line', that recording would even baffle the IBT operators. To avoid
confusion then, don't get other numbers or other people involved. I
don't see why though our correspondent simply does not get a second
independent line rather than try to work with distinctive ringing. It
would make things so much simpler.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #826
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11262;
          19 Dec 93 2:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08365
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 23:23:43 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07854
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 23:23:16 -0600
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 23:23:16 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #827

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 18 Dec 93 23:23:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 827

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference (Michael S. Baum, Esq.)
    Re: Restrictions on Repeat Call and Return Call (Paul Robinson)
    Re: TDD Software Wanted (Joe Whalen)
    Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Stewart Fist)
    Re: Carrier For 800 Number? (Robert Cohen)
    Re: AT&T's New Facility (Dave Niebuhr)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 14:55:00 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference


WORLDWIDE ELECTRONIC COMMERCE:
      Law, Policy and Controls Conference

****************Program Details****************


Dear Colleague:

Our world is getting smaller.  Electronic Data Interchange (EDI),
Electronic Mail (E-Mail) and other computer-based technologies (that
collectively support Electronic Commerce) are drawing individuals and
organizations closer together.  However, these exciting developments
also present significant challenges.  Corresponding audit, controls,
legal, policy and security issues pose potentially serious barriers to
the rapid adoption and extensive use of Electronic Commerce.

Worldwide Electronic Commerce will address the implementation and
control issues inherent in applying Electronic Commerce to today's
environment.  The answers provided at this conference will address
current problems as well as provide a foundation for dealing with
these complex issues in the future.  We have been fortunate to have
secured an unusually qualified and internationally recognized faculty
to share their experience, knowledge and theories on the wide range of
issues identified in this brochure.  We are equally pleased to have
obtained a distinguished group of organizations who, in affiliation
with this conference, are lending their considerable support.

Please join us at this unique and ground breaking event which will be
held on January 16-18, 1994 in New York City at the Waldorf-Astoria
Hotel.

Michael S. Baum, Esq., Conference Chair
M. Todd Ostrander, Conference Co-Chair


WORLDWIDE ELECTRONIC COMMERCE
CONFERENCE PUT ON IN AFFILIATION WITH:

American Bar Association,
Section of Science & Technology

Centre for Commercial Law Studies,
University of London

Computer Law Association

EDI Association of the United Kingdom

EDP Auditors Association

Harvard Law School

John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University

National Institute of Standards and Technology

U.S. Council for International Business

Data Interchange Standards Association

Healthcare EDI Corporation

International Union of Latin Notaries


CONFERENCE AT A GLANCE

SUNDAY, JANUARY 16TH - Registration 17:00 - 20:00

PRE-CONFERENCE TUTORIALS: 18:00 - 19:30
* Electronic Trade Overview for Beginners
* Security and Audit Overview
* A General Counsel's Perspective on Electronic Trade
* Electronic Commerce Policy and Regulation 101


MONDAY, JANUARY 17TH - Registration 7:00 - 18:00

OPENING PLENARY: 8:00 - 8:50

SESSION 1: 9:00 - 10:20
* Will Legislation Keep Up with Electronic Trade?
* Anatomy of a Model EDI Audit Program
* Will Privacy Requirements Inhibit Electronic
  Commerce?
* Clearing Houses and Electronic Commerce

SESSION 2: 10:30 - 11:50
* U.S. Efforts in Coordinating Electronic Commerce
  Standards Policy
* How to Audit a Third Party/Value Added Network
* What is Cost Effective Commercially Reasonable
  Security?
* Anticompetitive Restraints on Trade in Electronic
  Commerce

LUNCH 12:00 - 13:30

SESSION 3: 13:30 - 14:50
* Trading Partner and Business Agreements in
  Electronic Commerce
* Electronic Negotiability - What Scares the EDI Users
  Away?
* INFOSEC Standards Coordination and Interworking
* Time/Date Stamping - Options and Constraints

SESSION 4: 15:00 - 16:20
* United Nations Electronic Commerce Initiatives
* Directory control Issues in Electronic Messaging and
  EDI
* Comparing Critical Cryptographic Algorithms and
  Standards
* Financial Clearing Houses - a Foundation for EDI?

SESSION 5: 16:30 - 17:50
* Model Electronic Payments Agreements
* What to Save, When to Save It, and For How Long
* Do "Smart Cards" Provide an "Ultimate" Control
  Solution?
* The "FAST" Initiative - Business Trust in the
  Computer Era?

TUESDAY, JANUARY 18TH - Registration 7:00 - 12:00

SESSION 6: 8:00 - 9:20
* Negotiating Electronic Trade Agreements
* Back-Up, Archival and Contingency Planning Services
* Security Policy in a Global Information Environment
* Electronic Software Distribution (ESD) - a Pandora's
  Box?

SESSION 7: 9:30 - 10:50
* Value Added Networks and Interconnect Agreements
* Do Criminal Laws Really Protect Electronic
  Commerce?
* Digital and Electronic Signatures and the Law
* Accreditation and Certification - the New Frontier?

SESSION 8: 11:00 - 12:50
* The ICC Electronic Commerce Initiatives
* Admitting, Proving and Enforcing EDI Transactions
* Re-engineering the Tax Filing Process
* EDI Insurance - the Next Control Approach?

LUNCH: 12:00 - 13:30

SESSION 9: 14:00 - 15:20
* Central and Eastern European Electronic Trade
* The Role and Future of Notaries in Computer-Based
  Commerce
* Will Healthcare Reform Profoundly Reshape EDI Law,
  Policy, and Controls?
* The Uses of Escrow in Electronic Commerce

SESSION 10: 15:30 - 16:50
* Who Owns the Standards, Functionality and Systems?
* Risk Analysis in Electronic Trade
* Judicial EDI
* EDI Translation Software Control and Legal
  Considerations


CONFERENCE PROGRAMMING COMMITTEE:

Robert Barger, Esq., Section of Science and Technology,
American Bar Association

Michael S. Baum, Esq., Independent Monitoring, Conference Chair

Susan Caldwell, Executive Director, EDP Auditors Association

Rachel Foerster and Garren Hagemeier, Healthcare EDI Corporation

Mark L. Gordon, Esq., Computer Law Association

Jerry Mechling, Ph.D. and Tom Fletcher,Ph.D., Kennedy School of
Government, Harvard University

Mario Miccoli, Natariat, Unione Internazionale Del Notariato Latino

Professor Charles R. Nesson, Harvard Law School

M. Todd Ostrander, EDI Program Manager, Egghead Software, Conference
Co-Chair

Chris Reed, Esq. and Ian Walden, Ph.D., Centre for Commercial Law
Studies, University of London

Peter Robinson and Bruce Wilson, U.S. Council for International
Business

Roy Saltman, National Institute of Standards and Technology

In Memory of the Late Professor Donald Trautman, Harvard Law School


SUNDAY, JANUARY 16TH:
PRE-CONFERENCE TUTORIAL EVENING SESSIONS

The following tutorials provide newcomers to electronic trade with an
overview of the concepts, technologies, and business practices that
will make the conference more meaningful. These pre-conference
sessions are scheduled from 18:00 - 19:30, January 16th, so that they
will not interfere with the regular conference sessions.

ELECTRONIC TRADE OVERVIEW FOR BEGINNERS

An overview of "Electronic Trade" and how it applies to the business
environment of the '90's & the 21st century.  You will learn about the
history and state of electronic commerce, including EDI, E-Mail, and
other enabling computer-based trade technologies and the components
necessary to implement these technologies successfully in your
industry.  Additionally, this session will provide an overview of
electronic commerce-relevant aspects of the American National
Standards Institute (ANSI), United Nations/EDI for Administration,
Commerce and Trade (UN/EDIFACT) and International Standards
Organization (ISO) standards development processes, how they affect
you, and important differences that multi-national companies will
likely encounter while implementing them.

SECURITY AND AUDIT OVERVIEW

The basic control structures and security guidelines for an electronic
trade program including cryptographic and non-cryptographic controls
will be discussed in this tutorial session.  This session also
provides the 'non- auditor' with a description of the unique
characteristics of auditing in an electronic trade environment and an
understanding of how auditors must contribute to the electronic
commerce environment.

A GENERAL COUNSEL'S PERSPECTIVE ON ELECTRONIC TRADE

Corporate counsel are increasingly called upon to respond quickly and
effectively to the demands of accelerating electronic trade
implementation programs.  Veteran corporate counsel will summarize the
critical responsive actions they have taken, and provide perspectives
on how they navigated and climbed the electronic commerce learning
curve. This session will provide the electronic commerce neophyte
general counsel with helpful hints for making the most of the
conference.

ELECTRONIC COMMERCE POLICY AND REGULATION 101

The policy and regulatory issues affecting electronic commerce
continue to grow without an end in sight. As a primer for an enriching
Worldwide Electronic Commerce conference, this session identifies and
explains the critical policy and regulatory building blocks (and road
blocks) that electronic commerce professionals simply cannot avoid. It
also surveys the "tools" that are used in policy development and
implementation. This session provides a useful foundation for many of
the policy-oriented sessions.

REGISTRATION INFORMATION

HOTEL & AIRLINE INFORMATION

American Airlines is offering discounted air fares for the Worldwide
Electronic Commerce Conference.  Arrangements may be made by calling
American Airlines at 1-800-433-1790 and referencing "Star" Code
S1814P7.

Continental Airlines is also providing discounted air travel for the
Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference. To make reservations, call
1-800-468-7022.  Please reference Identification Code ZAB58.
International travelers: please contact your local Continental phone
number for specially discounted fares.  For this conference,
Continental Airlines has waived the need to stay over a Saturday night
to obtain the lowest possible fare.

The beautiful Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in the heart of New York City will
be the site of the Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference. This
prestigious internationally-acclaimed hotel provides the finest in
accommodations and is offering a special room rate of $159 to all
conference attendees. Reservations can be made by calling
1-212-355-3000.


CONFERENCE HIGHLIGHTS

INTERNATIONAL SCOPE: Most conference sessions will include one or more
persons from a country other than the United States, or one or more
representatives from international organizations, to provide a
diversity of perspectives and experiences.

CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS: Conference papers of all sessions will be
bound and distributed to all participants.

GROUP & STUDENT DISCOUNTS: Discounted registration fees will be
offered to companies sending three or more individuals and to
qualifying students. Call: 1- 214-516-4900 for more information.

CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION: For information concerning C.L.E. points,
call 1-214-516-4900.

HOW TO REGISTER

REGISTRATION FEE: $550 total conference registration fee.

BY MAIL: Completed forms must be accompanied by a money order, check,
or credit card number (American Express, MasterCard, or Visa). All
checks should be made payable to Worldwide Electronic Commerce
Conference, P.O. Box 743485, Dallas, Texas 75374, USA.

BY FAX: Completed forms, when paying be credit card, may be faxed to
1-214-424-0562.

BY PHONE: Call 1-214-516-4900 for payment by credit card or questions
about the conference.

BY E-MAIL: Worldwide Electronic Commerce can also be reached on
Compuserve at 76520,3713.


REGISTRATION FORM:

To register, please print out a copy of the form below, complete it by
typing or printing the registration information and return one
completed form with payment for each registration.  Mail to P.O. Box
743485, Dallas, TX 75374, USA or Fax to: 1-214-424-0562.

_____ I am registering for the Worldwide Electronic
      Commerce Conference (Total: $550)

_____ I plan on attending one of the Pre-Conference
      Tutorial Sessions. (Select one below):
        _____ Electronic Trade Overview
        _____ Security & Audit Overview
        _____ General Counsel's Perspective

        _____ Electronic Commerce Policy

A check is enclosed for $___________    -OR-

Please bill my:___VISA ___MasterCard ___American Express

Card No.______________________ Exp. Date_________________

Name on Card_____________________________________________

Signature________________________________________________

Registrant's Name________________________________________

Title____________________________________________________

Preferred First Name for Badge___________________________

Company / Organization___________________________________

MS / Dept._______________________________________________

Address__________________________________________________

City________________________ State______ Zip_____________

Telephone________________________ Fax____________________

Do You Require Special Handicapped Access? ____Yes ____No

Will you be staying at the Waldorf? ____Yes ____No

Final agenda subject to change, especially as the program expands and
additional speakers are added. CANCELLATIONS must be received in
writing and postmarked no later than December 22, 1993 to receive a
50% refund of the paid registration. No refunds will be issued after
December 22, 1993, regardless of when the registration is received.
NO SHOWS are liable for the entire conference fee.  SPECIAL
ARRANGEMENTS for the handicapped will be made if requested in advance.
To make a request, contact the "Conference Coordinator" at
1-214-516-4900.

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

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 12:26:15 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Restrictions on Repeat Call and Return Call
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Carl Moore <[e-mail]>, writes:

> Arriving with my Delaware phone bill, and I have put some comments
> in in brackets; *69 for return call and *66 for repeat call, with
> 11 replacing the * if used from rotary phone:

> Some phones may not respond properly to the Repeat Call and Return
> Call special rings.  A local or toll charge may apply for calls
> made with Repeat Call and Return Call.  [What is the special ring
> like, and what does such improper response consist of?  I guess the
> internal signal is different in some way.]

The standard ring on a phone is one six second ring.  The "return call
ring" is three one second rings.  Your phone or answering machine may
take this as one ring or as three, and if you have your answering
machine set at three rings, may pick up the phone.

> Repeat Call and Return Call do not work with calls made to most
> 700, 800, and 900 numbers.  [What are the exceptions, and what
> happens if you attempt this and it indeed does not work?]

There is no means on "return call" to identify where the call is
coming from unless the call on every single switch it traversed, ran
on SS7 switches.  Nothing else provides the information to tell where
the call came from.

There is no means on "repeat call" to put through a call to a normally
busy line unless the local switch can query the destination to see if
it is busy without ringing the destination.

If you try to use these services on numbers that aren't accessible,
you get a recording saying they can't do it.

> You can request your local business office to restrict Repeat Call
> and Return Call from your telephone line at no extra charge.  [What
> happens if such a restriction exists at the receiving end of your
> intended call?  Or does this mean that if I have such a
> restriction, I cannot use these features?]

It means if you have such a restriction, you cannot use these
features.  These are normally sold in two flavors: pay per view and
per month.  Per month means you pay a charge for usage during the
month -- here in Maryland it's $4 a month, each -- and you can use it
as many times as you want.  "Pay per view" means you pay 75c each use
with no maximum, e.g. if you used it 100 times during the month,
expect to be billed $75.00.

Its operation varies depending on where you are and how smart the
switch is.  In Pat Townson's Chicago area, if you try to repeat call to
the number you are at, it calls you to tell you the number is clear,
then finds it busy when you answer, then when you hang up it calls you
to tell you it's clear, then finds it's busy when you answer, and so
on for the next 30 minutes.

Here if you try that, and the number is still busy when you pick up
the phone, it informs you that it has cancelled your request because
the number has become busy while waiting for you to answer the phone.

I did some interesting tests on Caller ID and repeat call/return call
that I'll probably mention later.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It has been repaired here also, and now it only
attempts once to connect you with yourself. It finds your line free
and calls you; then once it gets you on the line of course it finds
your line busy and advises you it is cancelling the request. I sort
of liked it better before it was debugged.  :)  PAT]

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

From: Joe Whalen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TDD Software Wanted
Date: Sat, 18 DEC 93 22:10:44 EST
Organization: Delphi Internet


Michael,

  You are probably aware that TDD's normally use the Baudot code
instead of ASCII, like computers do.  I have not ever found software
that can send Baudot code.  You best bet is talking to ASCII TDD's.
Fortunately, most of the newer TDD's can be switched from one protocol
to the other.  :)


Joe

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

From: Stewart Fist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993  02:31:00 GMT


Dr Weiyun Yu writes about fax over Australian international cable
systems:

> Correct me if I am wrong. Exactly the opposite happens.
> The 0015 lines primarily use the satellite route while
> the 0011 numbers has the cable route when ever possible
> to provide better voice quality (no echoes).
> Apparently the fax machines are immune to echoes.

That's not my understanding; I checked with Telstra's National Network
Information Centre.  Fax only goes over satellite when nothing else is
available.

In fact, the main problem that fax machines face is echo, especially
on modern international circuits where the line quality is now very
good (and so, therefore, are the echos).  It is essential that
echo-cancellation be in place or multiple errors in the receiver will
likely cause the sender to retransmit the document, again, and again,
and again (One morning I had five copies of an MCI 15 page press
release).

The problem is that the echo cancellation circuits get turned off by
the 2100Hz tone in the handshaking routine.  And since this is a
half-duplex system (without Echoplex), cancellation needs to turn back
on again to handle the 9.6k data rate.  This would normally be forced
by a deliberate pause following the handshake transmission (part of
the fax standard), but with high-quality circuits and a bit of echo on
the line, the pause is camoflaged by noise and the echo-cancellation
stays locked out, which then creates problems during the transmission.
This happens even on the 0015 international fax lines.

Over satellites, fax has problems with protocol collisions during the
turn-around at the end of each page, also, because of the delayed
echo.  However fax is used over satellites to the Pacific Islands
(where there's nothing else available) so it obviously works, but it
is not desirable.  Speech interpolation and bit-stealing are however,
the main reasons why special cable circuits are designated for fax.
The DCME/DCMS interpolation systems tend to clip the transmissions as
they switch in and out, and cause errors, and the bit-stealing during
peak load periods on international circuits causes a quality loss
which the fax often won't tolerate.

About 80% of Australia's voice traffic and 100% of its fax traffic
goes by cable to the USA and Europe, I am told.  This is up from about
50% for voice and fax, a few years ago when satellite was more in
vogue and before the Pacific fibre systems became operational.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Cohen)
Subject: Re: Carrier For 800 Number?
Organization: Calif. Home for the Unruly
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 00:25:35 GMT


Gerry,

Simply put, when I dial +1800.950.3535 from San Francisco, Microsoft
Sales answers.


Robert Cohen    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: But Bob, he was not asking who the customer was
with the number, but *what carrier* they were using. For that info,
I still suggest whoever handles telecom for Microsoft Sales is
going to have to discuss that with him.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 02:42:43 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: AT&T's New Facility


[e-mail] (John J Butz)

> Over the Thanksgiving weekend, I traveled south on I-95 from NYC to
> Washington, DC.  After emerging from the tunnel in Baltimore, the AT&T
> cable laying ships are visible from the "port-side" in the harbor.  On
> Friday morning, both vessels were docked.  However, on the Sunday
> return trip, only one boat was still in port.  Perhaps to Long Island
> is where the second ship went?

It's possible since the cable laying is to begin shortly.  I was in
Maryland last year (Laurel and Columbia) and saw the ships on both
drives to there and back.

> I've been sailing on the Great South Bay out of Islip and it looks
> deep enough to handle an ocean going vessel.  Also, the Robert Moses
> causeway bridge to Fire Island would definitely provide clearance for
> a fairly tall ship.  However, I've been fluke fishing enough times to
> tell you that most of the Great South Bay is pretty shallow.  Dave,
> perhaps you could go on a recon-mission and let us know if the AT&T
> ship is there?  8-)

The bay is about ten feet deep, at most except for the intercoastal
waterway.

If AT&T is smart, that's the way to come into the bay.  Moriches Inlet
is closer to the crossing point but it has been officially closed to
traffic due to the offshore shoaling.  Boats still use it though.

There's still one more bridge to sail under, Smith Point, in Shirley
where the cable will cross the bay.  A large, ocean-going vessel
shouldn't be needed for this part of the operation.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #827
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16697;
          19 Dec 93 19:29 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06268
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sun, 19 Dec 1993 16:03:31 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26480
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Dec 1993 16:03:02 -0600
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 16:03:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #828

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 19 Dec 93 16:03:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 828

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Calling a PBX and Billing (Neil R. Henry)
    Caller-ID: Southern Bell Changes Rates (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Future of North American Numbering Plan (Robert L. McMillin)
    LD Rates From "Wholesale Club" (Richard Layman)
    ATT, MCI, Sprint: Who is Really the Cheapest? (Rudolf Usselmann)
    10xxx Dialtone (was Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Two Cell Phones With the Same ESN (Lars Nohling)
    Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (Charles McGuinness)
    Re: Cable Channels (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Richard Cox)
    Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Darren Ingram)
    Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Gordon Grant)
    Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Liz Auchinvole)
    Re: Inexpensive (Cheap ?) Modem Part II (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number (Anthony D. Vullo)
    Re: 1-800 Caller ID (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Book Review: "The Smiley Dictionary" by Godin (Rodolfo Paiz)
    Re: Are Local Calls Kept on Record? (Gordon Croft)
    Re: Fax Networks (Steve Elias)
    Angry Monkeys Go on Rampage (Henry Mensch)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

From: [e-mail] (Neil R. Henry)
Subject: Calling a PBX and Billing
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 06:29:05 GMT


I have a question for the collective net wisdom.  I am doing a good
deal of telephone work recently and am tracking the times and lengths
of calls for clients.  When I call a "direct number" at a large
organization (through a PBX but direct to their desk), when do I begin
to pay for the call?  I hear the initial ring and then the diverted
ring to voice mail.  Do these make a difference?  Does the PBX pick up
my call and then ring its lines or does it work as its own switch?
Does it mimic a switch to start billing when the line is picked up?  I
am on a nodding aquaintance with SS7 so I can handle the big words and
acronyms.  Thanks for any clarification.

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

Date: Sun, 18 Dec 93 08:01:14 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Caller-ID: Southern Bell Changes Rates


As you may know from previous postings, Southern Bell was charging
U$7.50/month for residential Caller-ID service. With this month's bill
I see that it is now U$6.00/month for basic Caller-ID and U$7.50 for
number and name. They automatically changed my charge to the lower
figure.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Future of North American Numbering Plan
Organization: Surf City Software/TBFW Project
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 14:13:34 GMT


I'm looking for a document that contains the future plans for the
North American Numbering Plan.  I tried looking in the Telecom
Archives, but didn't find anything satisfactory.  But before you say
to me, "You need the history.of.area.code.splits file", please know
that doesn't have quite what I want.  I would like to know the status
of Bellcore's proposals for 7D or 10D only dialing nationwide, as well
as the proposed upcoming area code splits.

Now ... who can help?


Robert L. McMillin | Surf City Software | [e-mail] | Dude!

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

Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 12:36:00 EST
From: Richard Layman <[e-mail]>
Subject: LD Rates From "Wholesale Club"


On Monday I received a direct mail package from "Long Distance
Wholesale Club" 1-0-297-1 offering savings of 10-30% off "ATT, MCI,
etc."  Of course, their mailing didn't list the specific rates and I
called.  After telling the clerk repeatedly that I didn't want the
pitch, just the rates, he gave 'em to me.

Mileage        8-5    5-11    nite

1-55        .189    .12    .11
56-124        .198    .13    .12
125-925        .207    .14    .13
926+        .16    .14    .13

    For day calls, that isn't bad, especially because my volume
isn't big enough to justify an account with a WilTel broker and the
like.

    I don't know if they provide service beyond DC, MD, and VA.
Their number is 703-243-4600.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rudolf Usselmann)
Subject: ATT, MCI, Sprint: Who is Really Cheapest?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 08:16:30 GMT


OK, so now I'm getting calls on a weekly basis, asking to switch.  And
each of them has the cheapest rate ;).

Anybody have a *total* and *complete* understanding of rates and
services?  Any kind of performance review? I do a lot overseas (Europe
and Pacific Rim) calling. I need clean lines for mostly local high
sepeed (14.4kboud) modem connections -- which is pobably handled by my
local carier anyway (PacBell).  Actaully I need good (clean) lines for
long distance too, since I do alot faxing (mostly 9600bd).

So, can any kind soul help me? Pleeeaaseee?!


Thanks,

rudi  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Who is cheapest and who is best is purely
an applications thing; there are programs available for PBXs which claim
to examine every possible factor involved (time of day, distance, etc)
and make a decision call by call and carrier by carrier on how to route
the traffic of the moment. Most of us don't have the volume of traffic
to warrant that, nor the resources and time to continue studying the
matter indefinitly, so we tend to pick and choose based on what sounds
good at the time. Perhaps it is a premium being offered (modem, cash,
etc) or perhaps it is the rate to a specific point at a specific time.
Then we decide to examine the quality of the transmission, and realize
the best long distance carrier (whoever that may be) is only as good as
the caller and called party's central offices. This is sort of like
the analogy that the chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Choose
all the long distance companies you want; you won't have the option of
selecting a local telco anytime soon, yet we still talk on the same
instrument over the same pair of wires.

A fellow wrote a book several years ago published by the Telecom
Library (Harry Newton's organization in New York City) in which over
several hundred pages he examined all the long distance carriers
available at that time. He laid out all the rates, terms and conditions
for service, etc. I wish I could remember his name and the name of his
book. It got rather technical in places and the final conclusion the
reader had to reach after reading it all?  What is *your* specific
application? Is your traffic great enough that it really matters?  A
few general rules of thumb might be: Do you make lots of daytime calls
and very few nighttime calls? Then you want a plan which gives you a
flat rate per minute unless your calls are mostly to nearby out of
state points.  Mostly nighttime calls? Then you do not want flat rate
since those are biased in favor of daytime users. Instead, you want
something which is time of day and distance sensitive. You'll have a
big savings on your short calls to nearby points. Are your calls very
very short in duration? Then you want a carrier who will bill in six
second (or less) increments. If the carrier has a monthly fee in
addition to call charges, can you justify or amortize that monthly fee
in a short time each month and still save money? Would you be better
off with a carrier who charges more per minute but bills in shorter
increments, etc?  And on and on it goes.  You tell me who is best.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 11:29:08 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: 10xxx Dialtone (was  Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Al Varney <[e-mail]>, writes:

> Note these shorthands:

>   00 = 10XXX+0#  IXC operator
>   0# = LEC operator

>    Also, 10XXX+# is cut-thru to IXC dial-tone (sorta like
> 950-0XXX). There is no shorthand for this access, since '#' by
> itself is an error.

This is a special feature and is not available everywhere. Here is
what happens on calls made from from Montgomery County, MD:

10000#: (A known invalid 10xxx code).  Looooong pause.  Click.  <SIT
TONE> "We're sorry, your call did not go through.  Will you please try
your call again." Message does not repeat.

10222#: Several seconds delay. <RING> "Your call cannot be completed
as dialed.  Please, check the number and dial again.  2CG."

10333#: Immediate click.  <RING> "Your call cannot be completed as
entered.  Please check the number and try your call again, or call
customer service.  44 230. " Message is not repeated.  The voice
appears to be Sprint's "Regular" error message woman.

10288# and 10732#: Several seconds delay. <RING> <SIT TONE> "We're
sorry, due to telephone company facility trouble your call cannot be
completed at this time.  Will you try your call again later?"

10444#: Immediate click.  <RING> "33-3. We're sorry, the number you
have dialed is invalid.  Please check the number to make sure you have
used the correct area code or call directory assistance in the city
you wish to reach."

Where it doesn't say, the message is repeated at least once.  Where it
says the message is not repeated, it either goes to reorder (fast
busy) after the recording or dead silence for ten seconds.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 10:05 EST
From: Lars Nohling <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Two Cell Phones With the Same ESN


If I read the FCC Quote correctly it is unlawful to change a phone's
ESN number.

Motorola has a procedure that transfers an ESN from one flip phone to
another so that a defective phone can be replaced without having to
notify the carrier.

It sounds like this violates the FCC rules?


Lars Nohling   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not really, because other parts of the
FCC regulations address the matter of what is called 'type acceptance'
and who is or is not authorized to construct a transmitter and put it
on the air. Motorola holds licenses from the FCC saying that their
products have met 'type acceptance'. They are authorized to build and
service radio equipment. ESNs have to be originated somewhere; the
government does not create the ESN nor do the carriers. Motorola, as
the maker of the phone originates the ESN and then advises the carrier
what it is (through the registration process when a phone is purchased
and put in use for the first time.) Please note also that when a firm
like Motorola swaps out a bad phone for a good one under warranty for
example and re-uses the ESN in the process, they are NOT permitted to
return the old phone to the customer as part of the contract they have
with the carrier. And despite what they say about 'not having to
bother notifying the carrier', what they mean is the end-user customer
does not have to bother with this. The carrier does get notified by
Motorola, but it is just a paperwork transaction.

The law was intended to address the cellphone phreaks who rarely are
authorized to modify the phone in the first place, and never remember
to complete the paperwork part (smile) ... if you get FCC authorization
to build/repair cellphones and a contract or understanding with the
carriers regards same, you'll be lawfully entitled to swap out ESN's
also. And I dare say that if you have such authorization and decide to
sneak through a few 'side jobs' for a phriendly phreak which get
traced back to you, your license or authorization will be yanked as
fast as you can snap your fingers. Motorola, Radio Shack, Cobra, Uniden
and the others are not going to jeopardize their licenses which are
worth a slight fortune to play games with ESN's.   PAT]

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

From: marks![e-mail] (Charles McGuinness)
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 17:27:20 EST
Subject: Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs)


A. Padgett Peterson writes that he thinks that there is not much of a
logical reason for a 500 channel system.  Specifically:

> The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think
> "if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad
> enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now
> requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for
> the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel
> listing ?

I think the perspective is wrong.  It's not that a system where you
have to press "upchannel" 500 times to loop around is going to be a
success, but a system where I get to choose which 40 (or whatever)
channels are on display instead of the cable company will be.

For example, the city I live in has quite a heavy population of native
Italian speakers; no doubt, they would appreciate the addition of some
Italian channels.  I, on the other hand, would find no value in that,
but would be thrilled to get BBC and perhaps some other european
channels.  When you add up the individual choices of all of us,
suddenly 500 channels sounds like too few, not too many.

I don't want 500 channels; 40 or so will do.  But I want to pick the 40!


charles

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

Date: Sun, 13 Dec 93 08:09:27 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Cable Channels (was Union Losing Telco Jobs)


 From: UVS1::"[e-mail]" 12-DEC-1993 23:17:34.13

> channels, it is quite possible that we each want 9 DIFFERENT channels.

> The advantage of a "500" channel system would be that each of us can
> select what we want, without preventing our neighbor from doing the
> same.  Hopefully the implementation of these new systems would allow
> us to pay for what we wanted, and let us leave the rest behind.

 From what I have seen, the delta cost between 1 channel and 500 is
essentially zero. The hard part will be in knowing what is on. It is
easy to set a modern television to simply skip the unwanted channels,
the hard part is in knowing what channel to turn on when.

Unless some sort of tailoring of the "preview guide" is possible or an
intelligent "TV-Guide" becomes available (weekly download?), the
choices will simply overload most people.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Cox)
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 06:00:30 GMT


[e-mail] (Zarko Draganic) asked:

>> I heard that the international direct dialing scheme will be changing
>> in the U.K. on Easter 1994.  Can anyone confirm this?

Almost.  The change is scheduled for June 1994 (which will be the
start of the permissive period); the old dialling will be turned off
in April 1995.

>> Right now I believe you dial 010 +1 to reach the USA from London.

Correct.

>> What's it changing to?

001 (i.e. 00+ CCITT country code)

>>  Why?

Standardisation with the rest of Europe (and, ultimately, most of the
rest of the world, apart from North America !)

UK internal area codes will be changing at the same time.  With a few
specific exceptions, they are to be prefixed with a "1".  i.e. London
(currently +44 71) will become +44 171


Richard Cox, Mandarin Technology, Cardiff ([e-mail])
Voice: [phone]; Fax [phone]:
These numbers will NOT be changing in 1995!

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

From: Darren Ingram <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?
Date: 19 Dec 1993 09:01:05 GMT


> I heard that the international direct dialing scheme will be changing
> in the U.K. on Easter 1994. Can anyone confirm this? Right now I
> believe you dial 010 +1 to reach the USA from London. What's it
> changing to? Why?  How long is the phase-out period?

Correct. The UK will be harmonizing with Europe, so that the
international access code will be 00. It is part of the PhoneDay
project, which will also see a renumbering for *ALL* UK numbers and a
recoding for five cities.


Darren Ingram: (e-mail [e-mail] and type 'subscribe
satnews YOUR NAME' for satellite news worldwide.

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Grant)
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?
Organization: Joint European Torus
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 10:40:56 GMT


In <[e-mail]> Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]>
writes:

> Quoth Zarko Draganic:

>> I heard that the international direct dialing scheme will be changing
>> in the U.K. on Easter 1994. Can anyone confirm this? Right now I
>> believe you dial 010 +1 to reach the USA from London. What's it
>> changing to? Why?  How long is the phase-out period?

> Last I heard, it's been put back to Easter 1995. The IDD code 010 is
> changing to 00 to bring it into line with most countries, and at the
> same time a 1 is being prefixed to all fixed area codes (so +44 923
> ... becomes +44 1923) but not special area codes like 831 (allocated
> to my mobile carrier) or 800 (free calls).

> There is no phase-out period -- it's a straight cutover.

Wrong! Both BT and Hg are allowing an eight month "Parallel running
period" from the 1-Aug-1994 to Easter 1995. This applies to both the
fixed location area codes and the international prefix.

I have checked this information with the Hg changeover help desk on
0500 04 1995 (this number is only available from within the UK).

After checking and ringing me back I was assured that the emergency
number was not changing at the same time. Now I thought it was moving
from 999 to 112. Anyone know when that's going to happen.

BTW for overseas readers:  Hg == Mercury Communications Ltd


[e-mail]   Gordon Grant             Jet Abingdon OX14 3EA UK
            Voice [phone]     Fax [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 11:00:50 BST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?


The number change in the UK does not take place until 'APRIL 1995'.
The international dialing code will then be 00 1 from the UK to the
USA instead of 010 1 as now.


Liz Auchinvole     AEA Technology   Harwell Laboratory

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 12:04:11 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Inexpensive (Cheap ?) Modem - Part II


A likely factor in the 144 price erosion is the COMDEX introduction of
a slew of v32ter 19,200 modems ranging in price from $229 (quoted for
Bay Connection Inc. Spectra-Com i192MX internal for PC in PC-Week) up.

This is going to rapidly erode the price of "lesser" modems. Still in
the wings are the vFast 28.8 modems. However I suspect that @ U$99.00,
a 144 external will still find a lot of uses if the low price does not
mask any other deficiencies. For reading E-Mail and telecommuting even
9,600 is "fast enough" IMHO.

Seems the MACWarehose is not the only outlet for the U$99.00 14.4
FaxModem. The have a sister organization named (surprise) the PC
Warehouse also in Lakewood, NJ (thought so as soon as I saw the girl
on the cover of the catalogue). For those who might prefer PC cables
and software, try calling 800.367.7080.

One correction to my previous posting -- apparently the modem is made
Prometheus Products in Tustin, Oregon and not Practical Peripherals.
I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has more information about
the SIERRA chip particularly the CALLER-ID function commands (both
AT#CID=? and AT%CCID=? give ERROR).

The major caveat seems to be that it requires class 2 FAX software and
will not work with class 1. (Lacking proper software, I still have not
tried this part but the AT+F commands seem to work properly).


Warmly,

Padgett

PS: I have no connection with any of the above other than having
bought one.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 11:31:21 PST


> [Moderator's Note: Landline telcos are under no obligation to provide
> a connection to 911 if your service was otherwise cut for reasons of
> non-payment or fraud. Neither do cellular carriers have to provide
> free air time to reach 911 to someone who won't/can't pay for it.  PAT]

Are you sure?  PacificBell's intercept message on temporary
disconnects says "this phone cannot place calls except to 911 and
Pacifc Bell Business offices."  However, this may be PacBell or CPUC
policy.


Steve   [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is apparently their policy to leave
phones connected during a temporary 'disconnect' and continue to
provide them with dialtone and limited calling privileges. On the
other hand, when Illinois Bell cuts you off for non-payment, they
refuse you any dialtone at all. If you go off hook, you'll get the
battery and that's all. You reach *no one*.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 10:48 EST
From: Anthony D. Vullo <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number


In V13 #801, we are confronted with:

> [Moderator's Note: Landline telcos are under no obligation to provide
> a connection to 911 if your service was otherwise cut for reasons of
> non-payment or fraud. Neither do cellular carriers have to provide
> free air time to reach 911 to someone who won't/can't pay for it.  PAT]

Pat, I've experienced several instances in my travels, where I've
attempted to call 911 from my mobile phone to report a disabled car on
the side of a highway, only to find that I was out of range.  Most
times, I found that I could switch to the other system (I have one
account on one system) to make the call.

I think that it is in the public interest for the carriers to connect
emergency calls, even when no account exists.  The analogy with
disconnected landline service shouldn't carry here.


Regards and Happy Holidays,

Tony Vullo

(No disclaimers needed when you speak honorably.)


[Moderator's Note: I agree with your public interest theory, sort of,
but what you did on the highway is nothing that anyone with cellular
service can't do, i.e. change the A/B switch and make a call on the
competitor's system when roaming. The only time I know of that you
cannot go back and forth between A/B is when you are in your home
territory. There, you have to specifically register with one or the
other. Once you start roaming, neither of the carriers where you are
at is going to know who you are; either or both is going to automatic-
ally extend you the courtesy of one call while they validate your ESN
and cellphone number with your home carrier. Now when they find out
(through the validation process) that you are from the wrong side of
the A/B divider, you'll likely get hassled on your second and subse-
quent calls. But I don't think it is necessarily 911 they are giving
you as a courtesy, it is that first call so you are not sitting there
wasting your time while they do a validation check. The cell companies
here also give 911 free of charge regardless of your credit status,
and it is likely if Illinois Bell ever gets to the point they leave
your line live during a suspension they will also provide calls to
the business office and 911 during that interim.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: 1-800 Caller ID
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 06:19:16 GMT


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

[regarding ANI delivery on 800 calls]

> [Moderator's Note: Just call the carrier handling your 800 service
> and tell then you want automatic number identification displayed in
> real time as calls are received. If they can't do it, you will need
> to switch your service to some carrier -- such as AT&T -- who can.
> You will *not* like the price they charge you for it. By comparison,
> Caller-ID on a regular POTS line is quite cheap.   PAT]

U.S. Sprint charges $0.01 per call for real-time ANI delivery as part
of their Clarity(tm) bypass 800 service.  There is a one-time charge
of $500 or so to activate the feature.


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well as I said, you won't like the
price they charge you for it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rodolfo Paiz)
Subject: Re: Book Review: "The Smiley Dictionary" by Godin
Date: 19 Dec 93 07:25:21 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts


Rob Slade <[e-mail]> writes:

> For even slightly more serious use, stick with Sanderson and
> Dougherty.

And we get this ... where?  I'm interested ...


Rodolfo

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Croft)
Subject: Re: Are Local Calls Kept on Record?
Date: 19 Dec 93 19:37:00 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada


> That one to Aurora cost me ten message units every five minutes, and
> the guy called it for a half hour one day and twenty minutes the next

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "message unit"?  Is that local measured
service or something?

Just a comment on the original question ... I'm sure that some COs
don't have the ability to record local calls.  What I'm thinking of is
some of the old Step by Step switches that we still have in some of
the smaller areas of British Columbia.

Just my CDN $0.02 worth... that's about US $0.0000002 !! :)


Gord


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In Ameritech/Illinois Bell territory, a
'unit' under the old system (in the 1970's) was a measure of time and
distance. Local calls have been measured here for years unless you had
the old unmeasured plan, long since discontinued.  Calls cost a certain
number of 'units' and each business telephone was given 80 'units' per
month as part of the basic monthly charge. Extra 'units' in those
days cost about three cents each.

On the real old equipment, the only way they had of keeping track of
local calls was by the use of a device called a pen register.
Typically a pen register was only placed on a subscriber's line when
the subscriber insisted the message count from one month to the next
was inaccurate. Of course the security department tended to use pen
registers a lot also in the course of their duties.  There was never
any law (and still isn't) saying telco can't keep track of who calls
where; after all, it is their system and their responsibility where
accurate billing is concerned. Its just that in the old days it was
usually too much to bother with on local calls unless the need was
present. PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Elias)
Subject: Re: Fax Networks
Date: 19 Dec 93 13:20:50  GMT
Organization: cisco Systems


Bob, the email->fax network that you have described is currently set
up on the Internet. It is called the tpc.int remote-printing experiment.

Mail to [e-mail] if you would like to join the
experiment as a user and/or a server. There is also a FAQ file
available.


eli

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 11:24:12 PST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Angry Monkeys Go on Rampage


On Dec 2,  2:07, TELECOM Moderator quoted someone else:

> "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million
> typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare."
>        -- Blair Houghton

On the Usenet, nobody knows you're a monkey.


-- h


[Moderator's Note: Not only that, they are so liberal they don't even
care if you are a monkey or not. A few even openly admit to being
monkeys and say they are proud of it. For those of you who are unable
to benefit from the wisdom of the ancients shared each day in
news.groups (a fine example of what Abusenet is all about) you'll
be interested to know they have been on quite a rampage the past
couple weeks since they went into involuntary TELECOM Digest
withdrawal. "Put it back!", they screamed as only noisy, angry monkeys
can do. "It belongs to us! You only work for us; you don't own it!".
 From the commotion, you'd have thought they found someone had stolen
the monkey-chow out of their bowls at mealtime. In a sense, maybe I
did.  I wonder if I should reconnect them? After all, its not the
fault of the vast majority that a few of the monkeys are more vicious
than the others but it had gotten a little more than I was willing to
deal with. I'll accept comments in private email from *list subscribers
only* on whether or not Usenet should receive the Digest as before.
Consider this the Call For Discussion, Call For Votes and Call For
Sanity all at one time. If the mailing list members want to include
Usenet, I'll give it favorable consideration -- its YOU I am trying to
serve, although you must know by now how I feel about the net.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #828
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17965;
          19 Dec 93 22:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13446
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sun, 19 Dec 1993 19:15:32 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24846
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Dec 1993 19:15:05 -0600
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 19:15:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #829

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 19 Dec 93 19:13:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 829

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Schedule of Events (Bjoern Kriews)
    Shared 800 Telephone Numbers (Paul Robinson)
    Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (John R. Levine)
    Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Nathan Lane)
    112 Emergency Calls From a GSM Phone (Juha Veijalainen)
    Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere ... (Carl Moore)
    Re: Check From MCI; What to Do? (Marshall Levin)
    Re: NYC Area Central Office Outage, PSAP Shutdown (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Research on the Effects of Telecommuting (Peter M. Weiss)
    Cellphones and RJ-11 Adapters (Lynne Gregg)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bjoern Kriews)
Subject: Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Schedule of Events
Date: 19 Dec 1993 23:28:24 +0100
Organization: Digital Island


                        "Ten years after Orwell"

                  10. Chaos Communication Congress 1993

                    - The European Hackerparty -

               December 27.-29. 1993 in Hamburg, Germany

                        Eidelstedter Buergerhaus
                   Elbgaustr. 12 / Hamburg-Eidelstedt

                Information * Discussion * Workshops
                 Chaos-Cafe * Archive + Photocopier
                  Hack-Center * Internet-FreePort

                  Phonenumbers of the Congress :

                     + 49-40-5710523 (General)
                     + 49-40-5710810 (BBS)
                     + 49-40-5714010 (Telefax)
                     + 49-40-5710133 (Congress-Editorial / Press)


             Dauerkarte:    "Normal"                 42.- DM
                            Reduced price            32.- DM
                            Members of CCC e.V.      23.- DM
                            Press                    77.- DM

Organization     Chaos Computer Club e.V.     Tel: [phone]
                 Schwenckestr. 85             Fax: [phone]
                 D-20255 Hamburg              Mbx: [phone]


10. Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Congressschedule -1-  Monday 93/12/27
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Time Theatre                       Conf1                   Conf2
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    09:30 -------------------------------start------------------------------

    10:00 +---------------------+
          | Opening / Welcome   |
          |                     |
          +---------------------+
    11:00                         +--------------------+ +-------------------+
                                  | How do computers   | | ISDN - Everything |
                                  | work at all ?      | | about a network.  |
                                  +--------------------+ |                   |
    12:00 +---------------------+ +--------------------+ | Experience & ideas|
          | Internet and Multi- | | Datacommunications | | from its users and|
          |  media applications | | for beginners      | | some programmers. |
          |                     | +--------------------+ +-------------------+
    13:00 | MIME / Mosaic       | +--------------------+
          | Gopher /            | | Internet for       |
          | Worldwibe Web       | | Beginners          |
          +---------------------+ +--------------------+
    14:00



    15:00 +---------------------+ +--------------------+
          | Media & flow of     | | Encryption for     |
          | information -       | | beginners.         |
          | What is left from   | | practical PGP      |
    16:00 | the truth ?!        | |                    |
          | direct democracy:   | |                    |
          |Informational needs  | +--------------------+
          | of citizens         |
    17:00 +---------------------+



    18:00 +---------------------+
          |alternative netsworks|
          |ZAMIRNET (ex-Jugos-  |
          |lavia), APS+Hacktic  |
    19:00 |(NL),Green-Net (GB), |
          |Knoopunt (B), Z-Netz |
          | and CL (D)          |
          +---------------------+
    20:00

    20:30  Organizational announcements, sleeping accommodations

    21:00 ------------------ End of this day - on congress...------------------

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

- 13:00 : Editors / press conference
          Announcement of congress program and further information.

- starting at 14:00 the women's room offers a continous program.


10. Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Congresschedule -2- Tuesday 93/12/28
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Time Theatre                   Conf1                  Conf2
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    09:30 -------------------------------start------------------------------

    10:00 +--------------------+
          | Administrivia,     |
          | Discus. of schedule|
          +--------------------+
    11:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+
          | Encryption:        | | Modacom-DataCom    |
          | priciples, systems | | Bernd Mielke       |
          | and visions.       | | presents concepts  |
    12:00 | Problems of social | | and applications   |
          | and political      | +--------------------+
          | relevance.         |
          +--------------------+
    13:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+
          | Electronic Cash    | |Mailbox-UI's for    |
          |                    | |citizens            |
          |                    | |participation       |
    14:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+



    15:00 +--------------------+
          |"Peep Attack" what's|
          |left from private   |
          |communication -     |
    16:00 |The plan to ban en- |
          |encryption.         |
          |Referents:          |
          |a.o. / Peter Paterna|
    17:00 |(MdB), Peter Schaar |
          |stellv. DsB-Hamburg,|
          |Gero von Randow a.o.|
          +--------------------+
    18:00

    18:30  Organizational announcements, sleeping accommodations

    19:00 +---------------------+
          | How does an         |
          | Intelligence work ? |
          | Example: Stasi      |
    20:00 |                     |
          | Educ.Films from MfS |
          |                     |
          +---------------------+

    21:00 ------------------ End of this day - on congress...------------------

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

- starting at 11:00 the womens room offers a continous program.


10. Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Congresschedule -3- Wednesday 93/12/29
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Time Theatre                     Conf1                  Conf2
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    09:30 -------------------------------start------------------------------

    10:00 +--------------------+
          | Administrivia,     |
          | Discus. of schedule|
          +--------------------+
    11:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+
          | Thoughts about     | | Computerrecycling  |
          | authorship...      | |                    |
          |                    | +--------------------+
    12:00 |                    | +--------------------+
          |Prof. Kurd Alsleben | | Network Stupidity  |
          +--------------------+ | Electronic Warfare |
                                 +--------------------+
    13:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+
          | Lockpicking- how to| |Workgroup for free  |
          | open non-electric  | |Bulletin Boards     |
          | lock systems.      | |introduces itself.  |
    14:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+



    15:00 +--------------------+
          | Ten years after    |
          | Orwell ...         |
          | Hacker's & Scene's |
    16:00 | visions            |
          | Final meeting.     |
          | Goodbye...         |
          +--------------------+
    17:00 ------------------------ EOC - End of Congress----------------------


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

- starting at 11:00 the womens room offers a continous program.

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

[e-mail] - Bjoern Kriews - Stormsweg 6 - D-22085 Hamburg [76] - FRG

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 11:36:46 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Shared 800 Telephone Numbers
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Dave Bonney <[e-mail]>, writes:

> Carl Moore <[e-mail]> in writing about changes to local
> dialing plans quoted from a Bell letter to customers:

>> "We thank you for helping us to prepare for Pennsylvania's new
>> area code.  If you have any questions, please call our We Can
>> Help Center at 1-800-555-5000, Monday through Friday, from
>> 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m."

> and Carl commented:

>> [I tried that number from Maryland and got U.S. West
>> Communications -- a recording only -- in Denver, Colorado.
>> Darn, I am not in Del. or Pa. now.]

> If you try that number in New England Telephone territory, you get
> the 'New England Telephone Customer Response Center'.

1-800-555-5000 has been in use as a 'shared' telephone number by the
(then) or (former) Bell System entities for many years, possibly even
back before the AT&T Breakup or just after.

Because most companies do not (explicitly) claim to only serve one area,
such a service isn't of much use to them.  If a company is, it could be,
but it's more expensive to do that (see below).

> Leading one to believe that despite the TELCO and RESPORG
> claims of 'One Number -- One User', it's another case of
> 'Mother Knows Best' and 'Do As I Say, Not As I Do'.

> Does anyone have any knowledge of a single 800 number being
> used for different customers in different geographical areas??

> (Other than Mother and the Children of course ...)

> Inquiring Minds Want To Know ...

The company Pat Townson uses to provide 800 service has much stricter
credit requirements for 800 numbers than I could meet, so I got an 800
number from Sprint.  Cost is $10 a month plus 30c a minute - which is
fine, since I don't expect to use more than a few minutes a month -
and terminates on an ordinary local dial number.  And it is listed
with 800 information.  For my purposes this service is sufficient.  If
I was going to be using a lot of call time, I'd probably want a less
expensive rate.

When setting up the service, I asked the customer representative who
called me about the ability to have a number served by more than one
IXC (long distance company).  He said that it can be done and you can
make it as complicated as you want, with the only real restriction
being that each area (not sure if that's as small as any particular
switch or each LATA) can only be served by one IXC.  It's also more
expensive.

For example, due to the large number of lines in New York City and
AT&T's heftier presence and larger number of trunks, if I was doing a
lot of calls from there, I could have AT&T handle calls from the area
codes there, and let Sprint handle the rest of the country.  Or have a
local company take all calls that occur, say, in DC/MD/VA and have the
rest from Sprint, or however I wanted to do it.

A similar feature can be done by one IXC, for example, if I have
offices in New York, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Phoenix and Los Angeles,
then I could have each office handle traffic for its own regional area
and calls are diverted there *until local closing time*.  At 5:00 New
York can shunt its calls to Chicago or Dallas depending on volume.
Those offices shunt their calls to Denver or Phoenix when they close,
and perhaps they transfer to Los Angeles as 5:00 rolls around there.
Or perhaps I put my national all-night response center in Phoenix.
Then after Los Angeles closes, all of its calls get shunted there, so
we can have the following map:

   East Coast shunts to Chicago at 5:00 then shunts to Denver at 6:00 then
   Los Angeles at 7:00 then Phoenix at 9:00 until 7:00 then back to New York

   Midwest shunts to Denver at 5:00 then Los Angeles at 6:00 then Phoenix at
   8:00 until 7:00 then back to Dallas

   Chicago... etc.

Now, since each response center is a different local trunk or terminating
telephone number, there is nothing that says that in each area that same
1-800 number can't be terminated to a different company instead of a
different regional office of the same company.

Since telephone companies currently by law cannot offer service
outside their own area, they have probably decided to each terminate
calls to 1-800-555-5000 to their own service bureau where they use
that number.

The big issue is cost.  My 1-800 number costs me $10 a month plus
usage, is listed with 800 information and is "good anywhere in North
America" (which means USA, Alaska, Hawaii and Canada - the represent-
ative asked if I wanted to include Canada and I said yes.)  Any other
service, such as shared 800 numbers requires that:

(1) you give up use of the area in question for that 800 number to
someone else;

(2) the area in question is such that you can delineate service in
specific areas to separate companies;

(3) there are no antitrust considerations;

(4) you're wil ling to pay more for a number that is only available to
part of the country.

In short, it would require the company in question only do business in
part of the country, not be interested in (or able to take) calls
outside its service area, and be willing to let someone else take
them.  Franchised companies or organizations specially licensed for
specific areas might be able to use such a feature, but they would
need a reason to share the same telephone number.  A franchise
operation might be a good idea, but most franchises imply operation
under the same family name with a specific company.

In short, this type of feature is not likely to be used much unless
800 numbers become in short supply, or there is some "special" spelled
number that several organizations in the same business in different
areas all want that they can arrange not to compete in each other's
area.

A plumbing contractor in Philadelphia could possibly use the same 800
number a local plumber advertises here, as could one in Atlanta,
Cinncinati, St. Louis or San Francisco.  But it would cost more for
them to do that than to get their own specific 800 number.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 13:32 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> And the previous post mentioned PSI.  Well, PSI just two months ago
> announced the first (I think) venture with a cable company back east
> (I think it was Continental in New York).  Their goal is to provide
> 10Mbps (yes, ethernet speeds) to cable customers, bidirectionally, for
> just $100/month.  The equipment is installed and I believe they even
> have trial customers now.

I believe that the first IP via CATV is supposed to be here in
Cambridge, but I haven't seen any evidence that it's anywhere near
ready to go, nor have other people I've asked.  The existing CATV
wiring only passes signals in one direction, head end to customers,
and nobody has any idea what they're planning to do for the reverse
direction.  Indeed, we're not even sure that Continental realizes that
there has to be a reverse direction.  Neither Continental nor PSI has
a stellar technical reputation in their respective industries.

They said Ethernet speeds, up to 300 people sharing the same "ether",
DES envceryption to keep us from intercepting each others' traffic.
For $100 per month I'd love to have it, since it'd be faster and
cheaper than what I have now.  But what I have now has the distinct
advantage of actually existing, so I'll stick with it.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 10:46:30 -0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos


> But what I have now has the distinct advantage of actually existing,
> so I'll stick with it.

Tell me about it.  Me too.  (I use PSI, and I agree with you when you
say they don't exactly have a stellar technical reputation).

PS - is comp.dcom.telecom still alive?  Obviously my post got
through, but since that time (two weeks ago), telecom has been
completely silent.


Regards,

Nathan Lane


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Delivery of the Digest to comp.dcom.telecom
is not happening at this time. Some decision will be made in the near
future on what to do with it. I don't like the mess on Usenet at all, but
several readers have strongly urged the gateway to continue. I've asked
for input from list subscribers on this, and will be reading and consid-
ering what everyone has to say. News later this week on the subject. PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 19 DEC 93 15:01
Subject: 112 Emergency Calls From a GSM Phone


My GSM phone manual states, that it is possible to make a 112 (911 to
you folks in USA) call even in the areas where normal calls are not
possible (phone sees the network, but considers the signal too weak -
in my phone 'SERV' indicator is flashing).

Does anyone know how this is done?  Does the phone boost its power?
Something else?


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

(dirty look) I'm sorry, I'm not allowed to argue any more.

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 17:09:42 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere...


What do you mean, "remote forwarding device"?  If I were to disconnect
my remote-forward and plug in a regular telephone, I'd have to make
arrangements (including with the phone company) to have a place
available to plug the phone in.  That number USED to be in an apartment,
but then I left and converted that number to a remote-forward, and
thus deleted its association with that apartment; the number exists
only in the phone company's facilities with a note of the number to
forward to.  So there cannot be any other calls placed from the number
which is now a remote-forward.

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

From: [e-mail] (Marshall Levin)
Subject: Re: Check From MCI; What to Do?
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 12:41:22 GMT


[e-mail] (John Macdonald) writes:

> But if you try to treat it as a check and cash it, then you are
> accepting the unsolicited offer, just as if you filled in your name
> and sent back an unsolicited subscription request.  Trickery about not
> signing the check as a deliberate ruse could be charged with fraud (it
> may be clear in *your* mind that the charge would fail but I sure
> wouldn't bet *my* future on it).

Now hold on one second -- it is my understanding that it is perfectly
legitimate to DEPOSIT a check without endorsing it, and unless you
endorse it, you have not signed anything legally binding.  Is this not
true?


Marshall


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That falls under the 'deliberate ruse'
category. You knew what you were doing and attempted to unjustly
enrich yourself by taking advantage of a flaw in the banking system:
that because of the volume of paper processed, immediate return of
unauthorized or improperly prepared documents cannot be done. Why do
you suppose the bank stamp on the back of the check says 'Prior Endorse-
ments Guarenteed'?  It is so the paperwork can be hurried along
through the system. But that guarentee means that should the payor
be dissatisfied with the endorsement or lack thereof, he can repudiate
the check and send it back down the line to where it originated. Your bank
could then in turn use its right of offset to recover the money it had
given you from your account and send you the check back in the mail
with a notation 'Refer to Maker'.  No one is going to sue you for fifty
dollars and it almost isn't worth the bother to audit all those checks
issued for promotional purposes to insure compliance. But you may get
reprimanded for it and after a few of your 'deposits' get charged back
to your account due to Stop Pay or Refer to Maker your bank may well
send you a letter and tell you that you (and they) would be happier if
you took your checking account somewhere else.  What goes around comes
around.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: NYC Area Central Office Outage, PSAP Shutdown
Date: 19 Dec 1993 11:31:57 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


TELECOM Digest Editor commented on the prudence of having at least one
responsible employee on duty in a CO at all times to avoid disasters
like the fire in Hinsdale, IL in May, 1988.

We have been telling our company that for years, but they don't seem
to be listening, at least not on a level that can take any action. We
have has some outages caused because of the lack of personnel on site;
they could have been worse. The systems are monitored but sometimes
things do get missed.

                         ===========

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The last time I went shopping for a
5-ESS switch, the best price I could find was a couple million
dollars, and that was if I agreed to purchase in quantity from a
certain well-known manufacturer of same on a long term basis. How
many years would it take to amortize that with a single clerk who
worked on the overnight shift and walked around the physical plant
occassionally noticing things that were wrong like a room full of
smoke, or water dripping out of the ceiling from a broken pipe on
the floor above? And if the person had other duties as well, such
as data-entry stuff the day crew had not finished then his salary
could be mostly taken from that budget rather than from some budget
set up specifically for 'watchman' duties and the amortization
would take even longer. Plus, wouldn't it be nice to know that never
again would your subscribers be denied service for even five minutes
in the middle of the night if you had a competent, responsible
employee present to take immediate, emergency remedial action while
notifying others of what was going on?  Did you know in the Hinsdale
case, they had to throw away the switch and install an entire new
one from scratch, that's how badly corroded the original one was after
the water damage it suffered while the fire was being put out?   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 08:13:33 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Research on the Effects of Telecommuting
Organization: Penn State University


The LISTSERV list FLEXWORK discusses telecommuting issues too.
To subscribe, send e-mail to: [e-mail] with
a simple body-of-text message (no .sig):

SUB FLEXWORK first-name last-name

Notebook archives of previous e-mail available.  To find the naming
convention (file names), include a line in the above e-mail:

INDEX FLEXWORK

Later, when you find the names, issue more LISTSERV commands:

GET FLEXWORK LOGnnnnn


/Pete ([e-mail])  --  co-owner  LDBASE-L, TQM-L, CPARK-L, et -L
Peter M. Weiss         "The 'NET' never naps"             [phone]
31 Shields Bldg. -- Penn State Univ -- University Park, PA 16802-1202 USA

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellphones and RJ-11 Adapters
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 12:57:00 PST


[e-mail] wrote:


> 1.  You can use any cellphone that has an RJ-11 adapter.  You can use it
> with any modem.

You can try, but you may see variable results.  I recommend and use a
modem with MNP-10. It's a Compaq Speedpaq in my Contura and it works
just great.  On the other hand, I've got a Pocket Peripheral 2400 baud
on my PC at home.  I've used it with a cellular connection, but you
are apt to see garbled data on your screen.

> 2.  The cellular companies suggest that you do this while stopped so you
> don't get handed off.

With the Compaq config, I've tooled around a wide area (Seattle to
Everett and yes, I WAS a passenger) transferring files and sending
email.  No problem.

> 3.  The RJ-11 adapter for my phone, a Motorola DPC550 "Flip" phone, is
> more expensive than the phone was.

Mmmm.  What was the price of the adapter?  Your phone was probably
discounted by a retailer.  Accessories generally are not discounted.


Regards,

Lynne

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #829
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01764;
          20 Dec 93 14:31 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18488
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Mon, 20 Dec 1993 10:08:33 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21981
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Dec 1993 10:08:05 -0600
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 10:08:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #830

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Dec 93 10:08:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 830

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Collecting Switches and Cards (David Leibold)
    Siemen Phones Wanted (Steve Bauer)
    Rural Telco Service/Internet Access? (Bruce Klopfenstein)
    Standards and Where to Get Them (Mike Storke)
    Checking up on Dialing Changes in 717 (Carl Moore)
    San Ramon, CA and Pac Bell Headquarters (Darren E. Peterson)
    Voice Mail Hardware Wanted (Joseph I. Ceasar)
    Re: Automated FAX Delivery (Bob Frankston)
    Re: FCC: No! GTE!!! (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Calling a PBX and Billing (Fred Goldstein)
    Re: Caller ID in Software? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (David Leibold)
    Re: Acoustic Coupler For PCMIA Modem Wanted (Mark Earle)
    Re: NBTel Goes Digital (506) (Curtis R. Nelson)
    Re: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted (Alex Cena)
    Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Mike Lanza)
    Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (David A. Kaye)
    Re: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? (Carl Moore)
    Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Joe Harrison)
    Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (Dave Niebuhr)
    Overheard ... (Mark S. Brader)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-Date.

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

0572    aTRh0<: Sun, 19 Dec 93 21:13:30 -0500
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Collecting Switches and Cards


 From a letter to {The Toronto Star} 28 November 1993, one Bruce
Crawford collects SxS (Strowger) switches, meeting other such
collectors from Britain and America, but no one else from Canada.
Those who want to contact him can write c/o Box 1000, Cargill,
Ontario, Canada N0G 1J0.

Meanwhile, in the {Star} 18 December 1993, the coin collector column
was devoted to telephone cards (stored value, thus something like
currency) such as the Israeli Telecards or Sprint Instant FonCards
(and the new Bell Canada "Hello Phone Pass" cards). There are
periodicals such as "International Telephone Cards" from the UK
(address: Box 777, Colchester UK CP3 3LQ) with the associated "World
Telephone Cards" catalogue. There is also the new bi-monthly "Premier
Telecard" (Box 3451, San Luis Obispo, CA USA 93403), or one might join
the Telephone Card Collectors Group c/o Alex Rendon, Box 323,
Massapequa Park NY USA 11762.


David Leibold

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

From: STEVE BAUER <[e-mail]>
Subject: Siemen Phones Wanted
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 20:48:35 CST


Pat,

I am very interested in locating a source for Siemen telephone models
2111 and 2212.

I used these phones and had good luck with them.

If anyone knows how I can get some please let me know.

I heard they were still manufactured, but in Germany and not sold in
the U.S. anymore.

If I can't find these phones, I am looking for a good 2500 type
feature phone.  Have been using the ITT 3480 and 3490 series, but have
not been real happy with them.

Some are saying Panasonic phones are good.

I usually order 50 to 100 at a time for use on my Plexar system.


Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Klopfenstein)
Subject: Rural Telco Service/Internet Access?
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 03:38:45 GMT


I am looking into buying a house in rural NW Ohio (United Telephone).
This will leave me with a long distance call to either my university
or the University of Toledo, making access to this account and the
Internet a long distance call.

What are my options?  Can a residential subscriber get WATS service at
a reasonable charge?  Are their tollfree numbers for getting access to
the Internet?  Where other than this newsgroup can I get some very
quick help?

Thanks in advance for taking the time to reply.


Bruce C. Klopfenstein             |  [e-mail]
Department of Telecommunications  |  [e-mail]
Bowling Green State University    |  [phone]; 372-2224
Bowling Green, OH  43403-0235     |  fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Storke)
Subject: Standards and Where to Get Them?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 04:52:06 GMT


CCITT v.* standards and the Bellcore DS* (aka T*) standards?


Mike P. Storke  Paranormal Investigator and Researcher; Inet nut...
Inet: [e-mail]    Amateur: No bbs locally :{
Snailmail: 2308 Paradise Dr. #134 Reno, NV 89512

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 03:50:03 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Checking Up on Dialing Changes in 717


I went to a payphone on the Hensel (717-548) exchange at a little
crossroads called Peach Bottom, in southern Lancaster County, PA.  The
new instructions aren't posted, but 233-xxxx (no leading 1) was
apparently recognized as a long distance call to Harrisburg.

I have no word available regarding local calls from 717 area to other
area codes.  717-548 has no such service; the closest place (or one of
the closest) in 717 that does is 529 at Kirkwood, elsewhere in
Lancaster County near the Chester County line.  In late October, I did
try 452-xxxx from a pay phone on 717-456 at Delta in York County, and
it was still recognized as a local call to Cardiff, Maryland.

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

From: [e-mail] (darren)
Subject: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 20:32:00 GMT


>> San Ramon, CA has 102 phones per 100 people ...

Just a wierd thought -- but San Ramon is home of Pac Bell (at Bishop
Ranch) which means if you drive the 680 corridor to work every
morning, you reach a massive traffic jam. There are 100,000 people who
work at Bishop Ranch every day, which seems like nothing big right? I
mean San Fran probably has 1,000,000 and New York has 7,000,000
workers entering every day -- but aside from Bishop Ranch, San Ramon
is a small sleepy town of maybe 30,000 -- too many of them yuppies who
are making it very hard on us younger types who want to buy homes in
our own region.

Maybe some of those Pac Bell employees could speak to this ... Also,
AT&T has an office in Pleasanton -- don't know what is there.

Never liked the place anyway. And if you work for Pac Bell, just
kidding; my phone service is wonderful and soooooooo cheap. Merry
Christmas.


darren e. peterson    Odessa   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph I. Ceasar)
Subject: Voice Mail HW Wanted
Date: 20 Dec 1993 01:43:00 -0500
Organization: CLS Computer Solutions


I am looking for voice mail cards that can be fully programmed.  I
have to build digital dictation machine for a customer.  They have
one, but were charged $40,000 for a 386SX with some voice mail cards
in it.  I told my customer that since they will be needing more of
them machines, I could duplicate 'em for about $10,000.  The question
is where do I find voice mail cards?

I have one from Talking Technologies, but it supports only two
lines/card.  I need something that can support four lines/card.  I've
heard of a Canadian company called Bicom, but cannot locate them!

Can anyone help?


Yossi (Joseph I. Ceasar) @ CLS Computer Solutions ---> e-mail: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dialogic also makes voice mail cards
capable of handling four lines. They are (I think) in Parsippany, NJ.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Automated FAX Delivery
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 15:04 -0400


The problem with using a PBX is that it would generally not be
integrated with a PC delivery system. In the United States, simpler
solution is to bypass the PBX and use DID (Direct Inward Dialing).
There are a number of boards that support DID including Brooktrout and
Gammalink. At least as of 1990.

I don't know what the European equivalent is, though one would assume
that ISDN with called number delivery would be an alternative except
that there might be a limit on the number of callable numbers
associated with a single link.

I guess assigning everyone an extension with a modem in their PC is
also possible. I suspect the economics are perverse in that the
fax/modem board is the smallest part of the expense. An additional
line card or a capable desk instrument is probably more of the
problem.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: FCC: No! GTE!!!
Date: 19 Dec 1993 17:27:46 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


There have been follow ups on this and it appears GTE plans to take
the same action as Bell Atlantic has done and bring suit against the
FCC.


The above statements maybe mine and have nothing to do with my employer.

Steven H. Lichter

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 18:15:09 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Calling a PBX and Billing


If a PBX has Direct Inward Dialing, then the call is not supervised
until it is answered.  During that interval, the speech path is only
supposed to be open in one direction, PBX-to-caller.  Supervision
makes it two-way.  Thus ringtone, busy, and announcements are "free".

Semi-amazing Fact #1: On the old Rolm CBX, they figured out that the
"autopark" feature can be unsupervised, even if it took a while.  So
you called a busy extension with the feature enabled (default), waited
ten seconds listening to busy, then got silence or music-on-hold.  The
callee got a beep tone and could "connect" to the waiting call, or
hang up and get rung by the waiting party -- even minutes later
(though by default it timed out to the operator after a while).  Only
then did the line supervise/charge.  I don't know if anyone else
picked up on this feature.

Semi-amazing Fact #2: Some PBXs can be combined into clusters, with
some feature transparency between separate switches.  In most cases
("satellite operation"), at least in the early '80s when I looked into
it, supervision occurred when the first PBX decided that the
destination was in the second PBX and seized a tie line.  Thus for
some extensions, the caller could get charged for busy or ring-no-answer,
because the PBX with the DID trunks thought it connected (though only
to another PBX).  I avoided setting up this sort of arrangement; when
I set up SatOps, I got each PBX its own trunks.


fred

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 12:14:42 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software?
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


John Allen <[e-mail]>, writes:

> Are there any tools that do Caller ID in software? I really do not
> want to buy a box when I have all these nice computers sitting here
> ready to do some work for me.

Software only goes so far.  Caller ID is sent on a telephone line as a
stream of data between rings to a telephone line which is on-hook.
Therefore, you still need hardware that can monitor an on-hook line
and retrieve the data that is delivered.  Software can't do this
unless there is hardware there to pick up the information, any more
than a color paint program can generate colors from a black and white
scanned image.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 00:08:27 -0500
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD changing 4/94?


Richard Cox writes:

> UK internal area codes will be changing at the same time.  With a few
> specific exceptions, they are to be prefixed with a "1".  i.e. London
> (currently +44 71) will become +44 171

The +44 956 I have listed as a PCN phone system, so I guess that's why
those numbers won't be changing ... I don't have specifics on what
exact service is represented by 956, though.

Meanwhile, I've seen some posts on uk.telecom which suggest that the
prefixing of geographic UK area codes with '1' was not a necessary
thing, and some claims that the number of area codes were actually
being reduced because of consolidation of exchanges and such. Can
anyone confirm or deny whether UK was really running out of area
codes, or is the idea to distinguish between "geographic" codes
(regular phone service in specific regions) and "non-geographic" codes
(such as cellular, 0800/0500 services, PCNs)?


David Leibold

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 03:38:31 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mark Earle)
Subject: Re: Acoustic Coupler For PCMIA Modem Wanted


Computer Products Plus, Inc
16351 Gothard Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
[phone]
[phone]
[phone] Fax

I have one of their Telecouplers; works very well, especially at 2400
- 9600 baud (w/wout error correction) and my Motorola 8000H portable
cellular phone. It has also seen service in offices with "digital"
phones; and in hotels who frown on customers taking apart their
instruments.

The one I have cost about $150. The company has a whole line of
products designed to make life for the "road warrior" easier.

Suggest you call for their catalog!


Do not 'reply'. Instead, send to [e-mail]
Note the 'w' it's mwearle       Mail FROM me may
originate at a variety of addresses for a while.

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 2:09:30 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NBTel Goes Digital (506)


In V13 #794 <[e-mail]> (Derek J. Billingsley)
writes:

> The New Brunswick Telephone Company (New Brunswick being on the east
> coast of Canada -- mostly rural with a few major centers ... well
> major being >50k people) has recently announced that it is running all
> digital switches with the final analog switch being taken offline
> about a month ago.  They are proclaiming to be the first telco in
> North America to do this.

Lincoln Telephone Company (200,000 lines in SE Nebraska, 19th largest
independent in the US) became 100% digital (switching and inter-office
trunking) in December of 1992.  By the middle of 1994 we will have
replaced about a dozen of our older digital switches to allow full
Equal Access capability and prepare for enhanced features like CLASS
services.  The city of Lincoln (about 100,000 lines) has SS7 in place
and CLASS features have been offered for about a year and a half.


Curtis R. Nelson, P.E.        email:    [e-mail]
Lincoln Telephone Company    phone:    [phone]
1440 'M' Street              fax:  [phone]
Lincoln, NE  68508

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 01:42:46 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted


On Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:47:43 EST Jason Demarte <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> I have recently been reading about the sytem called Automatic Call
> Distributor (ACD) and am wondering who are the major dealers for each
> version of ACD: integrated ACD and stand-alone ACD.  If anyone has
> some any information on this please post me a response, thanks.

You should call Aspect Telecom for some information.  Their stand
alone ACD is used by companies like Microsoft, Intuit, Sharper Image,
Wal Mart and Nintendo.  Their number is 1-800-541-7799.  Moreover,
many PBX vendors offer ACD capabilities as well.


Alex M. Cena    Lehman Brothers   [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 16:18:47 PST
From: Mike Lanza <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos


What we really need is a new packet-switched network that is more
aggressive and forward-thinking than the ones we've got.  Maybe the
Internet service providers are the ones to do it.

The existing big three (SprintNet, CompuServe, and BT Tymnet) are all
procrastinating and whining their way toward 9600 coverage.  This
should be in place at roughly half of their POPs by the end of this
year, with 100% coverage to supposedly come shortly thereafter.
14,400 deployment is slated to begin next year.  There isn't even a
plan to make this ubiquitous -- they're going to "wait and see what
the market wants."  Have these guys seen statistics for modem sales
lately?  v.32bis (14,400) is already outselling the other speeds.

In addition, the market is crying out for ubiquitous one-number
access, but the big three are really behind on this one as well.
Sprint does offer an 800 packet service (it can, since it has both 800
service and SprintNet), but it's grossly undermarketed and grossly
overpriced.  BT Tymnet says they'll have something like this as a
result of the merger (or is it an acquisition?) with MCI, but this
seems to be moving pretty slowly.

How about a new 950 service (950 is better than 800 since it avoids
local access charges) that hooks into a state-of-the-art packet
network?  Does anyone know of anything like this that's in the works?
If you do, I know of some potential customers!


Mike Lanza


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  You might try 950-1288 which is an
AT&T service connecting several places together. See the file in the
Telecom Archives on exploring 950-1288 for details and a help file.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized
Date: 20 Dec 1993 00:14:32 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [login: guest]


David Esan ([e-mail]) wrote:

> companies do not.  They rely on a tape or floppies from BellCore.  And
> BellCore was late in getting this information into the system.  The
> 905 NPA went live on 15 October, the pages were not filed until 22
> November.

But, what's wrong with Bell Canada for not allowing at least a six month
grace period as is done in the USA to allow for these kinds of problems?
I've seen a lot of area codes split in California and there always has
been a changeover time of six months to a full year.  I don't mean
dialing from within one of the affected area codes, but from without
as well.

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 9:04:59 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama?


I don't know why the first NNX area code won't be of the form AB0,
unless there was concern over people getting confused and trying to
"correct" it to A0B.  Remember the biggest concern is the people
getting the first area codes of form NNX, and the other people who
can't reach them because of improperly-programmed equipment. I had to
re-word the comment in the history file about NN0 when I learned of
334.  There was an "official" list of early NNX area codes in this
digest long ago.

But 520 in Arizona will be next door to Mexico, and some people were
wondering if Mexico would become reachable through area codes of form
52x where x is not zero (I removed the word "necessarily" from a new
version of the history file when I learned of 520).  (502 is in
Kentucky.)

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 08:16:33 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite


Here's something from the UK Telecom FAQ, I'm afraid I haven't tried
it myself.

{start quoting}
Question 30:

How do I get a guarenteed non-satellite circuit to the USA ? [from the UK]

Answer:

To get a guaranteed non-satellite circuit to the USA, useful for
certain data transmission requirements which involve a lot of
handshaking, dial 0101 83 + area code + number.

The code 84 allows you to obtain a satellite link, if you really want
one for any reason.

And before someone asks -- no, it doesn't allow you to dial 800 or 900
numbers.  I believe it did once.

{end quoting}


Joe
ICL Ltd. Reading Berkshire RG1 3PX United Kingdom ([phone])
    * [e-mail] *
* S=Harrison/I=J/OU1=rea0803/O=icl/P=icl/A=gold 400/C=GB *

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 07:49:41 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number


[e-mail] (Console Cowboy) writes:

> I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800
> number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to
> any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The
> number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why?

I just checked 800-884 and found that it was assigned to Sprint.  You
might want to contact them and find out who the number was assigned to
by them.  Unfortunately, I don't have the phone number for Sprint.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 04:24:39 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Overheard ...


Overheard ... a co-worker hanging up the phone and talking softly to
himself in a "this is a recording" tone of voice.

  If you have a touch-tone phone, please hang up now.

  If you do not have a touch-tone phone, please stay on the line
  and a representative will explain how to buy one.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #830
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa02515;
          20 Dec 93 15:29 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31864
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Mon, 20 Dec 1993 11:45:32 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07409
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Dec 1993 11:45:03 -0600
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 11:45:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #831

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Dec 93 11:44:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 831

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Pournelle's PC Communications Bible" (Rob Slade)
    Time Warner's Full Service Network (Alex Cena)
    Wireless Local Loop in India (Alex Cena)
    Send the Digest to abUsenet? (Mike D. Schomburg)
    Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Barry Lustig)
    Re: Checking Up on Dialing Changes in 717 (Carl Moore)
    Administrivia: Messages Lost (TELECOM Editor)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

Date: 20 Dec 93  0:50 -0600
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Pournelle's PC Communications Bible" by Pournelle/Banks


BKPCCOMB.RVW  931119

Macmillan of Canada
29 Birch Avenue
Toronto, Ontario
M4V 1E2
Elizabeth Wilson
416-963-8830
Fax: [phone]
or
Microsoft Press
1 Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA   98052-6399
USA
"Pournelle's PC Communications Bible", Pournelle/Banks, 1992, 1-55615-393-7
[e-mail] [e-mail]

Michael Banks is known to us through a couple of previous works
(BKPRTCOM.RVW and BKMDMREF.RVW).  Jerry Pournelle, of course, is known
to everyone.  With the Microsoft Press imprimatur, and the prestigious
title, usually reserved for the definitive work in a given field, one
could have high hopes for this book.  So, in the slightly altered
words of the old joke, "Believe in the PC Communications Bible?  Heck,
I've *seen* it!"  And it brings me no joy.

The "Bible," in a given technical field, is usually a work which
collects a considerable wealth of technical material.  Usually,
however, it is crafted with great care and skill in order to ensure
that the material is accessible to, at least, the diligent newcomer.
Not so here.  Technical material there is -- thrown in at random as a
kind of nerdish grandstanding ("Look!  See how much we know about
CRC?").  For the neophyte, the basic material is here -- buried in
verbiage, and presented with little logic or order.

Section one is entitled "Basics."  There is an eminently forgettable
"history" of data communications, an extremely limited account of
"what's available," and a terse and short-sighted view of the future.
Chapter two supposedly tells you what you need to get online: it takes
thirteen pages to say you need a computer, modem, software and a
telephone.  Chapter three purports to tell you how it all works.  The
explanations will make a data communications professional cringe.
But, some would say, does it really matter that these pages are
simplified to the point of inaccuracy?  Does the average user really
need to know the details?  Well, no.  In which case, this chapter is
completely unnecessary.  It serves only to allow the authors to show
off the fact that they can use the term "phase shift keying".  (There
is no evidence that they actually know what it is.)

Section two is "Getting Started," with chapters four and five
discussing making a data call and signing onto a BBS or online
service.  Both chapters are disorganized and of very little help to
the novice user.  Within nine pages, chapter four is discussing the
oddities that the authors found with different ports and interrupts.
Is this, then, for the advanced user?  No.  The material is far too
elementary for anyone with any computer communications background to
rely on.  It is simply self-indulgent posturing.

Section three discusses modems and communications software again.  I
take it back about the phase shift keying.  By a lengthy and
charitable stretch of the imagination, the definition given is almost,
but not quite, completely unlike the truth. The material, however,
does start to become a bit more technical at this point.  Having
thrown around "AT" command strings in earlier discussion, chapter six
finally prints out a limited list of them.  The list could have been
copied from any modem "quick reference" card: there is no discussion
of the needs or functions for various features.  The same holds true
for the chapters on software (with an incomplete list of ANSI codes),
and scripting (with a five-page Mirror III script for signing on the
Delphi, presumably from wherever Michael Banks lives).  The material
is all heavily recycled, largely opinion, and of little technical or
instructional value.

Sections four and five are intended to give an overview of "who to
call."  BBSes are given a chapter of their own, but only in limited
form.  There is almost no mention of Fidonet or other networking
systems.  The authors then show their commercial bias with discussions
of the larger (and higher priced) online systems.  (And other biases
as well: BIX gets first mention several times; guess who just happens
to write a column for {Byte} magazine?)  Of the Internet, of course,
there is not a word.  There is a short chapter later on which talks of
"international" computer communications -- mostly how to call the US
from Europe and Japan.

Section six is a miscellany of fax, online databases, "Doing Business
by Modem," the aforementioned international chapter and another
short-term look to the future.  Appendices include vendor listings; a
reasonable, but verbose, and overly personal, cabling guide; a rather
random troubleshooting guide (as in the chapter on getting connected,
there is no discussion of the typical problems you see with incorrect
parameters); and an ASCII table.

This is a more verbose, but no more helpful, version of Banks' earlier
books.  While one can see the additions Pournelle has made (quite
clearly, in some cases), there is no improvement in either technical
accuracy, completeness of material or organization.  Once again, for a
better generic introduction one has to turn to the system specific
texts of Gianone (BKUMSKMT.RVW) or LeVitus/Ihnatko (BKDMGTOU.RVW).

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993   BKPCCOMB.RVW  931119
Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of the TELECOM
Digest and associated mailing lists.

DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters
Editor and/or reviewer [e-mail], [e-mail], Rob Slade at 1:153/733
DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 09:20:34 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Time Warner's Full Service Network


 From a Time Warner Press Release:

  ORLANDO, Fla., Dec. 16 /PRNewswire/ via First! -- Dennis R. Patrick,
president and chief executive officer of Time Warner Telecommunications,
today announced that the company had installed and demonstrated the
first phase of its wireless Personal Communications Services (PCS)
field trial network which employs state-of-the-art Code Division
Multiple Access (CDMA) digital technology.  When completed this
spring, the trial network will be integrated into Time Warner's Full
Service Network (FSN) in Orlando.

  In making the announcement, Patrick said: "The combination of
personal communications service and Time Warner's upgraded cable
network is a significant development in the creation of the Full
Service Network and the evolution of the electronic superhighway.
This test network will permit the use of wireless phones in the home,
in the car and in the office.  Qualcomm, the leading innovator in
highly advanced CDMA cellular telephone systems, is creating a
specialized package of personal communications handsets and
infrastructure that will help us explore numerous exciting consumer
services and move forward to a new era in telecommunications."  In
addition to demonstrating common use of FSN and PCS networks and
service availability in multiple environments, technical trials will
also study coverage and capacity of the Qualcomm system.

  Patrick added, "The small, lightweight wireless PCS phone soon will
give the customer a single telephone number wherever he or she may go.
PCS will extend voice and data services to callers in their homes,
cars and offices." Time Warner's PCS network eventually will become a
wireless gateway to a wide range of FSN voice, video, data and
entertainment services.  The PCS phone will become a key component in
an interactive electronic superhighway that will permit customers to
access the FSN even while outside the home.

  The vendor for the PCS trial is Qualcomm Incorporated, a developer,
manufacturer and operator of advanced digital wireless
telecommunications products and systems based on CDMA (Code Division
Multiple Access).  Qualcomm's products include the OmniTRACS 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 VSLI devices.

CONTACT:  Alex D. Felker of Time Warner Telecommunications, 202-331-7478

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 09:34:56 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wireless Local Loop in India


Does anyone have details of the Wireless Local Loop System in
Southwestern India?  The system was used to restore communications
following the earthquake in India.

Specifically, I am interested in:

1) the equipment vendors involved;
2) spectrum allocation;
3) technology in use AMPs, TDMA, CDMA, GSM, etc.


Thanks in advance,

Alex M. Cena, Lehman Brothers, [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 09:56:06 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mike D. Schomburg)
Subject: Send the Digest to abUsenet?


Pat: I suggest you re-connect the dung heap just after Hell freezes
over.


Mike Schomburg    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, that occassion may come sooner than you
think. The National Weather Service says that Hell, Michigan may get
real cold toward the end of this week. Hell, a tiny little village
just a few miles northwest of Ann Arbor in Livingston County, Michigan
on highways 36/106 was the site of an NWS monitoring station for many
years, and regular reports were issued in the winter months advising
when when the temperature in Hell dropped below 32 degrees farenheit.
The only business around the area seems to be a tourist shop which
specializes in T-shirts and coffee mugs with "I've Been Through Hell"
printed on them.

On my visit during the summer a few years ago, the tourist shop was
quite busy and traffic was heavy on the highway leading into town. It
did not help that the highway was undergoing construction work
(possibly being paved with good intentions?) and was down to two
lanes; one in each direction. When you are in the area, stop and check
the place out. Part of the Pinckney State Forest/Recreational Area,
phone service in Hell comes from the Brighton and Dexter, Michigan
phone exchanges, depending on where in Hell you are calling from. The
best way to go straight to Hell is by taking Highway 43 north out of
Ann Arbor for about 12 miles to Highway 36 and turning east for
another five miles or so. Its an interesting place to visit, but I'm
not sure I would want to live there. A few of the locals however say
they have been in Hell all their lives and like it a lot. They also
wish to emphatically dispell the rumor started by Henry Ward Beecher;
the place does exist and lots of people come every year.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 11:37:49 EST
From: Barry Lustig <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos


[e-mail] (John R Levine) wrote:

> I believe that the first IP via CATV is supposed to be here in
> Cambridge, but I haven't seen any evidence that it's anywhere near
> ready to go, nor have other people I've asked.  The existing CATV
> wiring only passes signals in one direction, head end to customers,
> and nobody has any idea what they're planning to do for the reverse
> direction.  Indeed, we're not even sure that Continental realizes that
> there has to be a reverse direction.  Neither Continental nor PSI has
> a stellar technical reputation in their respective industries.

  It is very likely that PSI and Continental will use for their one
way cable systems a system such as that developed by Hybrid Networks.
The Hybrid system uses a 10Mbit/sec. downstream channel and a
telephone based upstream channel.  At the headend of the cable system,
there is a terminal server like box which deals with the upstream
traffic.


Barry Lustig   ICTV, Inc.

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 12:30:41 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Checking Up on Dialing Changes in 717


Since the earlier message, I made it to a Kirkwood (717-529) pay
phone.  There is a 717-932 prefix at Lewisberry, and apparently the
local call to Oxford (215-932, to go into 610) requires 1 + NPA + 7D.

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 10:27:17 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: Messages Lost


I am sorry to report that a processing error Monday morning at 10:15 AM
caused the loss of about a dozen or so messages waiting in the queue
for inclusion in the Digest. If you sent messages on Saturday, Sunday
or today (Monday) **and they have not yet appeared here** then they
are lost forever, and I ask humbly that you resubmit them. I am not
including the several messages pro/con reconnecting Usenet; only the
actual messages for the Digest itself.  Of particular interest to me
was the 'Technical Analysis' holiday message sent to me. That person
received a message saying I would use his message in a few days.
Unfortunatly it got bashed also. So if you will resubmit those
messages from the weekend or this morning not yet printed I will
appreciate it.

There will be a few more issues of the Digest, probably on
Tuesday/Wednesday, then a break for the Christmas holiday with
publication resumed probably over the weekend.


PAT

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #831
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa06660;
          21 Dec 93 9:02 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24840
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Tue, 21 Dec 1993 04:54:25 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18083
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Dec 1993 04:54:01 -0600
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 04:54:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #832

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 21 Dec 93 04:54:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 832

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia: The Digest and Usenet (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Voicemail on the PC (Chris Nelson)
    How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified (Brian Bulkowski)
    Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Erik Berg)
    GTE Files Request re Cerritos Cable Television (Steven H. Lichter)
    Frequency Database VIRUS (Alfredo E. Cotroneo)
    New Patents Information Wanted (Mark Voorhees)
    T1 MUX Recommendations Wanted (Ray Wong)
    WDC on Orange Card Bill (Carl Moore)
    Re: Cable Channels (and Satellites) (Lars Poulsen)
    Cellphones With RJ-11 Connectors (Paul N. Hrisko)
    Re: TDD Software Wanted ([e-mail])
    Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Carl Moore)
    Technical Analysis: Santa Claus Science and Myth (Dan L. Dale)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 03:56:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: The Digest and Usenet


On December 8, as a result of the long and often bitter conversations
in the Usenet news.groups forum regards comp.dcom.telecom.tech, the
comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup and this Digest, distribution of TELECOM
Digest to Usenet and the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup was suspended.
This was something that did not happen without a lot of thought as to
the ramifications of the decision, and although I said at the time it
would be permantently removed, I had not realized the large number of
readers who would object to that decision.

A few days ago, after receiving numerous comments from Usenet readers
about the absence of the telecom feed, I posed a question to the members
of the mailing list asking for guidance in deciding whether or not to
reconnect the Usenet feed.

I'm not really in favor of doing so, but the consensus was it is unfair
to the Usenet readers who have various reasons for not receiving the
email version of the Digest. Of 189 persons who responded, 165 said
the feed should be restored. A dozen were specifically against it,
saying that 'the added hassles were not worth it' (they were people
who had all followed the news.groups thread; some had contributed to
it. Several expressed indifference either way.

Six of the respondents were quick to point out that the restoration
of the telecom feed would simply start the news.group flaming all
over again; others mentioned that if the feed was not restarted, the
flames would continue for that reason also. It appears that either
way this goes, there will continue to be criticism and flaming.

Rather than unfairly punish the Usenet readers who have been without
the feed since December 8, I've chosen to restore it beginning with
this issue. As noted above, this is not entirely my decision, and I
hope everyone will understand I am a little bit wary and more than
a little weary about the continued controversy. I'm anxious to bring
an end to all the fighting going on and the inconvenience this has
caused the many loyal readers of the Digest who prefer to receive it
on Usenet for whatever reasons. The members of the mailing list
seem to in general approve of the decision, and that is what the most
important to me.

Finally, in the spirit of the holiday and in an effort to better
serve the users of the Telecom Archives, I am extending an invitation
to the proprietor of the Telecom-Tech mailing list to have it
included automatically in the Archives in its own sub-directory where
it will be available automatically for anyone who wants to see it
or get back issues, etc. A sub-directory will be established with a
special address to which Telecom-Tech should be mailed if Mr. Higdon
wishes to have it automatically part of the archives of record at
lcs.mit.edu.

I'm not convinced these gestures will make any real difference in
the way things have deteriorated in recent months; but I think its
the right way to go and I'm willing to try and make it work. There is
room on the net for an unmoderated telecom group, and I am willing to
put aside my differences with the group's originator for the good of
telecom news distribution in general. Perhaps others will put aside
their differences with me for the same reasons.


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Nelson~)
Subject: Voicemail on the PC
Date: 21 Dec 1993 01:25:52 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation


Thanks for reading ...

I recently purchased a used PC voicemail card, titled "The Complete
Answering Machine".  It is 1987 vintage and was produced by "The
Complete PC, Inc.", Milpitas, CA.  The company no longer has a phone
number in the 408 area code.

I'm looking for a lead on what company may have purchased the rights
to the product.  My quest is to find a later version of software that
may have been produced for the card.  Windows support would be most
wonderful!

Please send any response to this query directly to me.


Thanks,

Chris Nelson, N7VEC    |       Internet: [e-mail]
Intel Corp. CH5-217    |    Phone: [phone]   FAX [phone]
5000 W. Chandler Blvd. | Opinions are for those who don't know the facts.
Chandler, AZ  85226    |   Facts are for those who don't have opinions.
                       |        These are my opinions, not Intel's

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

Date: Tue, 21 Dec 93 00:03:43 EST
From: brian bulkowski <[e-mail]>
Subject: How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified?


Hi oh those in Telecom land -

I've been wondering about two things, and a recent short thread has
touched my memory.

First question is, how do they verify phone calling card numbers? My
calling card is a Pac Bell card, and it works absolutly everywhere
within the US I've ever tried to use it, including out of area Bells
(like NyNex).  Since NyNex doesn't touch PacBell, they would have to
traverse a long distance carrier's line, which seems odd.

Or there's a central clearing house somewhere. Or there's a simple
algorythmic check on the number. Maybe with the added backup that
known bad numbers are stored and denied service. It would seem
reasonable that routing information be stored in the calling card
number, like first three digits are 510, so talk to PacBell, but what
to do about people like ATT who are issuing calling cards but don't
have local phone numbers? If there's a central clearing house, how big
is it? A >100M record database, dutifially fault tolerant, able to
answer all those queries in two seconds each, must be something to
see.

In any of these systems, how do smaller providers like the Orange Card
get the same universality in coverage, or maybe they don't?

This, perhaps, answers the question of the person recently who asked about
how to avoid paying collect charges: use thy calling card.

Second question is this:

What's the telecom situation in Alaska like? I remember there was a
discussion a while ago about Hawaii. But then I was up in Alaska a few
months ago, and pay phones weren't too good on the 10xxx numbers.
AT+T seemed to give me something called Alascom. Does MCI really not
serve Alaska, or just not the pay phones? Is there a different set of
regulations for the Upper State that allows the payphone people to not
route 10xxx numbers? This was true both in a city and the sticks.

I was in a small village a bit north of the circle, Anaktuvuk Pass,
and found a pay phone. Easy to find: right next to the big satellite
dishes. No roads lead to Anaktuvuk Pass. A very interesting place.
The pay phone worked great, took my calling card and everything.

Here's another tidbit: when I call 10xxx - 0 - 510 xxx xxxx from my
415 work number, in order to get lower rates (intra LATA calls that
Pac Bell makes a fortune on), Pac Bell's error message is:

"We're sorry. It is not necessary to dial a long distance company
access code for the number you have dialed. Please hang up and try
your call again."  :-)


Regards,

brianb  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 15:07:40 CST
From: [e-mail] (Erik Berg)
Subject: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?



Well in a nutshell is there anyway to really block your phone number
from the person you are calling?

Here in IL, Ameritech does have Caller ID and Auto Callback.  You can
maybe block your phone number by using *67, but Ameritech does not
guarantee that this will work with non Ameritech equipment.

Problem is, my wife works with DCFS, a government agency that looks
after the welfare of the state's kids, sometimes taking them away from
their natural parents.  She called a client and used the *67, blocking
out our phone number from the person she was calling.  Problem is the
client has Auto Callback as well as Caller ID.  Even though when my
wife called her, the person was not home, her caller ID box said the
time of the call and it was a private number.  Well this person saw
the private number, freaked and called our house for the last 24 hours
with Auto Callback.  We were out during this time, but our machine is
filled to the rim with these frantic messages, and other wierd things
from the person.  I eventually had to go to work and call her from a
fax machine to erase our number.

On top of that at the end of the month, this person will have our
phone number from the Ameritech bill, if they ask for an itemized bill
of their calls (which the person threaten to do).

We tried everything we could with Ameritech.  Their solution, use
another phone and change your phone number.  This does not seem a fair
solution, and an invasion of some basic privacy.

In six months, Ameritech will have caller ID and User ID so your name
and number appear when you call someone.

Are there any devices out there that can scramble your phone number
from Caller ID and Auto Callback?


erik berg

(hoping the crazy people stop calling us after one call to them)
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Caller-ID and Auto Callback information
are both passed to the called-party's central office and there is no
real way to avoid having that information available if making a direct
call to someone. You can do *67 to ask the CO not to give out your
number but you can't defeat the call-return part of the process. There
is a ser- vice which operates on a 900 number at a premium fee which
allows you to call through it and out to wherever causing the called
party to get no usable ID/return call information. Even that guy won't
cover for you in the event of legal action against you, but for all
intents and purposes, it provides an effective shield.  I think the
number is 1-900-BLOCKER.   PAT]
(?).  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 16:35:14 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: GTE Files Request re Cerritos Cable Television
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)


GTE files request to continue its Cerritos cable-television operations

IRVING, TEXAS (DEC. 20) BUSINESS WIRE - GTE filed a stay request on
Friday, Dec.  17, with the U.S.  Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit in San Francisco requesting the company be allowed to continue
its cable-television operations in Cerritos, Calif.

The action follows a recent (Dec. 6) Federal Communication Commission
(FCC) denial of a similar stay request.  If granted, the stay would
allow GTE to continue operating its cable-television facility in
Cerritos, Calif., until the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rules
on an earlier GTE petition challenging the constitutional right of the
government to prevent GTE from offering video programming to its
in-franchise customers.

Although the FCC denied GTE's stay request, it did extend from Dec. 9,
1993 to Jan. 10, 1994, the required date for GTE to file how it
intends to comply with the FCC rescission order.

"It doesn't make sense for the FCC to stop our Cerritos project now,
if the court could eventually grant us approval to continue our
operations there," said Geoff Gould, vice president-regulatory and
governmental affairs for GTE Telephone Operations.  "All we are asking
for is enough time for the court to make its decision on GTE's right
to offer video programming to our in-franchise customers."

"In Cerritos," said Bob Calafell, vice president-video services, "GTE
has gleaned tremendous knowledge about interactive-video services, and
we are seeking the opportunity to bring the full benefits of what we
have learned to consumers.  In fact, the Cerritos project has already
spawned one commercial product -- GTE Main Street -- which transforms
the customer's television set into a dazzling new tool for education,
information gathering, travel, shopping and entertainment."

GTE's request to the FCC on Nov. 26 asked for a permanent stay on the
Cerritos rescission order, or at least a delay of 30 days after the
Ninth Circuit U.S.  Court of Appeals' ruling.  The stay, in addition
to preserving GTE's current working relationships in Cerritos, also
would keep the FCC from forcing GTE to use government compliance rules
that are being currently challenged in the courts.

In turning down the stay request, the FCC stated, "The commission
found, in particular, that GTE had failed to demonstrate it would
suffer irreparable harm if a stay is not granted.

GTE is the largest U.S.-based local telephone company and the
second-largest cellular-service provider in the United States.  With
$20 billion in revenues in 1992, the corporation is the fourth-largest
publicly owned telecommunications company in the world.  GTE also is a
leader in government and defense communications systems and equipment,
satellite and aircraft-passenger telecommunications, directories and
telecommunications- based information services and systems.

CONTACT:  GTE Telephone Operations, Irving
     Dick Jones, 214/718-6924, or 214/931-5447, after 6 p.m.

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

Date: 20 Dec 93 16:23:32 EST
From: Alfredo E. Cotroneo <[e-mail]>
Subject: Frequency Database VIRUS


*** VIRUS ALERT ***      [Feel free to repost as necessary]

We have just received a warning by fax from Bob Zanotti of Swiss Radio
International that the computer diskette containing the latest ILG
(International Listening Guide) database produced by Bernd Friedewald
in Germany contained a ParB virus.

Bernd Friedewald has been alerted of the problem, and considering
Bernd's good reputation there is no evidence of the fact that the
diskette might have been intentionally contaminated.

Given the extremely fast service of the Swiss Postal Administration,
there are reasons to believe that Bob Zanotti could have been one of
the first to receive the diskette, and first to discover the problem.
Hope this message get to you on time to take all necessary measures.
You have been warned!

(e.g. DO NOT attempt to either read, or write on the diskette, unless
you are sure that you got a good copy, or you know how to deal with
computer viruses. Contact your nearest computer expert or system
administrator for advice or Bernd Friedewald to know if yours is a
good copy. In any case it is always a good practice to check every
"unknown" diskette with a most recent anti-virus program before using
it)

Thanks to Bob Zanotti for the alert!


Alfredo E. Cotroneo, President         NEXUS-IBA is a
NEXUS-Int'l Broadcasting Association   non profit org.
PO Box 10980, I-20110 Milano, Italy    which operates
Phone: [phone]  IRRS-Shortwave &
email: [e-mail] ____ IRRS-GRM on FM

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Voorhees)
Subject: New Patent Information Wanted
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 12:46:33 EST
Organization: [MindVox] / Phantom Access Technologies / (+1 800-MindVox)


Does anyone know anything about the following patents, which were all
just issued?

5228055                 Spread spectrum
                        communications device

5228053                 Spread spectrum overlay communications
                        system

5228029                 Cellular TDMA communictions system
                        offset frame synchronization


Appreciate any help.


[e-mail]    Mark Voorhees

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

From: [e-mail] (Ray Wong)
Subject: T1 MUX Recommendations Wanted
Date: 21 Dec 1993 06:26:57 GMT
Organization: Telstra Corporation Limited


I have a requirement to connect a 64 Kbps digital link via a leased
line from New York to Sydney (Australia).  I'm told that the 64 Kbps
link between our equipment(in NY) and the carrier (in NY) has to be
carried on a T-1 service.  That means some kind of MUX will be
required.  Could someone please recommend a suitable MUX equipment or
a better solution?  Our equipment has a X.21 interface.

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 16:21:47 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: WDC on Orange Card Bill


I have previously seen WDC on my Orange Card bills for calls made from
Washington DC and the Maryland suburbs.  But it appeared for calls
made from northeastern Md. (where I'd expect BAL to appear) on Nov.
29-30.

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 22:35:58 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Cable Channels (and Satellites)


Padgett Peterson ([e-mail]) writes:

"The hard part is in knowing which channel to turn on when."

Here in Europe we have a system called "text-TV": 500 alphanumeric
pages of information hidden where the US system has the "closed
captioning" stuff. This includes program schedules for the channel.
Several VCRs can capture the schedule data and use this as a menu
system for requesting what programs to tape.

This is one feature that the US would do well to import from Europe.

Another innovation that I have seen here:

The largest satellite operator (German ASTRA which has a near monopoly
on service to Germany, Scandinavia and I think Be-ne-lux as well) has
two birds in the same nominal slot (and a third one planned) so that
you can get 24 channels without re-aiming the dish. This has allowed
the sale of very inexpensive receiver systems (I have seen a low end
system with 18" dish on sale for USD 155 including 25% VAT!! A normal
price is about twice that for a system with built-in descrambler with
2 "smart card" slots). This kind of pricing for "wireless cable" led
to sharp reductions on cable service prices.


Lars Poulsen           Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
CMC Network Products       Phone: (011-) [phone]
Hvidovre Strandvej 72 B       Telefax:      [phone]
DK-2650 Hvidovre, DENMARK  Internets: designed and built while you wait

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:26:32 EST
From: [e-mail] (PAUL N HRISKO)
Subject: Cellphones With RJ-11 Connectors


Hi,

     I'm looking for information on cellular phone the either have, or
can be adapted (with a dongle, whatever), to provide, an RJ-11 phone
jack.

     The whole idea is fairly simple -- I want to be able to use my
laptop to send mail, faxes, etc ... while mobile.  I'd also appreciate
information on the best modems to use for this type of application.
PCMCIA-type modems being preferred.

     Please reply by e-mail either to this address:
                      [e-mail]

           or preferably to: [e-mail]

However, if you feel that it won't take up too much bandwidth and may
be useful to others, feel free to reply to the Digest.


Thanks,

Paul

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TDD Software Wanted
Date: Mon, 20 DEC 93 23:37:36 EST
Organization: Delphi Internet


Mike, the phone company is right -- you can't get ASCII to Baudot
(code used by TYs) communication by software alone.  You're going to
need a hybrid ASCII/Baudot modem. There are several on the market,
including the MIC300i, and they have a version for the Mac too.
Ultratec in Wisconsin produces the Intelemodem, and Phone-TTY in
Hackensack, NJ has a model called the CM-4. Pricing for these products
runs about $350. As for software, there's Futura for PC compatibles
from Phone TTY, and the MIC 300i comes with FullTalk.  I don't think
anything is available specifically for working with UNIX, tho.

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 12:45:59 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite


This refers to calls originating in the UK:

> To get a guaranteed non-satellite circuit to the USA, useful for
> certain data transmission requirements which involve a lot of
> handshaking, dial 0101 83 + area code + number.

> The code 84 allows you to obtain a satellite link, if you really want
> one for any reason.

010 is international access code in the UK, and 1 is the country code
which includes the U.S.  Now you're telling me that EXTRA digits are
inserted for non-satellite/satellite links?  The equipment at the UK
end can handle these extra digits and would not be confused by the
coming of the NNX area codes?

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

Date: Tue, 21 Dec 93 03:43 EST
From: Dan L. Dale <[e-mail]>
Subject: Technical Analysis: Santa Claus, Science and Myth


                  SANTA CLAUS: Science and Myth

As a result of an overwhelming lack of requests, and with research
help from that renown scientific journal SPY magazine (January, 1990)
 -- I am pleased to present my scientific inquiry into Santa Claus and
his merriments.

1)  No known species of reindeer can fly.  BUT there are 300,000
    species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of
    these are insects and microbes, this does not COMPLETELY rule out
    the flying reindeer which only Santa has ever seen.

2)  There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world.  BUT
    since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and
    Buddhist children, that reduces the workload to 15% of the total -
    378 million according to UN'S Population Reference Bureau.  At an
    average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8
    million homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each.

3)  Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the
    different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels
    east to west (which seems logical).  This works out to 822.6 visits
    per second.  This is to say that for each Christian household with
    well-behaved children, Santa has 1/1000th of a second to park, hop
    out of the sleigh, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings,
    distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever
    LEFT-OVER snacks, scurry back up the chimney, get back into the sleigh
    and speed on to the next house.  Assuming that each of these 91.8
    million stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of
    course, we know to be false but for our calculations purpose - we will
    suspend our beliefs), we are now talking about .78 miles per household,
    a total trip of 75-1/2 million miles, not counting stops to do what
    most of us must do at least once every 31 hours, plus feeding and etc.

    This means that Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000
    times the speed of sound.  For purposes of comparison, the fastest man-
    made vehicle, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per
    second - a conventional reindeer can run, tops - 15 mph.

4)  The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element.  Assuming
    that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized "Lego" set
    (2lbs), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons, not counting Santa, who is
    invariably described as overweight.  On land, a typical reindeer can
    pull no more than 300 pounds.  Even granting that "flying reindeer"
    (see point #1) could pull TEN TIMES the normal amount, we cannot do the
    job with eight, or even nine.  We need 214,200 reindeer.  This
    increases the payload - not even counting the weight of the sleigh - to
    353,430 tons.  Again, for comparison - this is four times the weight of
    the Queen Elizabeth II.

5)  353,000 tons travelling at 650 miles per second creates enormous drag -
    air resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as
    a spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere.  The lead pair of
    reindeer will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy per second each.
    In short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing
    the reindeer behind them, and create deafening sonic booms in their
    wake. The entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26
    thousandths of a second.  Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to
    centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times greater than gravity.  A 250-pound
    Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of his
    sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force.

Observation:

    In order for Santa to deliver presents on Christmas Eve,
    he and Rudolph's mates will indeed be DIVINE.

                Merry Christmas with all the Blessings,
                       Wishing You and All at Home
             Joy, Happiness, Peace, Prosperity and Success
                             for the New Year.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My sentiments exactly!  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #832
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09655;
          22 Dec 93 16:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05701
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Wed, 22 Dec 1993 12:39:26 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06674
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 22 Dec 1993 12:39:01 -0600
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 12:39:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #833

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 22 Dec 93 12:39:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 833

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: Online Users Encyclopedia (Vedder Wright via Monty Solomon)
    Book Review: On Internet 94 (Dan L. Dale)
    Viewdata Terminal For Sale (Leigh M. Preece)
    Need Two to One Phone Line Switcher Help ([e-mail])
    Hardware Wanted For Compressing Data Over WAN Links (Ove Hansen)
    911 Changes in Toronto (Tony Harminc)
    NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity (Will Martin)
    ATM Tariffs - Anyone Have the Facts? (D.E. Price)
    Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Tom O'Connell)
    Call For Papers - SIGCOMM'94 (Patrick Dowd)
    Looking For Papers on Cellular Phone Technologies (Dell'Elce Antonio)
    Info Highway: 21 Companies Don't Announce (Tara D. Mahon)
    Digital Cellular Information Wanted (Alex Cena)
    Source For Cellular Phone Accessories Wanted ([e-mail])
    AT&T --> Earn Miles ON DL, UA, US (Eric Seiden via Monty Solomon)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 02:46:29 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: Online Users Encyclopedia


FYI.  From misc.books.technical.

 Newsgroups: misc.books.technical
 From: [e-mail] (Vedder A Wright)
 Subject: Review: Online Users Encyclopedia
 Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 22:39:30 GMT

                   Massive Telecom Book Arrives
                   c 1993 Vedder Wright

Bernard Aboba's "Online Users Encyclopedia" scoops the entire field
with breathtaking scope from bulletin boards to the Internet, from
how-to's to overview. This is a book for every level, beginner or
advanced. It clearly stands out from the pack in tone, organization,
and detail, offering specific information together with the big
picture -- the "vision thing."

The book is huge: about 800 pages on large format like a Sears
catalog.  The graphics and constant human touches help greatly to lead
the reader through the daunting range of technical information it
contains.

The book is for both Mac and PC platforms. Unix tips and tricks are
also found among the appendices. Other books don't attempt to tackle
this scope.

Of particular note is the detailed information for setting up SLIP and
PPP connections to the Internet, together with reviews of TCP/IP
software tools. The book contains helpful reviews of choice products,
lists of sites, software and hardware discussion, and much more. The
sections on compression utilities and file transfer are more detailed
than any other book I have found. It's well-researched and
well-organized.

Yet Aboba doesn't lose sight of the purpose of all this: to
communicate with other human beings. Vital human issues as well as the
technical details are addressed, such as the role that bulletin boards
play in relation to the Internet. Articles from online pioneers from
Tom Jennings to Vinton Cerf help to inform us of the issues at stake.


Vedder Wright   [e-mail]

******

The Online User's Encyclopedia, by Bernard Aboba

Addison-Wesley Trade Computer Books

ISBN:  0-201-62214-9

Suggested Retail Price: $32.95 Discounts:
Single-copy discounts of 25% are available for schools and

libraries; steeper volume discounts are available for user groups.

For information, contact Addison-Wesley Special Markets

at [phone], ext. 2915.

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

Date: Tue, 21 Dec 93 17:42 EST
From: Dan L. Dale <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: On Internet 94


 From the publishers of Internet World.
Title:          on INTERNET 94
                453 pages
ISSN:           1066-9973
ISBN:           0-88736-929-4
Preface:        Daniel Dern
Edited:         Tony Abbott

Publisher:      Mecklermedia, 11 Ferry Lane West, Westport CT 06880
                203-226-6967
                Mecklermedia Ltd. Artillery House,Artillery Row,London SW1P 1RT
                071-976-0405

Cost:           US$45.00

Certainly one of the most comprehensive directories of Internet
information services anywhere. For those of you that have ever
requested a List Global from a Listserver, you will appreciate the
tidy cross-referencing and healthy index.  This is exactly what I was
looking for when I first started using the Listserv and FTP-Server
functions of the Internet.

Other books on the Internet are great ... but reading them sometimes
takes as much effort as navigating the Net itself. Jack Webb wanted
"Just the Facts" well they are definitely in this book ... but can
they keep it updated?

Table of Contents

Section 1:      Discussion Lists and Special Interest Mailing Lists
Section 2:      Electronic Journals and Newsletters
Section 3:      Electronic Texts,Text Archives,Selected FTP Sites
Section 4:      Freenets and Other Community-Based Information Services
Section 5:      Campus-Wide Information Systems
Section 6:      Commercial Services on the Internet
Section 7:      Usenet Newsgroups and Other Mailing Lists
Section 8:      WAIS-Accessible Databases
Appendix:       List Review Service
Subject Index

END

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

From: [e-mail] (L.M. Preece)
Subject: Viewdata Terminal For Sale
Date: 22 Dec 1993 12:10:11 GMT


[ Article crossposted from comp.terminals ]
[ Author was L.M. Preece ]
[ Posted on 21 Dec 1993 14:04:45 GMT ]

Is anyone looking for a Sony Viewdata terminal ?  It has composite
video/RGB/TTL inputs and has inputs for an external modem.  Also
included is a Prestel type facility for hooking up to a phone line.
You can access loads of places with it and maybe even Internet or your
local server.  Mail me back and I can furnish you with the model
number and more specs.  I am advertising it on behalf of a colleague
and not my organization.


Leigh.M.Preece.   Keele University.Staffordshire.UK
           [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (andy)
Subject: Need Two to One Phone Line Switcher Help
Organization: EIES2 - NJIT
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 15:54:21 GMT


I am looking to either build or buy a device that will do the following:

I need to plug two standard phone lines into a device that will detect
which line is ringing and then connect the output to the line that is
ringing.

The device does not need to answer the call, just switch it to the
output line.  I realize two line phones and answering machines are
readily available, but that is not my application, this is just an
easier way to explain what I need.

Any replies would be appreciated to:  [e-mail]

For example:


                    Line 1              Line 2
                      |                    |
                      |                    |
                      |                    |
                 ---------------------------------
                 |                               |
                 |                               |
                 |           Device              |
                 |                               |
                 |                               |
                 ---------------------------------
                                |
                                |
                                |
                            Telephone
                               or
                         Answering machine


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Isn't the Radio Shack thing still
available which allows two lines to be switched into one phone (either
manually or automatically) still available? I've had one for a few
years and it works fine. LEDs even tell you which line is currently
switched. You can turn the automatic switching on or off, and choose
which line you want to use for outgoing calls.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ove Hansen)
Subject: Hardware Wanted For Compressing Data Over WAN Links
Date: 22 Dec 1993 17:17:09 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.


I'd be interested in receiving information about hardware products
available for compressing data sent over WAN links. I've heard about a
product called Symplex Datamizers and am awaiting more info about
this, does anyone have any experience with Symplex and their products,
or can anyone direct me towards other vendors offering similar
hardware?

Thanks in advance,


Ove Hansen - Network Administrator                 e-mail: [e-mail]
Silicon Graphics Manufacturing S.A. (Switzerland)  Phone : [phone]
Chemin des Rochettes 2, CH-2016 Cortaillod         Fax   : [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 21 Dec 93 17:23:36 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: 911 Changes in Toronto


I saw the following bizarre notice in the paper last week:

NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
RE: 9-1-1, Auto-dial Alarm Devices

In order to provide the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto with an
effective, efficient emergency response service, the Metropolitan
Toronto ambulance, fire and police service providers utilize the 9-1-1
emergency telephone system.

Technology has recently been made available to the general public
which allows an alarm device to auto-dial the 9-1-1 emergency number
by pushing a button.  On receipt of the call by an Emergency Operator
a microphone is activated which acts as a one-way listening device for
the operator.

These alarm devices are intended to function without supervision by
automatically accessing the 9-1-1 emergency system, implying that a
need for an emergency service exists.  The subsequent one-way
transmission inhibits proper communications, resulting in unnecessary
confusion and delays, monopolizing the time and efforts of emergency
services personnel who would otherwise be serving the public in more
appropriate ways.  These calls should be received and verified by a
private sector monitoring station, where the expertise and resources
are available to manage such activity.

For these reasons, effective January 1, 1994, the Emergency Services
of Metropolitan Toronto will not respond to, or act upon any alarm
transmitted directly to the 9-1-1 system, from any auto-dial alarm
device.

Members of the public are cautioned accordingly and advised to place
no reliance on these alarm devices, which transmit an alarm directly
to the 9-1-1 system, as a means of obtaining emergency response.  Your
best access to emergency services is a personal telephone call using
the 9-1-1 emergency number or through a professionally monitored alarm
system.

Dated at Toronto this 1st day of December, 1993.

(signed)
Director, Metropolitan Toronto Ambulance Service
Coordinator, Metropolitan Toronto Fire Chiefs
Chief, Metropolitan Toronto Police Force

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

Well, I can see their point, but in my humble-and-not-lawyer's opinion
they are setting themselves up for a lawsuit.  There is no technical
means to differentiate a 911 call from an alarm auto-dialer from the
case where a person manages to knock the phone off the hook, dial 911,
and perhaps mumble a few words about the emergency.

If they are really going to ignore 911 calls where the caller says
nothing, then they've thrown out half the benefit of the expensive
ANI-ALI system installed some years ago.  Now what they may have
*meant* to say is that they will ignore calls where the auto-dialer
plays a pre-recorded message, which makes reasonable sense, but it
sounds as though they've confused auto-dial burglar alarms with
personal safety dialers.


Tony Harminc

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 04:39:52 CST
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity


When I make an outside-line call on our NEC NEAX 2400 system here at
work (dialing 9 and then the local seven-digit number), the system has
the annoying habit of giving me a ring-sound (in the handset or the
speaker, depending which is turned on) and then a click that sounds
*exactly* like the far end picking up on the call. However, it is not
 -- the ring sounds then continue until the called party answers or I
hang up. What is going on that causes this initial ring-tone that I
hear followed by that click? Is it the process of the unit selecting
an outside trunk? If so, why does it give me a ring first?

It is extremely bothersome -- that click sounds so much like the
called party picking up that I am constantly reaching for the phone
handset to start the conversation (our phones have speakers but no
mikes, so we can start a call with the handset hung-up, but have to
grab it to speak when the called party answers). It doesn't matter
that I'm used to this and it happens every time -- I still can't train
myself to ignore that initial click. If these are intentional sonic
signals presented to me to indicate that the unit is working, I don't
appreciate them. I'd prefer a pause of dead silence until it grabs a
trunk and really begins the call.

There's so little correspondence between the ring sounds I hear and
the actual rings the called party's phone emits that I can't say if
that first ringing I hear is before or after the called party's phone
rings the first time. I'm guessing it is always internal-only; that
the click is when the outside connection is made.

Can anyone tell me just what is going on when I call out? When I dial
the initial "9", am I handed off to a telco trunk then, or does the
NEC just suck up all my dialled digits and only emit them to the telco
switch after I finish? Or am I "talking" to the telco switch right
after I dial the initial 9? I suspect the NEC waits until it detects a
complete and valid-by-its-standards number before it passes it to the
telco. That makes detecting and forbidding 976- and 900- calls easy.

If the NEC holds the numbers and then passes them on later, how fast
can it do this? Are the trunks it has to the telco higher-speed or
special lines, or the same as any generic business-type phone line?
Does it spit out DTMF at some far-higher-than-normal speed, or try to
emulate human-dialling speed? (It would seem there isn't all that much
time between the end of my dialling and that magical click ...)

I have no experience with other competing phone systems -- we were on
Centrex before we moved to the building which has this NEC NEAX 2400.
So do other systems do the same thing?


Regards,

Will

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

From: [e-mail] (D E Price)
Subject: ATM Tariffs - Anyone Have the Facts?
Organization: University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 11:57:55 GMT


Dear All,

    I have just spotted some articles in the trade press about a
tariff for ATM announced by the German Telecom.  Does anyone have the
full tariff for them or indeed for any other ATM provider (e.g. Sprint)?
I want to be able to calculate charges for a range of customers so I
need to know as much information as you have.


Thanks in advance,

Dave Price

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

Date: Tue, 21 Dec 93 11:02:43 -0800
From: fico!fico0![e-mail]
Subject: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts


Someone in our firm is currently experiencing a "different" problem
with our voice mail system.  She will be leaving a message in
someone's voice mailbox and the system will interrupt her, saying "To
Send this Message, Press..."- as if she had punched a key, but she
hadn't.  The problem has been re-occurring.

Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens
when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones
generated by the keypad.  The system interprets the voice as a key
being punched.

This seems odd, but I have HEARD of it on other systems.  Has this
happened to anyone else?  Anyone come up with a solution to this
problem?  (Other than HORMONE PILLS?)


Thanks,

Tom O'Connell
Fair, Isaac Co. - San Rafael, CA.
Internet: fico![e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Patrick Dowd)
Subject: Call For Papers - SIGCOMM'94
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: State University of New York at Buffalo
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 22:19:17 GMT


               Call for Papers
              ACM SIGCOMM'94 CONFERENCE
       Communications Architectures, Protocols and Applications

              University College London
                  London, UK

            August 31 to September 2, 1994
         (Tutorials and Workshop, August 30)

An international forum on communication network applications and
technologies, architectures, protocols, and algorithms.

Authors are invited to submit full papers concerned with both theory
and practice. The areas of interest include, but are not limited to:

   --  Analysis and  design  of  computer  network  architectures  and
       algorithms,
   --  Innovative results in local area networks,
   --  Mixed-media networks,
   --  High-speed networks, routing and addressing, support for mobile
       hosts,
   --  Resource sharing in distributed systems,
   --  Network management,
   --  Distributed operating systems and databases,
   --  Protocol specification, verification, and analysis.

A single-track, highly selective conference where successful
submissions typically report results firmly substantiated by
experiment, implementation, simulation, or mathematical analysis.
Papers must be less than 20 double-spaced pages long, have an abstract
of 100-150 words, and be original material that has not been
previously published or be currently under review with another
conference or journal.

In addition to its high quality technical program, SIGCOMM '94 will
offer tutorials by noted instructors such as Paul Green and Van
Jacobson (tentative), and a workshop on distributed systems led by
Derek McAuley.

Important Dates:

          Paper submissions: 1 February 1994
         Tutorial proposals: 1 March 1994
 Notification of acceptance: 2 May 1994
    Camera ready papers due: 9 June 1994

All submitted papers will be judged based on their quality and
relevance through double-blind reviewing where the identities of the
authors are withheld from the reviewers.  Author's names should not
appear on the paper.  A cover letter is required that identifies the
paper title and lists the name, affiliation, telephone number, email,
and fax number of all authors.

Authors of accepted papers need to sign an ACM copyright release form.
The Proceedings will be published as a special issue of ACM SIGCOMM
Computer Communication Review. The program committee will also select
a few papers for possible publication in the IEEE/ACM Transactions on
Networking.

Submissions from North America should be sent to:
     Craig Partridge
     BBN
     10 Moulton St
     Cambridge MA 02138

All other submissions should be sent to:
     Stephen Pink
     Swedish Institute of Computer Science
     Box 1263
     S-164 28 Kista
     Sweden

Five copies are required for paper submissions. Electronic submissions
(uuencoded, compressed postscript) should be sent to each program
chair. Authors should also e-mail the title, author names and abstract
of their paper to each program chair and identify any special
equipment that will be required during its presentation. Due to the
high number of anticipated submissions, authors are encouraged to
strictly adhere to the submission date.  Contact Patrick Dowd at
[e-mail] or [phone] for more information about the
conference.

Student Paper Award: Papers submitted by students will enter a
student-paper award contest.  Among the accepted papers, a maximum of
four outstanding papers will be awarded full conference registration
and a travel grant of $500 US dollars.  To be eligible the student
must be the sole author, or the first author and primary contributor.
A cover letter must identify the paper as a candidate for this
competition.


Mail and E-mail Addresses:

General Chair
-------------
    Jon Crowcroft
    Department of Computer Science
    University College London
    London WC1E 6BT United Kingdom

    Phone: [phone]
    Fax: [phone]
    E-Mail: [e-mail]


Program Chairs
--------------
    Stephen Pink (Program Chair)
    Swedish Institute of Computer Science
    Box 1263
    S-164 28 Kista
    Sweden

    Phone: [phone]
    Fax: [phone]
    E-mail: [e-mail]

    Craig Partridge (Program Co-Chair for North America)
    BBN
    10 Moulton St
    Cambridge MA 02138

    Phone: [phone]
    E-mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 11:42:18 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Dell'Elce Antonio)
Subject: Looking For Papers on Cellular Phone Technologies


Do you know of any network-available paper regarding celllular phones
communication (I mean research papers, but anything else is also ok.)

please email to me: [e-mail]


A. dell'elce

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 11:28:20 EST
From: Bob Rosenberg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Info Highway: 21 Companies Don't Announce


An article that ran in the 13 December {Wall Street Journal} said that
28 companies were to about to announce their support for the Info
Super Highway.  We know that IBM, Apple, BellSouth, AT&T, CitiCorp,
H-P, and Cable Labs were to take part in the announcement, but the
other shoe hasn't dropped yet.

Does anyone know the names of the 21 other companies that are/were
going to take part in this PR fest? Or when/if this announcement will
be made?

Any information would be greatly appreciated.


Bob Rosenberg    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 16:00:23 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digital Cellular Information Wanted


Some cellular carriers have made it known, which digital cellular
technology they plan to adopt today and in the future.  For example,
McCaw and Southwestern Bell already are deploying TDMA digital
cellular systems around the country, while Bell South is perceived to
also be leaning toward TDMA given their intent to purchase
infrastructure equipment from Hughes Network Systems.  US West, Pactel
Cellular and Bell Atlantic have announced CDMA deployment plans and
MCI plans to use GSM for its PCS deployment.

Does anyone know where Ameritech and GTE are with respect to digital
cellular technology?  What are the issues involved in the selection
process.


Thanks in advance,

Alex M. Cena    Lehman Brothers, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doc)
Subject: Source For Cellular Phone Accessories?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: kaiwan.com
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 01:16:47 GMT


I recently bought an AT&T cellular phone, and would like to know of
mail order houses or other outlets for accessories, such as extended
life batteries.  I have a couple of friends who also need such things
as chargers, antennae, etc.

We don't want to pay the rates charged by the cellular provider's
outlet.

Any suggestions?


Best,

[e-mail] - "Doc"

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 02:08:51 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T --> Earn Miles on DL, UA, US


FYI.  From rec.travel.air.

 Newsgroups: rec.travel.air
 From: [e-mail] (Eric A. Seiden)
 Subject: AT&T --> EARN MILES ON DL, UA, US
 Organization: Pro-Entropy  [phone]  (DAR Systems Int'l -- Miami, FL)
 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 20:38:17 EST

Call 1-800-7-REWARD and sign up. If you use AT&T for over $25/month in
long distance calls, you can get enrolled at NO CHARGE. I responded to
the ad in the paper and was pleased to find out you can apply five
miles for each dollar to any ONE of the three airlines. In your first
month get TRIPLE CREDITS too. There is no charge for this program --
it's designed to keep people with AT&T. (You can also apply credits to
LD service rebates instead).

Keep trying -- the line was busy for almost an hour before I got
through.  What a great idea!


RealName: Eric A. Seiden      (DAR Systems International: Miami, FL, USA)
ProLine : darsys@Pro-Entropy           [Call Pro-Entropy at 305-265-9073]
Internet: [e-mail]   [24 hours a day of chaos at 14.4K]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #833
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10129;
          22 Dec 93 17:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02071
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:54:18 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27339
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:53:52 -0600
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:53:52 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #834

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 22 Dec 93 13:51:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 834

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Caller ID in Software? (Todd D. Hale)
    Re: Caller ID in Software? ([e-mail])
    Re: Technical Analysis: Santa Claus, Science and Myth (Jim Agnew)
    Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (Kristin J. Rehberg)
    Re: How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified? (Curtis R. Nelson)
    Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (John R. Levine)
    Re: Voice Mail HW Wanted (Jeff Kenton)
    Re: FCC: No! GTE!!! (Mark Voorhees)
    Re: Two Cellphones With Same Number? (William Bauserman)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Jon Edelson)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (John R. Levine)
    Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (Wilson Mohr)
    Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (David A. Kaye)
    Re: Angry Monkeys Go on Rampage (Don Lynn)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd D. Hale)
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software?
Organization: Novell, Inc., Provo, UT, USA
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 15:54:32 GMT


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

>> Are there any tools that do Caller ID in software? I really do not
>> want to buy a box when I have all these nice computers sitting here
>> ready to do some work for me.

> Software only goes so far.  Caller ID is sent on a telephone line as a
> stream of data between rings to a telephone line which is on-hook.
> Therefore, you still need hardware that can monitor an on-hook line ...

So, what is the easiest (cheapest) way to access Caller ID?  What
simple hardware device is available to do this?  And, which modems
allow me to access it before the phone is answered?


Thanks in advance!

Todd D. Hale     [e-mail]   [e-mail]
Unofficially speaking, of course.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The cheapest and most effecient way is
to purchase a Caller-ID Display box from telco or some other supplier
of same. Seriously. Don't bother re-inventing the whole process. In
addition, there are modems which display Caller-ID messages in the
process of otherwise doing their thing.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software?
Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279, 714-539-0829)
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 08:16:24 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Software only goes so far.  Caller ID is sent on a telephone line as a
> stream of data between rings to a telephone line which is on-hook.
> Therefore, you still need hardware that can monitor an on-hook line
> and retrieve the data that is delivered.  Software can't do this
> unless there is hardware there to pick up the information, any more
> than a color paint program can generate colors from a black and white
> scanned image.

Zfax has an option to detect Caller ID. Unfortunately, there is no
Caller ID in CA for me to test it. You also need a ZyXEL modem to do
it. Zfax is free.

[e-mail],Anonymous FTP,Telnet kaiwan.com(192.215.30.2)FAX#[phone]
DATA# 714-539-0829,830-6061,310-527-4279 818-579-6701 16.8k/14.4k 8-N-1
ZyXEL U-1496E 16.8K: $279.00, U-1496E+ 19.2K: $389.00 Voice/FAX/Data Modems
AT&T DATA Port 14.4K: $189.00(Int) $209(Ext) w/ QuickLink II, FAX/DATA Modems

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

From: Brainwave Surfer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Technical Analysis: Santa Claus, Science and Myth
Date: 21 Dec 93 09:09:02 -0400
Organization: Medical College of Virginia


In article <[e-mail]>, Dan L. Dale <0005517538@
mcimail.com> writes:

>                   SANTA CLAUS: Science and Myth

Stuff deleted ...

> 5)  353,000 tons travelling at 650 miles per second creates enormous drag -
>     air resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as
>     a spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere.  The lead pair of
>     reindeer will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy per second each.

Well, according to quantum theory, if you pinpoint the energy of a
particle, you cannot pinpoint the location of Santa, plus you're
leaving out quantum "tunneling", which is probably facilliated by
Elf-assurance!!!  If Santa seems to have mastered quantum tunneling,
then he does his work while the night of the world has no end, as time
does not seem to exist in a quantum tunnel.

>                 Merry Christmas with all the Blessings,
>                        Wishing You and All at Home
>              Joy, Happiness, Peace, Prosperity and Success
>                              for the New Year.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My sentiments exactly!  PAT]

    And mine also!!!  Remember the reason for the season!!

a VERY Merry Christmas to you all.

Jim Agnew          [e-mail]  (Internet)
Neurosurgery,      AGNEW@VCUVAX        (Bitnet)
MCV-VCU            This disc will self destruct in
Richmond, VA, USA  five seconds.  Good luck, Jim..."


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since as you point out, under the
circumstances there is no real measurement of time, maybe Santa Claus
in fact works all year around if you decide to let him ...   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 09:34:46 EST
From: <[e-mail]>


Charles McGuinness writes:

> A. Padgett Peterson writes that he thinks that there is not much of a
> logical reason for a 500 channel system.  Specifically:

>> The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think
>> "if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad
>> enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now
>> requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for
>> the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel
>> listing ?

> I think the perspective is wrong.  It's not that a system where you
> have to press "upchannel" 500 times to loop around is going to be a
> success, but a system where I get to choose which 40 (or whatever)
> channels are on display instead of the cable company will be.

The idea behind the so-called "500-channel" cable system is that you
have between 50 and 150 channels of "regular" cable channels of which
you choose the channels you want.  These will be the "regular"
networks which most people recognize today, such as MTV, CNN, Comedy
Central, various SuperStations, and movie channels.

The rest of the 300 or so "channels" (not all of which may be "TV"
channels; cable companies say 500-channels to brag about the bandwidth
of the new fiber lines) are used for things such as Direct-To-Home
viewing of Request or Pay-Per-View events, some of which can be
displayed ON DEMAND for the customer, INTERACTIVE television, and, in
addition to various audio and computer services such as
Telephony/Voice Mail and the Internet, and (in the case of our local
cable company) a fully monitored home security system that won't
depend on the telephone company anymore.

Once our local cable fully implements the 500 channel bandwidth in our
area they can potentially destroy the monopoly that NY Telephone (now
NYNEX) holds on the local calling area, unless antitrust regulations
subvert this.  Why NYNEX isn't replacing its ancient copper street
pole wire with fiber optics TODAY is beyond me, because telephony is
such a simple application when compared to video.  It is also
interesting to note that NYNEX's ISDN and "Switched-56" service won't
be available in this area until at least 1995.  It is even more
interesting to note that full deployment of the local cable company's
fiber-optic network is nearing completion well ahead of schedule,
currently in 2Q94, and this is in an area which usually sees such
services very late in the game.  It's going to be a great decade for
local cable companies!

As a side note, I believe they will handle upstream traffic either by
using two fiber optic lines, or (for remote areas) the same fiber optic
with split download/upload bandwidth, or existing telephone wire.
Whether there are two conductores are inside the same wire on the pole
right now or not isn't known by me.  In very many, more populated
locations you will see two wires on the pole in parallel, but in
remote areas you will see only one wire.  For some reason I don't see
upstream traffic as posing such a large problem in the present day
because it will be mostly small request packets for programming and
transfers, with the bulk of the bandwidth almost always happening in
the download portion of the transmission (except for the occasional
video telephone conversation, of course! :)


Kriston J. Rehberg                   Internet: [e-mail]
Associate Programmer/Analyst     IBM Internal: V2ENA81 AT OWEGO
ENSCO, Incorporated                  or (AFS): [e-mail]
IBM Corporation, Owego, NY  USA         phone: [phone] or tie: 662-2180

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 06:28:28 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified?


> First question is, how do they verify phone calling card numbers? My
> calling card is a Pac Bell card, and it works absolutly everywhere
> within the US I've ever tried to use it, including out of area Bells
> (like NyNex).  Since NyNex doesn't touch PacBell, they would have to
> traverse a long distance carrier's line, which seems odd.

> Or there's a central clearing house somewhere. Or there's a simple...

Once upon a time (before divestiture), Alternate Billing Services
(calling cards, collect, third number billing) were supported by an
AT&T database called the Billing Validation Application (BVA) and
AT&T's CCIS6 signaling network.  The BVA was used to validate AT&T
calling cards as well as cards for Local Exchange Companies (LEC).  If
the LEC provided operator services and Mechanized Calling Card Service
(MCCS), the switch had CCIS6 links to the BVA.

In early 1992, the LECs and AT&T divorced themselves of the BVA and
migrated to a new system, the Line Information Data Base (LIDB).  LIDB
is composed of a number of separately owned databases (RBOCs, AT&T,
and some of the large independent LECs), accessed via the Signaling
System 7 (SS7) network.  Those telcos not large enough to have their
own LIDB had to make arrangements for their numbers to be placed in
someone else's LIDB.

When the LEC needs to validate a calling card or third party number
for billing, an SS7 query is launched from the operator switch to a
hubbing provider's Signaling Transfer Point (STP).  Anyone that
provides a hubbing service has SS7 links to all the various LIDBs.
The STP looks at the first three digits of the billing number and
determines which LIDB the query should be routed to (Global Title
Translation-GTT).  The query contains the identity of the orignating
switch and a transaction ID, which allows the response to return to
the proper switch and the switch to match the query with the response.
Bellcore maintains a guide called the LARG (LIDB Access Routing
Guide), which is updated monthly.  The LARG is used for maintaining
STP global title translation tables.

The transition from BVA to LIDB was a little shaky at first, but it
works well today.  It normally takes about half a second to receive a
response to a query.

> Second question is this:

> What's the telecom situation in Alaska like? I remember there was a
> discussion a while ago about Hawaii. But then I was up in Alaska a few
> months ago, and pay phones weren't too good on the 10xxx numbers.
> AT+T seemed to give me something called Alascom. Does MCI really not
> serve Alaska, or just not the pay phones? Is there a different set of...

Although Nebraska is a long way from Alaska, I have one theory.  It's
possible that Alascom may have an agreement with some or all of the LD
carriers to provide operator services on their behalf and then pass
the call to their trunks.  If you dial 10XXX + 0 and end up at an
Alascom operator, that may be the case.

> Here's another tidbit: when I call 10xxx - 0 - 510 xxx xxxx from my
> 415 work number, in order to get lower rates (intra LATA calls that
> Pac Bell makes a fortune on), Pac Bell's error message is:....

In Nebraska, LD carriers must get approval from the Public Service
Commision to carry Intra-LATA calls.  If they don't have that
approval, we (Lincoln Telephone) have to block those calls.  I don't
know if the same exists in California.

References:

   1)  United States Telephone Association (USTA) National Services Advisory
       Committee (NSAC) Bulletin TD 91-131, 11/27/91


Curtis R. Nelson, P.E.        email:    [e-mail]
Lincoln Telephone Company    phone:    [phone]
1440 'M' Street              fax:  [phone]
Lincoln, NE  68508

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 09:17 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> What we really need is a new packet-switched network [with faster dialups]
 ...
> In addition, the market is crying out for ubiquitous one-number access, ...

> How about a new 950 service (950 is better than 800 since it avoids
> local access charges) ...

Holy modem tax, Batman!

There's a good reason you don't see one number access: it costs more.
When a long-distance company connects to the local phone network, it
pays, by modem standards, a stiff price, four or five cents per
minute, or roughly $3/hr at each end of the connection.  If you call a
950 or 800 number, whoever the carrier is pays that, even if you don't
directly see it on the bill.  AT&T has one-number 950-1288 service,
but it's only used for on-line services that are already so expensive
that an extra $3/hr isn't a big deal.

The 'modem tax' brouhaha from 1987 was about these connection costs.
The FCC, not totally unreasonably, said that packet networks look a
lot like long-distance phone companies, so they should connect to the
phone network in the same way.  This would allow all sorts of swell
features not now available, e.g. Sprintnet could assign each of their
providers a 700 number so you could dial directly to the service you
want, using the same number regardless of where you're caling from,
instead of having to dial a local Sprintnet number, then go through a
second dialing dialog to tell it who you really want to talk to.  But
along with a real phone connection comes real phone pricing, and
nobody wanted to pay that extra $3/hr.  So the FCC backed off and left
us with the current situation where packet nets have a special rule
that lets them connect to the phone network like ordinary business
customers, without paying any per-minute charge.

I suspect the main reason you don't see 9600 bps dial-up packet
network connections is that there's not much demand for them.  By the
time you factor in the slowdowns due to network connection, and
consider how much cheaper normal long distance is compared to ten years
ago when the packet nets were getting giong, it's about as fast to
dial direct at 14.4K.

If you want to complain about slow data connections, complain about
the local telcos who have been slow to introduce ISDN, which provides
dual 64K bps connections, and have done so at prices that make it
unattractive.

There's also a chicken and egg problem here: ISDN per-minute prices
are, by and large, the same as toll rates, but ISDN connections can be
set up and taken down very fast, so a connection of a few seconds
makes sense.  If Compuserve, say, were set up so you called in via
ISDN, it blatted a few hundred K of screens and hung up, then you
pondered off-line for a few seconds, then reconnected, it blatted a
few more hundred K and hung up, you could actually be connected for
only five minutes out of each hour, and even at regular phone rates,
the phone bill would be on the order of 75 cents/hr.  But since there
isn't much ISDN, there's not much incentive to make things work that
way.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Kenton)
Subject: Re: Voice Mail HW Wanted
Organization: Kenton Systems Corporation, Weston MA
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 14:51:59 GMT


[e-mail] (Joseph I. Ceasar) writes:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dialogic also makes voice mail cards
> capable of handling four lines. They are (I think) in Parsippany, NJ.  PAT]

Dialogic is in Parsippany -- four line voice mail cards for a PC are
$1150.

Also try Rhetorex in Campbell, CA, which has similar equipment for
about the same price.


Jeff Kenton    [phone]
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Voorhees)
Subject: Re: FCC: No! GTE!!!
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 09:56:05 EST
Organization: [MindVox] / Phantom Access Technologies / (+1 800-MindVox)


Steve Lichter writes:

> There have been follow ups on this and it appears GTE plans to take
> the same action as Bell Atlantic has done and bring suit against the
> FCC.

GTE has effectively taken the same action as Bell Atlantic. By going
to court to seek to continue the Cerritos project, it is raising the
same constitutional issue, as did Bell Atlantic: whether telephone
companies can offer video programming (as opposed to just transport)
to their customers.

The Cerritos project had operated under a waiver from that prohibition,
and GTE now seeks to have the prohibition declared unconstitional,
which is exactly what Bell Atlantic successfully did.


[e-mail]   Mark Voorhees

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

Date: 22 Dec 93 09:48:02 GMT
From: Bauserman, William
Subject: Re: Two Cellphones With Same Number?


John Landwehr writes:

> Ameritech and Cellular One in Chicago claim that you cannot have two
> cellular phones with the same phone number.  (This would be a nice
> feature if you have a car phone, and a handheld!  But they claim the
> FCC doesn't approve. Translated -> they make more money this way).
> Their suggestion is call forwarding and no-answer-transfer.

This is not exactly true.  If they are using an AT&T Autoplex Cellular
Switch, there is a software feature available that allows up to three
cellphones to have the same directory number (without this feature you
are only able to assign ESNs and DNs on a one to one basis) .  So it
is available and I don't know why the FCC would not approve.

But why wouldn't you want to do it?  The best reason is as Pat stated,
you will probably wind up in a fraud database and then none of your
phones will work or worse yet your monthly bill will come in a box :)
Also, the current setup of the cellular network wasn't designed to
handle two units with the same DN and it creates problems.

These problems are avoided if you NEVER turn both phones on at the
same time.  But, if you do, it creates paging problems, alerting
(ringing) problems, and conversation problems (both land and mobile).


As always these opinions are completely my own.


Bill Bauserman    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Edelson)
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 01:42:30 GMT


In the first message of this thread, a question was asked about
blocking Caller ID in a situation where a social worker was calling
from home.  Rather then getting into the whole 'right to Caller ID
discussion' it seems to me that calls from someone representing the
social agency should be identified as calling from the social agency.
The social agency is 'responsible' for the call, and while I think
that people have the right to know who 'made' a call, I don't see why
a home number needs to be made known for a business call, as long as
the business is identified.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are suggesting then that perhaps a
valuable solution to one part of the Caller-ID controversy would be if
an 'alternate ID message' was available to certain individuals for use
at their home under controlled circumstances, i.e. a police officer
could have his ID shown as that of the Police Department, etc.  Not a
bad idea really.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 01:11 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> Are there any devices out there that can scramble your phone number
> from Caller ID and Auto Callback?

Well, there's distinctive ringing.  You get two numbers on your phone,
and they ring differently, one long ring or two shorts.  Telco considers
the one long ring number to be the true number and provides it as the
Caller-ID number.  It's an inexpensive service, $3/month around here.

For under $100, you can get a box known as a ring leader which listens
to the first ring of all incoming calls and connects to one of two
lines plugged into it.  I'd suggest getting a ring leader, attaching
it to the phone line where it comes into your house, and plugging the
rest of the phone wiring into the line two output.  Line one can
either go to an answering machine or be left unhooked.

This way, anyone who calls your main number gets on answer, the second
line is the number you actually give out.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 13:53:19 CST
From: [e-mail] (Wilson Mohr)
Subject: Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number


[e-mail] (Console Cowboy) writes:

> I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800
> number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to
> any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The
> number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why?

Well FWIW, welcome the new scam on the block. I got a page to
800-473-9323 number. When dialed the number thanks you "for calling
about making extra money!" I hung up at that point.

If you are interested you can hear it out, otherwise save your time.

BTW, it really peeves me that the pager user has to *pay* for each
page and some bonehead can waste my money without my consent.  (that
is, if *I were paying for it.) OTOH I *could* call the number and hear
it completely through a billion or so times? Nah. not worth the
effort.

Bottom Line? If I don't recognize the number, I ignore it. (I was
bored ...;) ) If it is important they will page again (and again ...)
What about emergencies? I have a "code" set up for determining that
nature of the page. No code? No return.


Wilson Mohr                                     [e-mail]
Strategic Quality - Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group
"ME speak for Motorola? No, I don't think so . . ."

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number
Date: 22 Dec 1993 15:53:49 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [login: guest]


Dave Niebuhr ([e-mail]) wrote:

> [e-mail] (Console Cowboy) writes:

>> I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800
>> number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to
>> any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The
>> number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why?

I don't know if this is an option, but some unscrupulous people were
billing back calls to 800 numbers with telco look-alike bills a few
years ago.  This may be a scam to get you to call them.  In this way,
they have proof that you did indeed call their number.  Sounds fishy,
I know, but this scam was being done.

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 10:29:45 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Angry Monkeys Go on Rampage


I think that there is something to be learned from the policies of the
satellite Global Positioning System.  They have first-class customers
(the military), and second-class customers (everyone else).  The
second-class customers receive their information (concerning their
position on earth) with intentionally added inaccuracies.  The
justification was that your average man-on-the-street should not be
given the accuracy sufficient to place a smart bomb in your pocket.
Clearly the Usenet should not be given accuracy sufficient to endanger
others, so just feed the TELECOM Digest to Usenet with intentionally
added inaccuracies (the nature of which can be left to your imagination).

Disclaimer: :-)

/Don Lynn


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But of course, Don! 'Everyone knows' I
send secret messages to the mailing list not seen by comp.dcom.telecom
and in fact what I do is leave the c.d.t. version a little messy
sometimes with spelling and grammatical errors *on purpose* not seen
by the list people (who's copies and the messages therein are always
perfect -- so perfect as to be divine).  Then whenever I see a message
on Usenet with spelling or grammatical errors or just downright wrong
I know it had to be copied from my writings to the net.

I was in the local Radio Shlock store the other day when a customer
came in and ask the clerk for a dummy load to use in place of an antenna
when tuning up his radio. The clerk pointed at me and said "He's the
only one we have right now, but sometimes the store is full of them."

Remember Don and other readers: Let's put the 'X' back in Xmas. 'Tis
the season to be jolly even if you don't feel comfortable wearing
any gay apparal. Tra-la-la-la-la and all that.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #834
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa13250;
          23 Dec 93 7:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04075
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 23 Dec 1993 04:07:35 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13644
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 23 Dec 1993 04:07:06 -0600
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 04:07:06 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #835

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 23 Dec 93 04:07:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 835

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters (David A. Kaye)
    Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: 911 Changes in Toronto ([e-mail])
    Re: 911 Changes in Toronto (Macy Hallock)
    Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Macy Hallock)
    Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Chris Ambler)
    Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Steve Bauer)
    Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Richard Cox)
    Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (George Zmijewski)
    Re: Wireless Local Loop in India (Gerald Serviss)
    Re: Standards and Where to Get Them? (Michael D. Griffin)
    Re: Calling a PBX and Billing (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: Cellphones With RJ-11 Connectors (John R. Levine)
    Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (George Zmijewski)
    Re: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? (Joe Kimbrough)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters
Date: 22 Dec 1993 15:48:51 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [login: guest]


darren ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Ranch) which means if you drive the 680 corridor to work every
> morning, you reach a massive traffic jam. There are 100,000 people who
> work at Bishop Ranch every day, which seems like nothing big right?

It's funny.  Bishop Ranch is probably the largest non-city in
California.  They have, what, 19 telephone exchanges now?  Still, ask
someone where Bishop Ranch is and you're likely to get a blank stare.
I had no idea there were 100,000 people working there now.

It *is* a huge complex, and includes all the major telco carriers.
Funny that they'd think to concentrate so much firepower in one
location.  An accidental power line cut, say from a storm up at the
Altamont Pass, or a nuclear spill from Lawrence Livermore and it would
just wipe them out for many hours. I wonder if anyone has thought
through these possibilties.

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Subject: Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters
Date: 22 Dec 1993 18:42:29 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access


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

>>> San Ramon, CA has 102 phones per 100 people ...

> Just a wierd thought -- but San Ramon is home of Pac Bell (at Bishop
> Ranch) which means if you drive the 680 corridor to work every
> morning, you reach a massive traffic jam. There are 100,000 people who
> work at Bishop Ranch every day, which seems like nothing big right? I
> mean San Fran probably has 1,000,000 and New York has 7,000,000
> workers entering every day -- but aside from Bishop Ranch, San Ramon
> is a small sleepy town of maybe 30,000 -- too many of them yuppies who
> are making it very hard on us younger types who want to buy homes in
> our own region.

I fail to see how the many people who live in San Ramon make it hard
for you to buy a house in your own region.

> Never liked the place anyway. And if you work for Pac Bell, just
> kidding; my phone service is wonderful and soooooooo cheap. Merry
> Christmas.

Besides Pac Bell contributing the jams on the 680 corridor, don't
forget Chevron Corp. which has an equally large complex at Chevron
Park. I used to work there and hated the commute but quite liked the
offices. Also I think Northern Telecom had offices in the same general
area.


Laurence Chiu              Walnut Creek, California
Tel: [phone] (work)   Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 20:25:07 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 911 Changes in Toronto


Tony Harminc submitted a public notice and wrote about 9-1-1,
Auto-dial Alarm Devices in Toronto.

> NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
> RE: 9-1-1, Auto-dial Alarm Devices

> If they are really going to ignore 911 calls where the caller says
> nothing, then they've thrown out half the benefit of the expensive
> ANI-ALI system installed some years ago.  Now what they may have
> *meant* to say is that they will ignore calls where the auto-dialer
> plays a pre-recorded message, which makes reasonable sense, but it
> sounds as though they've confused auto-dial burglar alarms with
> personal safety dialers.

This is all a very good point, but speaking from the point of view of
EMS dispatch (ambulances for medical emergencies), it is hard for the
call-taker at the primary PSAP to shift the call to police, fire or
EMS without at least some caller information.  The default often goes
to police, though in some enlightened urban systems 9-1-1 calls with
no caller present and an open line are handled as a "(wo)man down"
meaning a "send in the Marines" EMS response (first responders and
advanced life support ambulance, both on emergency response--lights &
sirens).

Then too, the problem of the call-taker at the primary PSAP during
busy hours trying to figure out what is happening could cause call
"stacking" and delay the response to others.

I'd suggest a response and a warning if the call is inappropriate.  We
just got that in Philadelphia for "false" burglar alarms, five "false"
calls allowed (warnings will be issued), but on the sixth it will cost
you $250.


Regards.

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

From: fmsystm!fmsys![e-mail]
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 20:35 EST
Subject: Re: 911 Changes in Toronto
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: F M Systems/Telemax  Medina, Ohio USA


In article <[e-mail]> Tony Harminc <EL406045@BROWNVM.
brown.edu> writes:

> I saw the following bizarre notice in the paper last week:

> NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
> RE: 9-1-1, Auto-dial Alarm Devices

[contents of notice about denying response to alarm auto dial
devices calling 911 deleted ...]

This type of event has been brought on by several situations:

1. The sale of "panic button" and "medical alert" devices on
   the consumer market that the manufacturer says "program this
   to call a number for assitance"

2. Persons who want some type of alarm signalling for aid to
   be sent (often burglar alarms), but do not wish to subscribe
   to a commercial alarm monitoring service.  This is often
   done by "do it yourself" types installing their own equipment.

3. The use of autodialing monitor units, such as the "Sensaphone"
   that will iniate a call to a programmed number, and open a
   room monitor mic, on dectection of a noise or other event.
   Radio Shack sold a unit of this type at one time.

In most cases, the user does not consult with the Police Dept, or 911
agency before doing this.  The assumption is that they authorities are
there to respond to any occurrence.

The fault perceived by the agencies involved is false alarms and
unverifiable events.  A very large number of these calls come from
unoccupied premises.  The operational basis for most 911 systems is
the receive calls from citizens with an emergency need.  This means
response, and verification of each event.

Since most of these devices are installed by untrained persons, false
alarms are common when typical events occur.  Power failures,
thunderstorms, swinging doors, radio interference, accidental
operation and equipment malfunctions are typical causes of unwanted
alarm signals being sent to 911.

These unwanted signals frustrate the authorities, and endager the
public by taking up valuable time of dispatchers, officers, and
response vehicles.  Most dept's will respond to any event as a matter
of course, but will enforce false alarm ordinances, and other
applicable rules strictly.  In some areas, the fines are quite stiff.

It's very likely that this notice was published as part of some type
of false alarm ordinance or pending rulemaking.

There is much more to this discussion, its an complex topic and the
subject of much debate.  I've tried to provide the best short
explaination I could.

Disclaimer: I own an alarm company.  My father-in-law is a retired
police chief.  I've seen both sides of this issue, and I have my own
opinions.  I've also helped write a couple of false alarm ordinances.
(BTW, the alarm industry has its own false alarm problems, as do many
alarm users.)


Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG  +1.216.723.3030  [e-mail] [e-mail]
Telemax, Inc. - F M Systems, Inc. 152 Highland Drive  Medina, OH 44256 USA

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

From: fmsystm!fmsys![e-mail]
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 93 20:12 EST
Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: F M Systems/Telemax  Medina, Ohio USA


In article <[e-mail]> fico!fico0![e-mail]
writes:

> Someone in our firm is currently experiencing a "different" problem
> with our voice mail system.  She will be leaving a message in
> someone's voice mailbox and the system will interrupt her, saying "To
> Send this Message, Press..."- as if she had punched a key, but she
> hadn't.  The problem has been re-occurring.

I've seen a couple variations of this:

1. Caller has a "soft" voice and the Voice Processing System (VPS)
   has a fairly high "threshold" level detect.  The VPS treats
   the call as short or truncated.

2. Caller has a voice that does not fall within a frequency passband
   used for voice detection.  Same result as 1.

3. Caller's voice has a component that is interpreted as a Touch
   Tone digit by the VPS.  The VPS discards, truncates or branches
   depending on the interpreted digit's action.

4. Caller is calling via a circuit that has low audio levels
   (often in one direction only, toward the VPS).  Same result as 1.

5. Caller has noisy circuit, inducing erratic operation.

Comments:

I've seen several problems with systems that seen to have difficulty
with high pitched, soft voices.  There is a known charateristic in the
telephone network know as high frequency rolloff that attenuates
frequencies above 1800 hz or so.  With some callers, usually found to
be certain type of high pitched, soft and often female voice, the VPS
has trouble determining that the caller is really not there.  That's
because the amplitude of the human voice is usually found in the 800
hz to 1500 hz portion of the audio spectrum, and VPS boards are
programmed to look at that area for voice detection.

No doubt there are others on the net more capable than I in describing
the details of this.

Disclaimer: I sell and service, among other things, voice processing
systems.  This information is from my observations, not from what
the manufacturers tell me. I have my own opinions.  YMMV, no doubt.


Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG  +1.216.723.3030  [e-mail] [e-mail]
Telemax, Inc. - F M Systems, Inc. 152 Highland Drive  Medina, OH 44256 USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Ambler - Fubar)
Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts
Organization: The Phishtank
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 01:56:16 GMT


fico!fico0![e-mail] says:

> Someone in our firm is currently experiencing a "different" problem
> with our voice mail system.  She will be leaving a message in
> someone's voice mailbox and the system will interrupt her, saying "To
> Send this Message, Press..."- as if she had punched a key, but she
> hadn't.  The problem has been re-occurring.

> Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens
> when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones
> generated by the keypad.  The system interprets the voice as a key
> being punched.

> This seems odd, but I have HEARD of it on other systems.  Has this
> happened to anyone else?  Anyone come up with a solution to this
> problem?  (Other than HORMONE PILLS?)

Oh, I was going to suggest hormone pills, but since you've tried
those ... :-)

Actually, I design voice mail systems, and so I'm intimately familliar
with this problem. The solution I have found works best is to increase
the touch tone(tm) threshold, if you can. Most systems include a way
to force the hardware to wait longer before registering the tone.
Since a human voice will waver quite a bit (relative to the steady
tone of a phone), this usually does the trick. If your hardware
doesn't support this, first bug your vendor to put it in the next
revision, and then good luck.


++Christopher(); // All original text is strictly the opinion of the poster
Christopher J. Ambler, Author, FSUUCP 1.41, FSVMP 1.0, [e-mail]

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

From: STEVE BAUER <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 18:28:31 CST


When a female voice triggers a Voice Mail system, I have two suggestions:

1.  Ask the person to talk a little slower.  This will naturally lower
the voice a bit, hopefully just enough to eliminate the problem.

2.  Hold the phone a little further away from her lips.  This might
reduce the offending frequency so it won't trigger things.


Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Cox)
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 23:56:28 +0000


David Leibold writes ...

> The +44 956 I have listed as a PCN phone system

+44 956 is shared between a PCN system (Mercury One-2-One) and a new
service, "FLEXTEL", which is the UK's first personal numbering
service.  A bit like the 700 codes in the USA - but not, you'll be
glad to hear, carrier specific!

> Can anyone confirm or deny whether UK was really running out of area
> codes

The UK is not running out of area codes.  Never has been.  The
proposed changes are, essentially, political.  Have you ever tried to
get a civil servant to admit they were wrong?  Then you'll understand
the problem.

There is a *lot* of area-code wastage in the UK (The worst case is
Foula, a tiny island with 25 or so telephones, which has its own area
code +44 393.  That code, like most other area codes, has capacity for
a million numbers.  If some of these under-used area codes were
combined, over 200 new codes could be made available very easily and
at a low cost (say, under five million UK pounds total).  Also different
providers are being given "branded" codes for special services, which
means there are so many premium codes that most users cannot remember
which is premium and which isn't.  That suits telco!

(Americans are lucky to have a single 900 code for this sort of thing,
even though there are some "local" codes as well).

The main worry is that there are a number of cities (Brighton,
Belfast, Coventry, Bournemouth etc) which have a growing population,
and are likely to need to move from six digits to seven in the next
few years.  London is also likely to exhaust its supply of numbers
before the year 2000, even though it is already on seven digit
schemes, and has recently had one area code split.

So yes, the change will be happening (but at Easter 1995, not 1994).
The problem is that it won't actually solve any of the problems that
were used to justify the need for it in the first place !!!

Merry Christmas everybody - Nadolig Llawen i chi gyd !


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail address: [e-mail] - PGP2.3 public key available on request

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

From: [e-mail] (George Zmijewski)
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?
Organization: MGZ Computer Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:39:52 +0000


>From Oftel Consultative Document June 93:
(...)
 .. details of the codes that were to change in 1995

 - addition of a "1" to all fixed network area codes after the trunk
   dialling prefix "0";
 - a change of code in five major cities introducting seven digit
   subscriber numbers
 - a change in the international dialling prefix from "010" to "00"

The codes that will *not* change at NCC are the existing codes for
non-geographic services, ie:

 - frephone services;
 - premium rate services;
 - services where national calls are charges at local call rate;
 - mobile (cellular and PCN ) services;
 - certain paging services;

 ...

followed by 23 pages of discussion on the subject.

The date for NCC is 16 April 95 but new codes will begin to be
accepted by some switches in March 94, around August 94 all exchanges
should be able to recognise new codes.


George Zmijewski

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerald Serviss)
Subject: Re: Wireless Local Loop in India
Date: 22 Dec 1993 15:09:07 GMT
Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola


The system that you refer to is built by Motorola.

It is based on analog signalling standards (AMPS/TACS). The India
system was probably TACS as India is a GSM country.

This system is designed to hook up to a Class 5 office.

For more information contact Larry Svec at [e-mail]


Jerry Serviss   Mororola Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael D. Griffin)
Subject: Re: Standards and Where to Get Them?
Date: 22 Dec 1993 20:20:30 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


Mike Storke ([e-mail]) wrote:

> CCITT v.* standards and the Bellcore DS* (aka T*) standards?

For CCITT (now ITU) try gopher at ties.itu.ch

I don't know of any site that has Bellcore or old ATT (T1) specs
online ... the EIA/TIA will sell the ANSI T1 spec. but not online
either.

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Re: Calling a PBX and Billing
Date: 22 Dec 1993 20:48:48 GMT
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Not necessarily.  Our AT&T Definity system supervises an incoming call
immediately.  When asked why, our telecom support group mumbled
something about compatiblity with our voice-mail provider.

I complained that, when I use my cell phone to call in, I'm charged
air time for unanswered calls.  They investigated, and learned that
GTE Mobilnet in Portland OR doesn't pay attention to supervision.
Their avowed policy, "you never pay for an unanswered call," is
implemented by charging nothing for calls lasting less than a minute.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])

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

Date: Thu, 23 Dec 93 01:18 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Cellphones With RJ-11 Connectors
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> I'm looking for information on cellular phone the either have, or
> can be adapted (with a dongle, whatever), to provide, an RJ-11 phone
> jack.

Lots of phones now come with the jack.  The Audiovox CTX-3200E that
NYNEX sold me (for $0, requires 24 months of service) has an RJ-11 in
the cradle.  I haven't tried to use it, but it appears that it's easy
to set the phone so the RJ-11 device answers incoming calls, but you
have to place outgoing calls yourself and then switch to the jack.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (George Zmijewski)
Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite
Organization: MGZ Computer Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:10:08 +0000


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

> This refers to calls originating in the UK:

>> To get a guaranteed non-satellite circuit to the USA, useful for
>> certain data transmission requirements which involve a lot of
>> handshaking, dial 0101 83 + area code + number.

>> The code 84 allows you to obtain a satellite link, if you really want
>> one for any reason.

> 010 is international access code in the UK, and 1 is the country code
> which includes the U.S.  Now you're telling me that EXTRA digits are
> inserted for non-satellite/satellite links?  The equipment at the UK
> end can handle these extra digits and would not be confused by the
> coming of the NNX area codes?

I don't know what the future holds but 83/84 prefix works without any
problems from UK right now. Does anybody know about plans for area
codes 83X 84X?  I think this range may remain reserved for some time
 -- the 83/84 prefix was in use for several years and I'm sure a lot
of automatic dialers use it. It will become redundant with time when
ISDN will take over all data calls -- when you request international
call with guaranteed 64k channel it selects cable route. (Its an extra
zero I think and it costs you more.)

BTW I use 83 for all calls to US since I have noticed that echo
created by satelite connections caused MF4 bleeps to be heard twice on
the other end.  (ie 70ms mark, 70 ms space while the delay was 300ms
long enough for the bleep to go from my switch to the remote switch
come back , loop through my handset and go back again loud anough to
be recognised). I only noticed this problem few times on one
particular US switchboard. Apparently there should be some echo
cancelling eqpt. on the way but I don't know why it didnt work.


George Zmijewski

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 07:22:15 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jon Kimbrough)
Subject: Re: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama?


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

> I don't know why the first NNX area code won't be of the form AB0,
> unless there was concern over people getting confused and trying to
> "correct" it to A0B.

If this is the case, the concern seems unwarranted to me.  It's been
my experience that the average Joe doesn't have any idea that area
codes can only be made up of certain limited combinations of numbers
and isn't likely to think twice about dialing 520 or 330 as an area
code.


Jon Kimbrough    [e-mail]

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein, either stated or implied, are
solely my own and do not reflect Lockheed's views in any manner.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #835
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa13527;
          23 Dec 93 8:28 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18301
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 23 Dec 1993 05:04:27 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11742
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 23 Dec 1993 05:04:02 -0600
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 05:04:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #836

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 23 Dec 93 05:04:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 836

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Mike Lanza)
    Re: Info Highway - 28 Companies (Jim Burkitt)
    Re: NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity ([e-mail])
    Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (Bud Couch)
    Re: FCC: No! GTE!!! (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Jay Hennigan)
    Re: Mobilink Service (Mark Bryan)
    Modem Monitoring Question (Mark Case)
    ISDN in 513? (Paul Joslin)
    Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere? (Vamsee Lakamsani)
    X.25 to Mexico (Laurence Chiu)
    Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted (Jeff Sokolov)
    Free E-Newsletter on Advanced Computing and Communications (David S. Lewis)
    Panasonic EKT2105 Information Wanted (Leonard Erickson)
    Chaos Digest Finished For the Year; Happy Holidays From Editor (J-B Condat)
    Administrivia: A Break For Christmas (TELECOM Digest Editor)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 14:14:28 GMT
From: Mike Lanza <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos


>> What we really need is a new packet-switched network [with faster dialups]
> ...
>> In addition, the market is crying out for ubiquitous one-number access, ...

>> How about a new 950 service (950 is better than 800 since it avoids
>> local access charges) ...

> Holy modem tax, Batman!

> There's a good reason you don't see one number access: it costs more.
> When a long-distance company connects to the local phone network, it pays,
> by modem standards, a stiff price, four or five cents per minute, or
> roughly $3/hr at each end of the connection.  If you call a 950 or 800
> number, whoever the carrier is pays that, even if you don't directly see
> it on the bill.  AT&T has one-number 950-1288 service, but it's only used
> for on-line services that are already so expensive that an extra $3/hr
> isn't a big deal.

Yes, but only one local access charge -- for the user's side of the
call -- need be paid if a packet-switched network takes that call and
delivers it to the server (by X.25 or frame relay).  Sprint's pricing
for a service that does this, their "Data Call 800" service, is
actually a fair amount more than their pricing for T1-delivered 800
service (i.e. Sprint delivers calls to their customer by T1, thus
bypassing one local access charge).  It's hard to compare these
directly, but when I looked at it it seemed to come out to about $10
or $11 per hour for Data Call 800 versus about $8 or so for
T1-delivered 800 service.  I think Sprint could eliminate that
differential if they really wanted to (and they should want to).
Besides, the rep I spoke with about Data Call 800 was very unfamiliar
with it and didn't seem to be interested in selling it.

AT&T's 950-1288 goes for around $11 to $13 per hour as I recall.

Again, that's way too high, when the packet networks start at about
$6, and drop to as little as $2 with the highest volumes.

> The 'modem tax' brouhaha from 1987 was about these connection costs.
> The FCC, not totally unreasonably, said that packet networks look a lot
> like long-distance phone companies, so they should connect to the phone
> network in the same way.  This would allow all sorts of swell features not
> now available, e.g. Sprintnet could assign each of their providers a 700
> number so you could dial directly to the service you want, using the same
> number regardless of where you're caling from, instead of having to dial a
> local Sprintnet number, then go through a second dialing dialog to tell it
> who you really want to talk to.  But along with a real phone connection
> comes real phone pricing, and nobody wanted to pay that extra $3/hr.  So
> the FCC backed off and left us with the current situation where packet
> nets have a special rule that lets them connect to the phone network like
> ordinary business customers, without paying any per-minute charge.

I wonder if a packet network could push this "special rule" even
further by using a 950 number and getting around the local access
charges.  The answer to this is probably no, but what are the local
access charges for 950?  Are they identical to 800, or are they
cheaper?  If they are identical, what's the advantage over 800?  (Is
dialing three fewer numbers really that big a deal?)

> I suspect the main reason you don't see 9600 bps dial-up packet network
> connections is that there's not much demand for them.  By the time you
> factor in the slowdowns due to network connection, and consider how much
> cheaper normal long distance is compared to 10 years ago when the packet
> nets were getting giong, it's about as fast to dial direct at 14.4K.

C'mon!  There *certainly* is demand for 9.6K as well as 14.4K
connections.  As I noted in my original message, most modems being
sold these days are 14.4K.  It's been a long time since 2400 bps
modems were among the biggest sellers.

As for dialing direct vs. packet, I agree that direct is almost as
cheap, but that's only because the packet networks still have their
heads up their butts with regard to high speed capacity.

A caveat with respect to dialing direct -- I understand that the long
distance carriers, Sprint and MCI in particular, are known to use
compression schemes and echo cancellation schemes that make modem
communication at 9.6 or 14.4Kbps very difficult or impossible.  I'm
not home now (away for the holidays), but I can dig up a message I
pulled from CompuServe on this issue when I return on 12/29, if anyone
is interested.

> If you want to complain about slow data connections, complain about the
> local telcos who have been slow to introduce ISDN, which provides dual 64K
> bps connections, and have done so at prices that make it unattractive.

> There's also a chicken and egg problem here: ISDN per-minute prices are,
> by and large, the same as toll rates, but ISDN connections can be set up
> and taken down very fast, so a connection of a few seconds makes sense.
> If Compuserve, say, were set up so you called in via ISDN, it blatted a
> few hundred K of screens and hung up, then you pondered off-line for a few
> seconds, then reconnected, it blatted a few more hundred K and hung up,
> you could actually be connected for only five minutes out of each hour,
> and even at regular phone rates, the phone bill would be on the order of
> 75 cents/hr.  But since there isn't much ISDN, there's not much incentive
> to make things work that way.

Yeah, I've thought about this one a lot.  Lightning-fast call setup,
as well as a 64K data pipe, would be aweswome for online services.
The problem here, though, does not lie just with the telcos.  It also
lies with the ISDN primary rate (2B+D) spec.  It's basically one voice
channel (which the customer already has today) and one 64K data pipe.
That promises very little advantage over what he has now.  On the
other hand, in order to adopt ISDN the customer has to trash all his
phones in favor of ISDN phones at $100 a piece at least.

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

Date: 22 Dec 1993 14:28:14 GMT
From: JIM BURKITT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Info Highway - 28 Companies


Bob Rosenberg asked about 28 companies supporting a Info Super
Highway.  The December 20, 1993 issue of {Telephony} on page eight
talks about the Cross Industry Working Team (XIWT).  This group plans
to issue a white paper early next year on architectural and technical
requirements for the super highway.  The members of the team are:

Apple, AT&T, Bellcore, BellSouth, Cable Television Laboratories,
Citicorp, DEC, GTE Labs, H-P, IBM, Intel, MCI, McCaw, Motorola, NYNEX,
Pac Bell, Silicon Graphics, Sun, Southwestern Bell, CBEMA, Cisco,
Financial Services Consortium, Hughes Network Systems, Science
Applications International, Sprint, 3Com,West Publishing and Xerox.

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 15:53:59 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity


In TELECOM Digest V13 #833, Will Martin <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> When I make an outside-line call on our NEC NEAX 2400 system here at
> work (dialing 9 and then the local seven-digit number), the system has
> the annoying habit of giving me a ring-sound (in the handset or the
> speaker, depending which is turned on) and then a click that sounds
? *exactly* like the far end picking up on the call. However, it is not
> -- the ring sounds then continue until the called party answers or I
> hang up. What is going on that causes this initial ring-tone that I
> hear followed by that click? Is it the process of the unit selecting
> an outside trunk? If so, why does it give me a ring first?

I used to help in operating a 2400.  It is difficult to offer an
answer without knowing more about how that particular 2400 is set up.
It's possible that the system is using "least cost routing", in which
case the 2400 simulates second dial tone (after you dial 9) and looks
at the entire dialed number before it decides which outgoing trunk to
use.  However, if that were the case, the system would not simulate
ring tone.  If you hear ring, it would be from the outgoing line.

The 2400 uses a register card to actually recieve and decode the touch
tones.  After the 2400 has determined the correct trunk to use,
connected the call to the trunk and signalled the destination number
out, it doesn't need the register card anymore, so it drops the card
out of the circuit.  That may be the click you are hearing.

On the other hand, any number of other things could be happening.  The
call could be being forwarded by some other switching equipment.

The best way to find out is to ask the people who maintain the system.


David Devereaux-Weber, P.E.             [e-mail] (Internet)
The University of Wisconsin - Madison   [phone] (voice)
DoIT - MACC Communications; B263        [phone] (FAX)
1210 W Dayton St.                       Madison, WI 53706

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 16:46:00 -0600 (CST)
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs)


Kriston J. Rehberg ([e-mail]) writes:

> The rest of the 300 or so "channels" [...] are used for things
> such as Direct-To-Home viewing of Request or Pay-Per-View events,
> [...] INTERACTIVE television, [...] and (in the case of our local
> cable company) a fully monitored home security system that won't
> depend on the telephone company anymore.

Well, this was roughly the point where I spewed my coffee all over the
keyboard. Not to put too fine a point on it, but I distinctly prefer
my fully-monitored home security system to be dependent on our local
telephone company than our local cable company, thankyouverymuch. It's
just a question of reliability: in the darkness of our occasional
blackouts I can always pick up the phone, hear the dialtone and see
the nice backlit green keypad light up. Whereas the cable service
seems to be routinely knocked out by everything but Rising Tensions in
the Middle East.

I honestly cannot remember any time when our home phone service was
out of order, and upon reflection I can think of many everyday
applications that rely on telephone lines being up and running 24
hours a day. While I do not doubt the technical ability of the cable
companies to produce this promised _level_ of service, I have serious
reservations about the ability (of _our_ current outfit, anyway) to
provide any reasonable _quality_ of same.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.           Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron               UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610-3498    FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bud Couch)
Subject: Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number
Organization: ADC Kentrox Industries, Inc.
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 23:57:38 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David A. Kaye)
writes:

> Dave Niebuhr ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> [e-mail] (Console Cowboy) writes:

>>> I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800
>>> number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to
>>> any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The
>>> number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why?

> I don't know if this is an option, but some unscrupulous people were
> billing back calls to 800 numbers with telco look-alike bills a few
> years ago.  This may be a scam to get you to call them.  In this way,
> they have proof that you did indeed call their number.  Sounds fishy,
> I know, but this scam was being done.

Well, if a large charge shows up on our company bill, I'm sure that
they will track it back to my extension, and I'll report on it here.

In the meantime, let me offer my own WAG. I tried the number from my
PC and found that it connected at *1200* bps, although my modem is a
V.22bis (2400). This means that the machine at the other end is
forcing the speed to be that low. Why?

I suspect that the modem on the other end is an older (in modem terms
more than two years is *old*) ZOOM modem, for their 1200 units had an
interesting security feature: the entry password to the modem was not
an ascii string, but a four number *touchtone* sequence.If the correct
code wasn't entered within a few seconds of answer, the unit hung up.
We may have just stumbled into someone's database "server" that has
this security feature.


Bud Couch - ADC Kentrox    [e-mail] (192.228.59.2)
insert legalistic bs disclaimer here

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: FCC: No! GTE!!!
Organization: Camosun College, Victoria, B.C.
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 20:51:05 GMT


All the pending cases maybe moot since Clinton/Gore are moving towards
allowing the companies to offer just about any service they want to
including LD service. Can you just see Pacific Bell Screen Door/Cable
and Telephone company?


The above maybe my own ideas and not my employer.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jay Hennigan)
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
Date: 22 Dec 1993 18:05:22 -0800
Organization: Regional Access Information Network (RAIN)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu (Jon Edelson) writes:

> In the first message of this thread, a question was asked about
> blocking Caller ID in a situation where a social worker was calling
> from home.  Rather then getting into the whole 'right to Caller ID
> discussion' it seems to me that calls from someone representing the
> social agency should be identified as calling from the social agency.
> The social agency is 'responsible' for the call, and while I think
> that people have the right to know who 'made' a call, I don't see why
> a home number needs to be made known for a business call, as long as
> the business is identified.

Sounds like a perfect application for DISA via the government agency's
telephone system to me.  > >


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I quite agree. An 'alternate ID message'
should be provided for people in that category of employment who do
some or all of their work from home.  That should resolve many of the
complaints about privacy we hear now.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 01:45:22 -0600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Mobilink Service


Pat and company,

Mobilink is made up of several cell providers nationwide, Mobilnet
being only one of the companies.  Their goal is to provide a complete
network for roaming and service 24 hours a day. Also to obtain service
on your phone in a distance city if necessary.

I have been told you can reach Mobilink at 800-877-5665.  I was told
the number in the ad is sent to this group for handling.

However, in the event you cannot dial that 800 number from your
calling are the same group is reachable at 813-282-6000 and ask for
customer service.


Mark Bryan   GTE Data Services

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Case)
Subject: Modem Monitoring Question
Date: 22 Dec 1993 18:43:46 GMT
Organization: USACE Waterways Experiment Station


Hi folks,

I am posting a question for a friend.  Granted, it is a very vague
question, but here goes anyway.  Suppose there is a remote location at
which there is a microwave transmitter and a modem, and suppose this
location goes down.  The question is: how can the location be
monitored so that it may be determined whether the problem is with the
modem or with the transmitter?

Thanks in advance for any information.


Mark Case

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Joslin (Sverdrup))
Subject: ISDN in 513?
Date: 22 Dec 1993 19:41:08 GMT
Organization: Model Based Vision Lab, Wright Laboratory


Does it exist?  It must, since bbs.combinet.com tells me it's been
available at my home exchange (513 42X) since September.  I called the
local phone company business office, and was referred to a special
ISDN number: [phone].  I've tried this number several times a
day for the last week, and it is always busy.  Is this number not
dialable from 513/ 25x?

Is anyone out there?


Paul R. Joslin [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Vamsee Lakamsani)
Subject: Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere?
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 18:06:36 CST
Organization: Software Interfaces, Inc.


It is very convenient to have the yellow pages accessible on-line.  Do
any US cities have this facility? Is there any reason not to make
yellow pages accessible on-line?


Vamsee Lakamsani   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Subject: X.25 to Mexico
Date: 22 Dec 1993 18:42:32 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access


Our company has a requirement to connect to a company in Mexico so
that we are able to logon to their IBM mainframe from here. We would
normally use the IBM Advantis network to achieve this but apparently
IBM is not approved to provide SNA connections to Mexico yet.  The
customer is getting anxious and now wants to go X.25 via GE Net
(Genesis?). This is okay except we would now have to get a leased line
from the local Telco (Pacific Bell) and the company in Mexico would
need to get a leased line from their premises to the nearest GE
office.

Thoughts around here are that the delays in making this connect will
be the leased lines in Mexico followed by the leased lines in
California! Does anybody have any thoughts on this? How good is the
PT&T in Mexico (City) in providing comms?


Laurence Chiu              Walnut Creek, California
Tel: [phone] (work)   Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Sokolov)
Subject: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Incorporated
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:24:29 GMT


I am looking for recommendations for introductory books on
telecommunications.  I'm familiar with Pierce's "Signals" but would
like something more recent.

Thanks in advance.


Jeff Sokolov    GTE Laboratories, Incorporated
40 Sylvan Road  Waltham, MA 02254   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Scott Lewis)
Subject: Free E-Newsletter on Advanced Computing and Communications
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 07:12:02 GMT


HOTT -- Hot Off The Tree -- is a FREE monthly electronic newsletter
featuring the latest advances in computer, communications, and
electronics technologies.  Each issue provides article summaries on
new and emerging technologies, including VR (virtual reality), neural
networks, PDAs (personal digital assistants), GUIs (graphical user
interfaces), intelligent agents, ubiquitous computing, genetic &
evolutionary programming, wireless networks, smart cards, video
phones, set-top boxes, nanotechnology, and massively parallel
processing.

Summaries are provided from the following sources:

{Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post,
  San Jose Mercury News, Boston Globe, Financial Times (London), Daily
  Telegraph} (the largest circulation daily in the U.K.) ...

{Time, Newsweek, U.S. News & World Report} ...

{Business Week, Forbes, Fortune, The Economist (London), Nikkei Weekly
  (Tokyo), Asian Wall Street Journal} (Hong Kong) ...

Over 50 trade magazines, including {Computerworld, InfoWorld, Datamation,
  PC Week, Dr. Dobb's Journal, LAN Times, Communications Week, Electronic
  Engineering Times, New Media, VAR Business, Midrange Systems, Byte} ...

Over 50 research journals, including ALL publications of the IEEE Computer
  and Communications Societies, plus technical journals published by AT&T,
  IBM, Hewlett Packard, Fujitsu, Sharp, NTT, Siemens, Philips, GEC ...

Over 100 Internet mailing lists and USENET discussion groups ...

plus ...

Listings of forthcoming and recently published technical books and
  forthcoming trade shows and technical conferences.

BONUS:

Exclusive interviews with technology pioneers ... the next issue
features an interview with Mark Weiser, head of Xerox PARC's Computer
Science Lab.

Send subscription requests to:
  [e-mail]
Leave the "Subject" line blank
In the body of message input:
  SUBSCRIBE HOTT-LIST
Do *not* include first or last names following "SUBSCRIBE HOTT-LIST"

The next issue of the revived HOTT e-newsletter is scheduled for
transmission in late January/early February.

Please forward this announcement to friends and colleagues, and post
to your favorite bulletin boards (especially university BBS).  Our
objective is to provide a high quality newsletter for over 1,000,000
subscribers.  Thank you.


David Scott Lewis
Editor-in-Chief and Book & Video Review Editor
IEEE Engineering Management Review
(the world's largest circulation "high tech" management journal)
Internet address: [e-mail]      Tel: [phone]
USPS mailing address: POB 18438 / IRVINE CA 92713-8438  USA

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

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 17:06:00 PST
From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Panasonic EKT2105 Information Wanted


I've got a friend who has one of these, still in the box, but with no
documentation. It looks to me like it's a digital phone for use with a
PBX. Can anybody give me any info on it, including what it's worth,
and what the minimum system it'll run with is?


Thanks,

uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson
Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Chaos Digest Finished For the Year; Happy Holidays From Editor
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 10:27:28 EST


With the issue #1.73, ChaosD is down for '93 for the holidays.  We'll
be back with #2.01 about Jan. 3, '94.  We will, however, continue to
answer mail during the break.

Thank for your support and assistance during the past year, and we
look forward to the coming year.

The French translation of Mark A. Ludwig's book, "Naissance d'un
Virus" is now available at the editor address: Addison-Wesley France,
41 rue de Turbigo, 75003 Paris, France (Phone: [phone] fax: +33
1 48879799) Don't hesitate to order it directly (circa 198 FF +
porto).

Bonne et heureuse annee a tous ... et le paradis a la fin de votre vie.


Jean-Bernard Condat     General Secretary   Chaos Computer Club France


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And greetings to all of you from us
here in the USA at this holiday season. Like yourself, this Digest is
now winding down for the Christmas holiday, except I'll be back next
week (maybe over the weekend) with at least a couple more issues to
wind up the year. I hope the New Year is a happy one for you.   PAT]

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

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: A Break For Christmas
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 04:45:00 CST


This is the last you'll see of the Digest for a couple days while my
family and I spend the holiday together. I might have an issue or
two of the Digest for you sometime Sunday evening or else Monday
morning; then there will be a few issues during the week ahead as I
try to clean out all my files here to end the year. Have a happy
holiday, and remember, let's put the 'X' back in Xmas!  :)   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #836
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26585;
          26 Dec 93 0:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09646
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sat, 25 Dec 1993 20:29:35 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15118
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 25 Dec 1993 20:29:08 -0600
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 20:29:08 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #837

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 25 Dec 93 20:29:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 837

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review Index (Rob Slade)
    Fax Machine as Scanner? (Hiro Sugawara)
    V.35 to RS-232 Conversions (Brad Walker)
    Questions About CSU/DSU Link Speeds (Brad Walker)
    Notice to AT&T Customnet and Pro Wats Customers (Paul Robinson)
    Indiana NPA 317 Dialing Change Breaks Many COCOTS (George Goble)
    ATM and Multimedia (Xavier Garcia)
    ATM (Donald Army)
    ISDN Clarification (Mike D. Schomburg)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

Date: 25 Dec 93 11:53 -0600
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review Index


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although as Rob points out he is unable
to send back issues, most of the books listed in the index below have
been reviewed by Mr. Slade here in the Digest during the past year. If
you are interested in seeing reviews you missed earlier, what you can
do is grep the index to the Digest for the past year using the keyword
'Book Review:'  You'll get the issue numbers involved and can obtain
those copies from the Archives. Generally Mr. Slade's reviews have
appeared here two or three times per week for the past several months.
If you like seeing his book reviews in the Digest, drop him a note and
let him know, asking him to continue them in 1994.  Thanks.   PAT]

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

Pre-scriptum: No, I can't send you back issues.  No, there is no ftp
or mail-sever site -- yet.  Two outfits have expressed interest, but
neither have gotten their ASCII together yet.

REVIEW.LST   931114

                               Book review index

This is a listing of (mostly technical) book reviews.  The initial
coding is the review file name (and approximate size of the file):
this is followed by the name of the book and author(s) and a very
brief description.  (Some versions of this file may also contain
listings of software reviews.)

BK2NDCNT RVW  2832 "Second Contact", Resnick - fiction about hacking for data,
                   some reasonable database security stuff
BKABCLAN RVW  5439 "The ABC's of Local Area Networks", Dortch - practical, but
                   somewhat limited in detail, good intro for small LAN
BKAMGTMN RVW  2012 "A manager's guide to multivendor networks", Enck - like it
                   says
BKBBS4BS RVW  6728 "Bulletin Board Systems for Business", Wood/Blankenhorn -
                   very PC oriented (COM932)
BKBSECCS RVW  4880 "Building a Secure Computer System", Gasser - heavy on
                   technical, particularly secure hardware
BKBURGER RVW 11277 "Computer Viruses and Data Protection", Burger - poorly
                   written with little solid information, some viral programs
                   in source code
BKCMCOOP RVW  3668 "Communications for Cooperating Systems", Cypser - IBM
                   biased view of OSI and TCP/IP
BKCMPSEC RVW  5779 "Computer Security Basics", Russell/Gangemi - good overview,
                   but some problems (SEC931)
BKCMVRCR RVW  3662 "Computer Virus Crisis", Fites/Johnston/Kratz - somewhat
                   sloppy and a number of errors
BKCONINT RVW  4132 "Connecting to the Internet", Estrada - good reference for
                   contact with Internet providers, hopefully to be improved in
                   future versions
BKCURRY  RVW  3171 "Unix System Security - A Guide for Users and System
                   Administrators", Curry - not as good as Spafford/Garfinkel
                   (SEC932)
BKDEDMAC RVW  3614 "The Dead Mac Scrolls", Pina - diagnosis guide for Mac
                   hardware
BKDEMAN  RVW  2784 "!%@:: A Directory of Electronic Mail Addressing and
                   Networks", Frey/Adams - valuable reference on email details
                   between networks
BKDENING RVW  8118 "Computers Under Attack", Denning, ed. - collection of
                   essays roughly related to security, also "the net"
BKDMGTOU RVW  8012 Dr. Macintosh's Guide to the On-Line Universe,
                   LeVitus/Ihnatko - somewhat flippant but very thorough
                   introduction to computer communications regardless of system
BKDTCMDC RVW  2912 "Data Communications & Networking Dictionary", Pardoe/Wenig
                   - a basic glossary, not overly biased, not overly complete
BKEMAIL  RVW  4066 "E-Mail", Caswell - good business proposal, but limited and
                   dated
BKETHICS RVW  4331 "Computers, ethics and society", Ermann/Williams/Gutierrez -
                   textbook for computer ethics course: not great
BKETHPKT RVW  2529 "Ethernet Pocket Guide", Byron Spinney - big on cabling and
                   stuff
BKETWOOS RVW  6481 "Exploring the World of Online Services", Resnick - looks at
                   Compuserve and Prodigy, very rah, rah, not much info
BKEYESTM RVW  2465 "Eye of the Storm", Gold Eagle/Worldwide - fiction, virus is
                   minor subplot
BKFANLAN RVW  2782 "Fantastic LANtastic", Talbott/Raker - good one stop
                   reference for users, managers and installers
BKFARROW RVW  3556 "Unix System Security", Farrow - basic
BKFEUDO  RVW  4414 "Computer Virus Desk Reference", Feudo - collects basic
                   virus reference sources for those without online access
BKGIGNET RVW  3564 "Gigabit Networking", Partridge - good overview of some of
                   the latest hot topics in comms
BKGLBTCH RVW  7883 "Globalization, Technology and Competition",
                   Bradley/Hausman/Nolan - what business thinks about
                   technology and communications - not much
BKHGHLND RVW  5286 "Computer Virus Handbook", Highland - good overview,
                   unfortunately somewhat dated
BKHGTWFW RVW  4648 "Hacker's Guide to Word For Windows", Leonhard/Chen -
                   necessary information to augment Word for Windows with its
                   bugs and documentation
BKHODGE  RVW  2393 "Rid Me of This Virus!", Hodge - short, uneven material,
                   perhaps a good pamphlet
BKHOFMAN RVW  5768 "Rogue Programs", Hoffman, ed. - good collection of essays
BKINTCMP RVW  5422 "The Internet Companion", LaQuey/Ryer - short and quick, not
                   many helps and sometimes too many details, passable intro
BKINTDCM RVW  7280 "Introduction to data communications", Gelber - bad start,
                   good contents later
BKINTSYS RVW  3175 "Internet System Handbook", Lynch/Rose - essays by people
                   involved with the Internet, strong on protocols, weak on
                   direction
BKINTTCP RVW  3105 "Internetworking with TCP/IP", Comer/Stevens - good
                   overview, also good basic network comm concepts
BKKROL   RVW  4616 "The Whole Internet User's Guide and Catalog", Ed Krol -
                   excellent introduction to the Internet as well as resource
                   for experienced users (COM931)
BKLEVIN  RVW  3793 "Computer Virus Handbook", Levin - vague and undisciplined
BKLRNUNX RVW  1941 "Learning the UNIX Operating System", Todino/Strang - like
                   it says.  Short.
BKLUDWIG RVW  6838 "Little Black Book of Computer Viruses", Ludwig - MS-DOS
                   specific, not very accurate, viral source code
BKLUNDEL RVW  4304 "Virus!", Lundell - a lot of research, but a lot of errors
                   as well
BKMANUCP RVW  2114 "Managing uucp and Usenet", O'Reilly/Todino - clear and
                   complete overview
BKMATRIX RVW  7009 "The Matrix: Computer Networks and Conferencing Systems
                   Worldwide", Quarterman - almost everything you ever wanted
                   to know about "inter" networks
BKMCAFEE RVW  5668 "Computer Viruses, Worms, Data Diddlers, Killer Programs and
                   Other Threats to Your System", McAfee/Haynes - some
                   interesting speculations buried in a mass of undisciplined
                   garbage
BKMDMREF RVW  4939 "The Modem Reference", Banks - fairly complete overview, but
                   with errors and without much organization
BKMGENIE RVW  5560 "Glossbrenner's Master Guide to GEnie", Glossbrenner -
                   somewhat dated with the changes in the system, but still
                   very useful
BKMSTNVL RVW  4432 "Mastering Novell Netware", Currid/Gillett - a very *basic*
                   intro to Novell
BKMSUNCM RVW  4464 "Mastering UNIX Serial Communications", Gofton - good, but
                   very brief, intro to serial comm and some UNIX programs
BKNTINTG RVW  1458 "Network Interface Technical Guide" - lists important data
                   for any and all network cards, invaluable for LAN admins
BKOPSYNT RVW  3366 "Open Systems Networking", Piscitello/Chapin - Solid
                   management and technical review of the "hot topic"
BKPCVIRS RVW  6620 "PC Viruses: Detection, Analysis and Cure", Solomon - very
                   accurate, slightly dated, somewhat demanding technically
BKPICKGD RVW  2333 "A Guide to the Pick System", Dale Dougherty - like it says,
                   intro
BKPRTCOM RVW  4160 "Portable Communications", Banks - very little portable, but
                   some reasonable communications background
BKPRUNSC RVW  3705 "Practical UNIX Security", Garfinkel and Spafford - very
                   practical, very secure, very UNIX (SEC932)
BKPTHWRK RVW  1992 "The Complete Guide to Pathworks", Spencer - DOS and VMS
                   only, but a reasonably good overview
BKRDDBSC RVW  3796 "Research Directions in Database Security", Lunt (ed.) -
                   rather generic, but a good intro to the various problems in
                   a very complex area
BKSCNCMP RVW  2839 "Security in Computing", Pfleeger - reasonable textbook, but
                   some shortcomings
BKSGTCVR RVW  6052 "Survivor's Guide to Computer Viruses" - relatively good,
                   but disappointing coming from the Virus Bulletin
BKSHKWAV RVW  2582 "Shockwave Rider", John Brunner - fiction, "tapeworm" is a
                   minor but important aspect of the plot
BKSMILEY RVW  2704 "Smileys", David W. Sanderson/Dale Dougherty, 1993 - short,
                   mostly listing, some discussion (COM931)
BKSMLDCT RVW  1444 "The Smiley Dictionary", Seth Godin - not as complete as
                   Sanderson and Dougherty, but nicer format
BKSNDMAL.RVW  3201 "sendmail", Costales/Allman/Rickert - complete overview and
                   reference on sendmail
BKSYSLAW RVW  3685 "Syslaw", Rose/Wallace, 1992 - legal aspects of BBSes and
                   online systems (COM932) (SEC932)
BKTCHDCM RVW  4029 "Technical Aspects of Data Communications", McNamara - an
                   intro to data comm course between covers
BKTERMCP RVW  3666 "termcap and terminfo", Strang/Mui/O'Reilly - good overview
                   and tutorial
BKTRMCMP RVW 12846 "Terminal Compromise", Schwartau - fiction, some good
                   security ideas buried in a lot of bad writing
BKUNICOD RVW  4962 "The Unicode Standard" - just like it says
BKUMASSC RVW  4709 "Using McAfee Associates Software for Safe Computing",
                   Jacobsen - printed docs for SCAN et al
BKUMSKMT RVW  5143 "Using MS-DOS Kermit", Gianone - excellent documentation for
                   MS-Kermit, excellent overview of terminal emulation and file
                   transfer in general
BKUPOS   RVW  4625 Unix, Posix, and Open Systems, Quarterman/Wilhelm - good
                   intro to one of the current "buzz phrases"
BKUSUUCP RVW  1548 "Using UUCP and Usenet", Todino/Dougherty - short
BKWNPROG RVW  2471 "Windows Network Programming", Ralph Davis - good
                   programming reference

MVSNEAKR RVW  4726 "Sneakers", Universal Pictures - fictional, but reasonably
                   good portrayal of a "tiger team"

Publishers or authors wishing to have their books reviewed and added
to the list should have copies sent to Rob Slade at 3118 Baird Road,
North Vancouver, BC, Canada, V7K 2G6.  Please note that all shipments
from outside of Canada should state very clearly that the material is
for evaluation and has no commercial value.  In addition, it is
advisable to declare a media cost of $1 per disk and an "intellectual
property" value of $1 per item such that the total does not exceed
$15.  Rob Slade does not take any responsibility for shipments delayed
or refused at Customs for failure to follow these directions.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993   REVIEW.LST   931114
Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of the TELECOM
Digest and affiliated newgroups/mailing lists.

DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters
Editor and/or reviewer [e-mail], [e-mail], Rob Slade at 1:153/733
DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hiro Sugawara)
Subject: Fax Machine as Scanner?
Organization: Lynx Real-Time Systems, Inc., Los Gatos, CA
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 22:20:01 GMT


Does anyone know a good way to use a fax machine as a scanner to send
image data to a fax modem through a local connection? I would be very
possible and easy if I had two telephone lines, but I do not.

I use a Mac IISi and a LineLink modem with MaxFax.

Here are what I have done so far:

1. FaxScanner

I bought a device called FaxScanner from a small Florida company for
some $70. They sent me a sub-cigarette box size device with a 9V
battery and a "BitFax" program. I followed the instruction and
installl BitFax with MaxFax termporarily removed. My fax machine
transferred image to BitFax successfully.

Here are the problems with this:

- BitFax is *very* slow handling image data.
- BitFax's user interface is much poorer than other fax programs I have
  used (MaxFax and GlobalFax), so I don't want to use BitFax as my resident
  fax program.
- Believe or not, this configuration transferred image *without* the black
  hardware device. It's a kind of scam! I didn't need to buy it!

Another company in San Diego is selling a similar product called
FaxScan for some $100. I would recommend keeping away from these.

2. MaxFax

Having discovered that the black box is unnecessary, I tried to make
MaxFax do the same thing, manual transmission from the fax machine and
manual receiption to MaxFax, but no success. MaxFax somehow recognizes
the fax machine and fax machine displays MaxFax's station ID, but the
negotiation eventually fails and no data is transferred.

Listening to the negotiation signals carefully, I noticed that MaxFax
makes different tones from what it makes when it answers to regular
incoming calls with ringing. So, I think if there's any way to
simulate ringing, MaxFax can make it. I checked with some telephony
books and found that the central office uses 90Vrms ringing signal and
ringing has to be removed within 200ms after detection of an off-hook.

Does anyone know more about this or any *cheap* commercial product?


[e-mail]

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

From: oilean![e-mail] (Brad Walker)
Subject: V.35 to RS-232 Conversions
Organization: Island Software
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 08:44:12 GMT


I'm curious to know where to look for information on the v.35 spec.
In addition I'm curious to know if anyone has done v.35 to rs-232
conversions.

I've done several device drivers for SBus serial cards that had the
capability to do up to 256Kb/port. And I noticed that on most datacom
equipment like routers they have a v.35 connection that hooks into a
CSU port. What I would like to do is build a Point to Point link using
Cisco routers. But, would like to plug the Cisco directly into my SBus
board. The only problem is that the Cisco speaks v.35 and the SBus
board speaks rs-232. Hence my question.

Thanks for any and all info.


brad w.

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

From: oilean![e-mail] (Brad Walker)
Subject: Questions About CSU/DSU Link Speeds
Organization: Island Software
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 08:36:58 GMT


I'm curious to know if you can concatenate two 56Kb links from a local
service provider to get 128Kb through put. What I'm interested in is
what is the next increment up from 56Kb. Is it fractional T1 or what?
And if it is fractional T1 then what kind of CSU/DSU does one need.


Thanks,

brad w.

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

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 02:12:13 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Notice to AT&T Customnet & Pro Wats Customers
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


December 25, {New York Times}, Page A23

NOTICE TO AT&T CUSTOMNET[TM] AND AT&T PRO(R) WATS SERVICE CUSTOMERS

   A tariff was filed with the Federal Communications Commission on
December 21, 1993, pursuant to which AT&T will substantially
restructure the AT&T CustomNet[TM] Service Type 2 rate schedule for
direct dialed international calls from locations on the United States
mainland and Hawaii.  As part of the restructure, rates will be
divided into two rate periods, called "Standard" and "Economy".  Also,
the timing interval for additional periods will be reduced from six
seconds to one second.  Based on existing calling patterns, CustomNet
Service Type 2 users will experience rate changes ranging from a 39%
decrease to a 34% increase.  On average, these changes will result in
a 3.1% decrease across all such users.

   In addition, AT&T filed tariff changes that reduced the timing
interval for additional periods on domestic AT&T CustomNet Service
calls from six seconds to one second, and increased usage rates for
such service by 1%.  Further, AT&T increased PRO(R) WATS schedule (b)
usage rates by 1%.  AT&T CustomNet Service and PRO WATS schedule (b)
will also be simplifying the rate periods on domestic calls to
peak/off-peak periods.  The latter change will have no effect on
rates.

   The tariff changes are scheduled to become effective January 4,
1994.  For information on International Services contact an International
Sales Representative at 1 800 222-0900.  For information on Domestic
Services contact a Domestic Sales Representative at 1 800 222-0400.

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

From: [e-mail] (George Goble)
Subject: Indiana NPA 317 Dialing Change Breaks Many COCOTS
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 13:39:47 GMT


Nov 1, GTE (Lafayette, IN), and Indiana Bell (Indianapolis) announced,
that Dec 1 all non-local area calls in NPA 317 (i.e 1+ and I assume 0+
) would be REQUIRED to include the NPA.  The reason stated was the
shortage of NPAs and this change would free some up.

Prior to November 1, many 1 + NPA + NXX + YYYY reached an intercept
saying "not necessary to dial the NPA".  1 + NPA + ... (where NPA
wasn't needed) has caused all sorts of various behaviors over the last
20 years.  After November 1, 1 + NPA dialing would work, with mandatory
being 12/1/93.

On 12/1/93, 1 + NXX + YYYY still worked, but sometime around the
middle of December 1 + NXX + YYYY just started getting a fast busy,
but no message.  My Cellular ONE phone, still works for 1 + NXX
dialing (switch based in Indy).

This change appears to have broken piles of software in PBXs,
Voicemail outcalls, etc, etc, and most importantly COCOTS!

I have seen numerous signs on COCOTS in the Lafayette Area "Long
distance does not work".  I know one of the business owners, the Levee
Coin OP Laundry.  I have been lecturing him for years on the Evils of
COCOTS/AOS's and gave him telecom printouts.  Now their COCOT/AOS
SCREWED them. The provider wants a whole bunch of money, and a
signed new contract (via mail, you know over XMAS), before they will
think about reprogramming the phone. I think they have been down
approximatly two weeks.

My Cellular One voice mail has pager outcall.  THe Voice mail switch
is in Indy, my pager in Lafayette, not in "local area", but both in
NPA 317.  When setting up my voicemail to pager outcall in the past
(about a year ago) I set it to 1-317-423-YYYY, but it did not work.
Their switch/software/routing ONLY would work if set to 1-423-YYYY.  I
remembered that, and told Cellular one around Dec 1. They didn't do
anything and around December 7 it all quit, but the voice mail would
not accept 1-317- ... All pagers were broke for approximatly two weeks
before they got somebody to reprogram things to take 1+317+NXX+ ...

I would imagine that there are tons of PBXs, which try "least cost"
routing, etc, which are totally hosed by this change.  The public only
had 30 days notice.  Has this sort of thing happened in recent times
before without major havoc?  This all coincides with the holidays,
with many of the important players on vacation.


ghg

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

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 14:48:53 +0100
From: Xavier Garcia <[e-mail]>
Subject: ATM and Multimedia
Organization: EPFL


Does anyone know how can I contact the Multimedia Forum or tell me
what are they working on (e.g video compression standards AAL2
definition.)?


Thanks,

Xavier Garcia                          research engineer

          Telecommunications laboratory
Swiss federal Institute of technology, Lausanne
           1015 Lausanne Switzerland

Internet: [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]    Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Donald Army)
Subject: ATM News Groups Wanted
Date: 25 Dec 1993 15:41:48 GMT
Organization: Symantec Corporation


Are there any news groups on ATM??

Thanks,

[e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 09:07:57 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mike D. Schomburg)
Subject: ISDN Clarification


Concerning Mike Lanza's remarks about ISDN on 12-22-93, it should be
noted that the 2B+D spec is the Basic Rate Interface, or BRI. The
Primary Rate Interface, or PRI, contains 23B+D, and fits within a
conventional T-1 bit stream. While the BRI and PRI are commonly lumped
together as narrowband ISDN, they play very different roles in the
network. PRIs are becoming quite common as high (relatively) capacity
delivery vehicles from IXCs to customer premises, with at least two
advantages over vanila T-1. The call control is message-oriented --
over the D channel -- and caller ID is delivered over the D channel,
making it much easier to manipulate.

The purpose of the BRI is to bridge the analog gap between the
customer premise and the (virtually) all-digital LEC-IXC network. ISDN
specs define the B and D channels generically, meaning there is no
arbitrary constraint on the use of the channels. Either or both B
channels (64kbps) can be used for voice or data (but Mike is correct
that there is no advantage to digital voice). Particular LECs may
choose to offer only one B channel, or any combination of the
possibilities.

One last point -- personal computer cards are available that provide
64kbps connectivity for the computer, and also have an RJ-11 jack for
your plain old phone. You do not necessarily have to junk your phones.
My appologies if this is redundant.


Opinions expressed are my own and are not to be confused with my employer's.

Mike D. Schomburg         [e-mail]
Lincoln Telephone Co.    402 476 5351

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #837
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26843;
          26 Dec 93 0:53 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03989
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sat, 25 Dec 1993 21:34:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12447
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 25 Dec 1993 21:34:02 -0600
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 21:34:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #838

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 25 Dec 93 21:34:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 838

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Another Prepaid Calling Card (John R. Levine)
    Area Codes 'n' Public Acceptance (David A. Kaye)
    Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ ([e-mail])
    Calling a PBX and Billing (Richard Cox)
    Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (John R. Levine)
    Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Mike Lanza)
    Re: Info Highway: 21 Companies Don't Announce (Yechezkal-Shimon Gutfreund)
    Re: Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere? (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere? (Mark Edwards)
    Re: NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity (William (Bill) Brownlow)
    Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Robert Virzi)
    Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Jon Sreekanth)
    Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (David A. Kaye)
    Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters (Carl Moore)
    Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters (David A. Kaye)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Another Prepaid Calling Card
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 20:30:11 EST


The current {Consumer Reports Travel Letter} mentions the Liberty Card
from Quest Telecommunications.  It works much like the Orange Card:
you dial an 800 number, punch in your account number, then the number
to call.  Rates are 33 cents/min within the US, 69 cents to Canada,
higher to other countries.  Like the Orange Card, it's quite
competitive for short calls from payphones, less so for longer calls
where the lower per-minute rate for conventional calling cards
dominates.

They're for sale direct from Quest at 800-277-7682, charged to a major
credit card.  They're also supposed to be for sale over the counter at
campus-area retailers, and I've seen them at a truck stop.  When the
card runs low, you can recharge it over the phone, again charged to a
major credit card.

I've also seen prepaid Sprint cards at convenience stores.  Their
per-minute rate depends on what size card you get (the higher value
ones get you more minutes per dollar) but also seem to be in the range
of 33 cents/min.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: Area Codes 'n' Public Acceptance
Date: 25 Dec 1993 17:53:03 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [login: guest]


Jon Kimbrough ([e-mail]) wrote:

> my experience that the average Joe doesn't have any idea that area
> codes can only be made up of certain limited combinations of numbers
> and isn't likely to think twice about dialing 520 or 330 as an area
> code.

When the SF Bay Area was divided again for the 510 area code I
remember people saying "What does 510 mean?"  They didn't quite grasp
the area code thing.  When I see number like 415-206-9999 it even gets
confusing for me.  I'm always reluctant to dial that kind of number
because it looks like I'm calling Seattle.  And to think they could
have just solved it by adding an extra digit to the phone numbers
thereby increasing capacity ten-fold.  Sheesh.

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

From: [e-mail] (Badari)
Subject: Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ - Ten Years Hence
Date: 25 Dec 1993 18:26:24 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University.


Howdy,

    It is ten years since Ma Bell was dismantled. Lots of talk now
about how this has helped the Telephone Industry and the consumers.
While I know sketchy details about the creation of baby Bells, I'd
like to know, in detail, what lead to the divestiture in the first
place and how this has affected the organisation of AT&T, its effects
on the Telco industry as a whole. I request folks out there to please
let me know either by posting on this group or via personal mail.

    I'd appreciate any references (books,articles) that talk about
the same.

    Happy holidays,

    Badari

PS: I have read the December, 1993 issue of {IEEE Commns Mag} - Special
report on Divestiture.


[Moderator's Note: You might also want to check out back issues of this
Digest you are reading now. TELECOM Digest published a number of articles
during 1983 and 1984 on divestiture and the pros/cons of same. What I
may do to wind up this year or start out 1994 here is reprint some of
those articles. A feature I used to do occassionally was called "Ten
Years Ago in the Digest" and perhaps a few readers would enjoy some of
the comments from the readers who were on our list back then during the
final days of the old Bell System and the first few days of the 'new
way' of doing things.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Cox)
Subject: Calling a PBX and Billing
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 00:58:38 GMT


[e-mail] (Andrew Klossner) wrote:

>>  Our AT&T Definity system supervises an incoming call immediately.

This is bad news.  The Definity switches that AT&T are trying to sell
over here, also supervise before the call is actually answered.  I had
to explain to their Sales reps recently, that this was the reason when
selecting a PABX for a client, that we didn't buy from AT&T.  Sadly,
he still didn't seem to understand.  In a competitive market, the
supplier who meets the needs of the customer is the one who will get
the orders.

Of course, I so accept that the fact that AT&T is a major LD carrier
in the USA (and may be one here, before long) has nothing to do with
this policy!


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail address: [e-mail] - PGP2.3 public key available on request

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

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 20:21 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> What we really need is a new packet-switched network [with faster dialups]
 ...
> In addition, the market is crying out for ubiquitous one-number access, ...

Technically, there's nothing standing in the way of 14.4K dialups.
Sprintnet has evolved into Sprintlink, a fast multiprotocol net, and
is one of the larger pieces of the Internet.  They certainly have the
bandwidth and the technology.  As mentioned elsewhere, 950 access is
easy enough, but you have to pay the same rates to the local telco as
any other 950 user, about $3/hr, and few data users want that.

So I have to believe is that the reason that Sprintnet et al. don't
have faster dialups is because there's not much of a market for them.
The primary use of packet dialups these days is to access commercial
on-line services.  (I occasionally call the OAG that way.)  The
typical pattern of use is that the user types a command or two, the
system sends back a screen, the user pages from screen to screen until
done.  The difference between repainting a screen at 2400 bps and at
9600 bps is noticable, but hardly compelling since even at 2400 it's
much faster than you can read.  9600 bps modems are cheaper than they
used to be, but they're still four times as much as 2400 bps modems,
so 9600 bps will cost more.  I wouldn't pay extra for OAG at 9600, I
doubt if many others would, either.

The main advantage of 9600 and up is for bulk data transfer, uploading,
downloading, mountains of fidonet or usenet news, stuff like that, and
dialup packet nets are a lousy technology for that.  With the delays
in packet nets and the ten cent/min nighttime long distance rates that
are common, one might as well dial direct and use the full modem
throughput.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 20:28:14
From: Mike Lanza <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos


John Levine writes:

> So I have to believe is that the reason that Sprintnet et al. don't have
> faster dialups is because there's not much of a market for them.  The
> primary use of packet dialups these days is to access commercial on-line
> services.  (I occasionally call the OAG that way.)  The typical pattern of
> use is that the user types a command or two, the system sends back a
> screen, the user pages from screen to screen until done.  The difference
> between repainting a screen at 2400 bps and at 9600 bps is noticable, but
> hardly compelling since even at 2400 it's much faster than you can read.
> 9600 bps modems are cheaper than they used to be, but they're still four
> times as much as 2400 bps modems, so 9600 bps will cost more.  I wouldn't
> pay extra for OAG at 9600, I doubt if many others would, either.

The description above assumes an old online service model -- basically
command-line and interactive.  Three new factors are enabling new
online service models which can actually exploit bandwidth greater
than 2400 bps:

1) High speed modems have become very inexpensive, and thus they have
come into wide use.  I've looked at the distribution of modem sales by
speed, as well as the distribution of installed base.  Over 50% of all
sales of modems are currently high speed, and this percentage is
constantly increasing.  The installed base of high speed modems will
approach 50% of all modems in the not too distant future (a year or
two).

2) Graphical user interfaces have become the norm on PCs and
workstations.  Online services with command line interfaces look
pretty darned stupid on machines with GUIs.  Most online services have
realized this and are becoming graphical.  (I'm sure Delphi realizes
this and is working to change things.  If it doesn't, ol' Rupert might
be looking real foolish before too long.)  In a couple of years we'll
be amazed that we ever put up with command-line interfaces to online
services.

3) Due to tremendous price drops in mips, a startup can get an online
service off the ground with less than $20K in equipment costs (perhaps
even less).  Thus, it is economically feasible to start an online
service whose content is focused rather narrowly, relative to most of
today's online services (e.g. Prodigy, CompuServe, AOL, Delphi, Dow
Jones News Retrieval etc.).  Because of this focus, the user interface
to these services can be so easy that the user interaction needed to
use it is minimal.  At the extreme, no user interaction is needed at
all -- the service's sessions consist completely of automated (i.e.
programmatic) transactions between a client application (on the
customer's machine) and the server application (on the online
service's machine).

An example of a service such as this is Reality Technology's Smart
Investor Network.  Users of Reality's investment management
application, Wealth Builder, instruct their computer to run a session
with the Smart Investor Network, and then Wealth Builder completely
takes over.  A couple of minutes later, the user has current security
prices for the securities in his portfolio, some relevant analysts
reports, and some news articles.

> dialup packet nets are a lousy technology for that.  With the delays in
> packet nets and the 10 cent/min nighttime long distance rates that are
> common, one might as well dial direct and use the full modem throughput.

Not everyone can wait until nighttime.  Think about business users!
Daytime long distance rates are 20 to 25 cents per minute.

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

From: [e-mail] (Yechezkal-Shimon Gutfreund)
Subject: Re: Info Highway: 21 Companies Don't Announce
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Inc.
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 15:40:34 GMT


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

> An article that ran in the 13 December {Wall Street Journal} said that
> 28 companies were to about to announce their support for the Info
> Super Highway.  We know that IBM, Apple, BellSouth, AT&T, CitiCorp,
> H-P, and Cable Labs were to take part in the announcement, but the
> other shoe hasn't dropped yet.

> Does anyone know the names of the 21 other companies that are/were
> going to take part in this PR fest? Or when/if this announcement will
> be made?

Most of this stuff is viewed as way to sell current services and
hardware. That is, Telcos, etc. announce that they already have the
NII in place, and you can buy the stuff from them today. They view
things like NII as a marketing ploy and are glad the administration is
helping with the advertizing.

Sorry, to say this, but that is the way a lot of the entrenched
beauracracy sees things. Come the revolution, things will be different :-).


Yechezkal-Shimon Gutfreund                [e-mail] [MIME]
GTE Laboratories, Waltham MA        http://www.gte.com/circus/home/home.html

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere?
Date: 25 Dec 1993 21:23:00 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Vamsee
Lakamsani) writes:

> It is very convenient to have the yellow pages accessible on-line.  Do
> any US cities have this facility? Is there any reason not to make
> yellow pages accessible on-line?

Yes, yellow pages are online.  Just telnet to Compu$erve and log in,
then type GO YEL-4.



Carl Oppedahl AA2KW    Oppedahl & Larson (patent lawyers)
Yorktown Heights, NY   voice 212-777-1330


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However Carl, it should be mentioned
that one does not routinely 'telnet to Compuserve'. It *can* be done
through a couple of somewhat obscure connections not to widely
publicized -- but discussed here in the past -- and in any event the
login at CIS is subject to normal customer requirements and billing.
In other words, it is not your traditional 'ftp and use/get it for free'
arrangments so common om the net. It is, as you point out available on
Compuserve if one is a member there and willing to pay for it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
Subject: Re: Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere?
Date: 25 Dec 1993 13:32:42 -0500
Organization: General Videotex Corporation


[e-mail] (Vamsee Lakamsani) writes:

> It is very convenient to have the yellow pages accessible on-line.  Do
> any US cities have this facility? Is there any reason not to make
> yellow pages accessible on-line?


Well, the AT&T Yellow Pages are online at CompuServe -- not free,
but availible ...


Mark Edwards

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

From: [e-mail] (William Brownlow)
Subject: Re: NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity
Date: 25 Dec 1993 15:54:36 GMT
Organization: U. S. Bureau of Mines


Will Martin ([e-mail]) wrote:

> When I make an outside-line call on our NEC NEAX 2400 system here at
> work (dialing 9 and then the local seven-digit number), the system has
> the annoying habit of giving me a ring-sound (in the handset or the
> speaker, depending which is turned on) and then a click that sounds
> *exactly* like the far end picking up on the call. However, it is not
>  -- the ring sounds then continue until the called party answers or I
> hang up. What is going on that causes this initial ring-tone that I
> hear followed by that click? Is it the process of the unit selecting
> an outside trunk? If so, why does it give me a ring first?

It has been a few years since I worked on a NEAX 2400, but it is
beginning to sound as if you have a hardware problem in the switch.
Your instrument is connected to a particular line card in the switch
which may have an option set wrong, or be improperly configured in the
switch's software.  Have you reported the problem to your local
(in-house) telephone people?

> Can anyone tell me just what is going on when I call out? When I dial
> the initial "9", am I handed off to a telco trunk then, or does the
> NEC just suck up all my dialled digits and only emit them to the telco
> switch after I finish? Or am I "talking" to the telco switch right
> after I dial the initial 9? I suspect the NEC waits until it detects a
> complete and valid-by-its-standards number before it passes it to the
> telco. That makes detecting and forbidding 976- and 900- calls easy.

> If the NEC holds the numbers and then passes them on later, how fast
> can it do this? Are the trunks it has to the telco higher-speed or
> special lines, or the same as any generic business-type phone line?
> Does it spit out DTMF at some far-higher-than-normal speed, or try to
> emulate human-dialling speed? (It would seem there isn't all that much
> time between the end of my dialling and that magical click ...)

The NEC buffers the digits until it detects the end of your dialing.
It uses the digits you input to determine the path it should take out
of the switch (least cost routing and call blocking).  The system
dials the digits you hit, after stripping your access codes, in less
than one second.  After dialing the digits, your internal trunk is
"cut over" to the CO trunk, this may be the 'click' that you are
hearing.  The telco trunks are not special in that they are high
speed, DTMF signaling only needs around 100 msec of tone, but they may
be special in the type of electrical handshaking they do with the PBX.

In reviewing this, two other possibilities creep to mind.  Is the
telephone you are using one provided by NEC, or is it a third party
phone?  The second is that you may be experiencing a polarity reversal
on one of the lines which is not guarded.  (You could have had your
extension wired with tip/ring reversed or a miswired cord between the
phone jack and your phone.)  If the phone is not a NEC, have a
technician measure your on-hook voltage at the phone.  If it is higher
than a nominal 48v, have them turn off the message waiting lamp from
the console and then disable it through software.


William Brownlow, Senior Telecommunications Analyst   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Virzi)
Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham, MA
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 15:24:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, <fico!fico0![e-mail]>
wrote:

> Someone in our firm is currently experiencing a "different" problem
> with our voice mail system.  She will be leaving a message in
> someone's voice mailbox and the system will interrupt her, saying "To
> Send this Message, Press..."- as if she had punched a key, but she
> hadn't.  The problem has been re-occurring.

> Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens
> when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones
> generated by the keypad.  The system interprets the voice as a key
> being punched.

This problem is not at all uncommon, and it is true that it is more
problematic for some people than it is for others.  I'll bet that this
woman has a particularly clean voice, by which I mean it sounds
"musical."

BTW -- I have heard this refered to as "Talk off," not "Prompt
interruption."

Anyway, many systems have a parameter or two that can be tuned to help
avoid this situation.  I think you want to look for a parameter that
controls how long DTMF must be present before a signal is considered
valid.  Lengthen this by, say, 20 milliseconds, if it is really a big
problem.  Of course, this will mean you miss some valid keypresses
(one's that are too quick).  It is basically a signal detection
problem and you can reduce the number of false positives if you are
willing to accept a higher number of incorrect rejections.

On the other hand, if it is just one user on a many person system, you
may not want to inconvenience everyone else by slowing down the
system.  So, how high up the ladder is she, anyway?


Bob

[e-mail]   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth)
Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 20:30:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu (Chris Ambler - Fubar) writes:

> fico!fico0![e-mail] says:

>> Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens
>> when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones
>> generated by the keypad.  The system interprets the voice as a key
>> being punched.

> Actually, I design voice mail systems, and so I'm intimately familliar
> with this problem. The solution I have found works best is to increase
> the touch tone(tm) threshold, if you can. Most systems include a way
> to force the hardware to wait longer before registering the tone.
> Since a human voice will waver quite a bit (relative to the steady
> tone of a phone), this usually does the trick. If your hardware

Might this run into problems with phones like many AT&T models, which
generate a fairly short (50ms ?) burst of dtmf when a key is pressed,
instead of sending dtmf continuously as long as the key is held down?
What threshold time have you found works best?


Jon Sreekanth

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

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts
Date: 25 Dec 1993 17:59:46 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [login: guest]


fico!fico0![e-mail] wrote:

> Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens
> when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones
> generated by the keypad.  The system interprets the voice as a key
> being punched.

> This seems odd, but I have HEARD of it on other systems.  Has this

Yes.  Octel has had problems with it, so has Centigram in both its
Voice Memo and Memo II systems.  Seems to happen only with women's
voices.  Another problem may be the talk threshold may be set too low
 -- many women speak in quieter voices than men do.  I don't know much
about the tone processing technology, but it seems a little primative
 -- on both companies' products the response is very quick for touch
tones, meaning that the accident rate will also be a little higher.

STEVE BAUER ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 2.  Hold the phone a little further away from her lips.  This might
> reduce the offending frequency so it won't trigger things.

I always recommend people to speak slower and closer to the phone, not
further away.  A couple reasons -- the slowness does enhance the lower
tones as you said, but phone mouthpieces are designed to be used
closely.  Get too far away and it's just too hard to hear the person.
Also, the silence sensor tends to kick in.

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

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 9:53:17 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters


Bishop Ranch is not even a postal name, nor does anything appear in
old notes for the 415 area (long before the 510 splitoff).  Was it
broken out of some other exchange's service area?  Mailing address for
Bishop Ranch should have a zipcode of the form 945xx.

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

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 12:27:44 PST
From: David A. Kaye <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters


Carl Moore wrote in the previous message:

> Bishop Ranch is not even a postal name, nor does anything appear in
> old notes for the 415 area (long before the 510 splitoff).  Was it
> broken out of some other exchange's service area?  Mailing address
> for Bishop Ranch should have a zipcode of the form 945xx.

Nope.  Bishop Ranch is totally synthetic and did not come out of any
other exchange.  It is in San Ramon.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #838
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa03987;
          27 Dec 93 6:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16545
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Mon, 27 Dec 1993 02:51:09 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22859
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 27 Dec 1993 02:50:42 -0600
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 02:50:42 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #839

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 27 Dec 93 02:50:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 839

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Phil D. Howard)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (John R. Levine)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Dennis G. Rears)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Caller ID in Software? (Phil D. Howard)
    Re: Caller ID in Software? (Ralph Becker)
    Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (David Devereaux-Weber)
    Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (Michael Hui)
    Re: Calling a PBX and Billing (Macy Hallock)
    Re: Calling Card Databases (Lee Sweet)
    Re: 911 Changes in Toronto (Robb Topolski)
    Re: 911 Changes in Toronto; Auto-Dial Alarm Devices (Greg Abbott)
    Re: TDD Software Wanted (Steve Peltz)
    Re: Modem Monitoring Question (David A. Kaye)
    Re: How Are Telephone Cal (Chris Farrar)
    Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Dave Levenson)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

From: [e-mail] (P D H)
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 16:17:26 GMT


[e-mail] (Erik Berg) writes:

> Problem is, my wife works with DCFS, a government agency that looks

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Caller-ID and Auto Callback information
> are both passed to the called-party's central office and there is no
> real way to avoid having that information available if making a direct
> call to someone. You can do *67 to ask the CO not to give out your
> number but you can't defeat the call-return part of the process. There
> is a service which operates on a 900 number at a premium fee which
> allows you to call through it and out to wherever causing the called
> party to get no usable ID/return call information. Even that guy won't
> cover for you in the event of legal action against you, but for all
> intents and purposes, it provides an effective shield.  I think the
> number is 1-900-BLOCKER.   PAT]

One possible solution is a number to call in to DCFS to make outgoing
calls from.  Obviously you need to identify what number to make the
calls look like they come from in addition to an access code.  It
could be a lot of digits to dial, but you could stick the codes in a
memory that most phones now have these days.  I don't know if equipment
that could make calls look like they come from your extension is avail-
able.


Phil Howard, KA9WGN   <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 19:20 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


>> it seems to me that calls from someone representing the ...

>> I don't see why a home number needs to be made known for a business
>> call, as long as the business is identified.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I quite agree. An 'alternate ID message'
> should be provided for people in that category of employment who do
> some or all of their work from home.

Hey, that's a fine idea.  I do consulting work, some at clients'
offices, and it will be a pain when CL-ID arrives here because then
I'll no longer be able to call client B from client A's office without
telling B that I work for A.  Same problem for doctors who return
after-hours calls from home or friends' houses.  So can we please make
'alternate ID message' standard everywhere?

Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'd make 'alternate-ID' available on a
'need-to-have-it' basis where the applicant for the service had to
give specific, valid (from a list of a few) reasons for needing the
service. Permission for same would be renewed (or denied) annually, and
any defalcation, phreaking, failure to pay the bill when due, etc. would
be grounds for immediate removal of the privilege. The alternate message
would have to include some published, working phone number somewhere,
and the subscriber owning the number used as someone else's 'alternate'
would need to give permission as part of the annuual permit process.
For example, a police officer's phone might alternately identify as the
police department switchboard, ditto the social worker's phone might
identify as the agency's main number. The person (or company or agency)
allowing their number to be used as an alternate would sign off agreeing
to accept responsibility for the content of the transmissions made when
their ID was being used. In other words, 'improper' use of the phone via
your alternate (probably employer's) ID in order to deflect attention
away from yourself would be a serious matter if you got caught at it.
You'd lose the privilege of course, but you might lose your job as well
if your employer found out that *their phone service* had been jeopardized
by your behavior.  Fair enough?  I think it is a good compromise. A star
code (i.e. *63 or similar) would be prepended to the dialing string
meaning to use the alternate-ID for the call being presently made.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 14:48:49 EST
From: Dennis G. Rears <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?


> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
> edu (Jon Edelson) writes:

>> In the first message of this thread, a question was asked about
>> blocking Caller ID in a situation where a social worker was calling
>> from home.  Rather then getting into the whole 'right to Caller ID
>> discussion' it seems to me that calls from someone representing the
>> social agency should be identified as calling from the social agency.
>> The social agency is 'responsible' for the call, and while I think
>> that people have the right to know who 'made' a call, I don't see why
>> a home number needs to be made known for a business call, as long as
>> the business is identified.

> Sounds like a perfect application for DISA via the government agency's
> telephone system to me.  > >

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I quite agree. An 'alternate ID message'
> should be provided for people in that category of employment who do
> some or all of their work from home.  That should resolve many of the
> complaints about privacy we hear now.   PAT]

  No.  Caller-ID should be the number of the phone that called you.
If you start allowing an 'alternate ID message' you start preverting
the idea of Caller-ID to where it is worthless.


dennis


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I personally would opt to have it the
way you suggest, Dennis. I have no patience for example with attornies
who insist on getting my home number while refusing to give theirs to
me. Whenever an attorney asks for my home number, my immediate response
is to ask for his. When he says he does not give it out and that he
takes calls at his office, my response is I do the same.  Touche, and
all that. For that matter, attornies have had Caller-ID for years, long
before telco invented it; they use their secretaries to find out who
is calling and screen out the calls they don't want / are afraid to
deal with. So now the rest of us have Caller-ID as well. My heart is
really bleeding. But as a compromise to the many fine people who really
are in a bind as a result of working at home, etc, I would make the
'alternate-ID' service a tariffed, but relatively restricted offering. PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 06:56:35 EST
Organization: Harry's Place BBS - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


I think that supposedly intelligent people (doctors, lawyers, social
workers, and their employers) should find their OWN solution to that
issue and not burden the public-switched-telephone-network, and the
rest of us, with their problems.  If an employee has a legitimate need
to routinely make telephone calls from their residences for their
employer, the employer should provide a phone line for their exclusive
use.  The City of New York has done that for certain Mayoral employees
for years.


[e-mail]  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place BBS (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (P D H)
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 15:46:21 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The cheapest and most effecient way is
> to purchase a Caller-ID Display box from telco or some other supplier
> of same. Seriously. Don't bother re-inventing the whole process. In
> addition, there are modems which display Caller-ID messages in the
> process of otherwise doing their thing.  PAT]

I take it that a lot of people are interested in which modems do
include the hardware feature and have cooresponding firmware to deal
with it.  I would suspect one reasonable way to deal with it is when
the "RING" message comes from the modem, the second one can include
the caller-id info.  Then your host software can choose to do with it
as it wants.


Phil Howard, KA9WGN      <[e-mail]>


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, the 'RING(ING)' message on
the screen is not synchronized with the incoming ring very much. On
my modem it runs a second or two late so probably the message could
be delayed long enough to pick up the data which is always sent at
the very instant the first ring finishes, and it could come with the
first RING announcement.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 11:48:44 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ralph Becker)
From: [e-mail] (Ralph Becker)
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software?


> Are there any tools that do Caller ID in software? I really do not
> want to buy a box when I have all these nice computers sitting here
> ready to do some work for me.

I think the question here is "Is there any software out there that
will exploit the existing Caller ID capability of my modem and make it
act like one of the add-on Caller ID boxes that are available?".  This
is a good question.  I also have such a modem, and I've been looking
for a utility like this ever since I got Caller ID (New England
Telephone calls it PhoneSmart).  It would be even better if it had an
automatic logging capability.  Anyone seen something like this?

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

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 10:48:14 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs)


In Quantum Economics (TELECOM Digest V13 #834), Kriston J. Rehberg
writes:

> ...Why NYNEX isn't replacing its ancient copper street pole wire with fiber
> optics TODAY is beyond me...

NYNEX is still regulated.  The state Public Utilities Commission must
approve all capital projects, and if there is functional copper in
place, the regulatory paradigm says that replacement would add
unnecessary cost to the ratepayers.  It is likely that NYNEX can see
the handwriting on the wall but is working with regulatory
constraints.

If telecom regulation were to be totally removed, it is likely that
there would problems with providing service to low revenue and low
density subscribers.  The problem we all face is how to let the
regulated companies move into new technology without loosing service
to some market segments.


David Devereaux-Weber, P.E.             [e-mail] (Internet)
The University of Wisconsin - Madison   [phone] (voice)
DoIT - MACC Communications; B263        [phone] (FAX)
1210 W Dayton St.                       Madison, WI 53706

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

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 15:24:00 +0000
From: michael (m.m.y.) hui <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs)


500 channels is only overwhelming when you do not have an efficient
means to find out what you want to watch, and when it's on. Given that
many channels, you would need a nice database, possibly downloaded
into your home computer via the same cable that feeds digital
compressed video into your set top converter. Then, some powerful and
at the same time easy to use database program will let you efficiently
find what you want to watch, schedule everything, including
programming your VCR automatically to tape those shows you can't watch
in real time, and your week will be all set.

The only debate right now concerns where the database software will
run. One school thinks that the set top box should run everything,
hence it'll at least have to be a moderately powerful computer. That's
an expensive, but ultimately the best solution. The stop gap solution
is to require that you have a popular brand of personal computer
available at home, which you then run the program supplied to you by
the cablevision company along with the supplied hardware connections.

Tastes always diverge, and always multiply. In order to cater to a
more diverse taste, you need more channels. How can you argue with
that?

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

From: fmsystm!fmsys![e-mail]
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 09:32 EST
Subject: Re: Calling a PBX and Billing
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: F M Systems/Telemax  Medina, Ohio USA


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

> Not necessarily.  Our AT&T Definity system supervises an incoming call
> immediately.  When asked why, our telecom support group mumbled
> something about compatiblity with our voice-mail provider.

This has affected the way we set up ACD groups.  At one time, we could
offer the initial "all agents are busy, please hold" message without
giving answer supervision, and be within the rules.  Now, we give
answer supervision on the first message and start paying for the calls
immediately.  This has induced clients to use automated attendants and
voice mail to route and answer calls more quickly.

Here's how things changed:

Several of the types and mfr PBX systems I work with have software
flags to control answer supervision on TIE, DID and CCSA trunks.

About two years ago two of the manufacturers came out with software
patches to disable control of answer supervision.  The effect of these
patches was to "hard code" supervision on answer or announcement.
Only ringback, busy tone and reorder tone now do not give answer
supervision on DID and CCSA trunks.

The field service bulletin that accompanied these patches stated that
the FCC had ruled that answer supervision must be provided if anything
other than a standard call progress tone was given to the incoming
trunk.  There is a provision for an intercept recorder, but it is very
strictly controlled.

Upon inquiry, I was told that AT&T had asked for this change in the
FCC CPE requirements due to fraud and revenue loss.  These changes are
now part of the FCC part 94 telephone equipment rules, and are
mandatory.  (Hmmm, I think thats the correct part number.)

Since I have heard this from two different manufacturers, in basically
the same words, I'm inclined to beleive it.  I haven't taken the time
to locate and reread the FCC paperwork.

Comments:

I know that AT&T modified their No. 4 ESS machines to give only one
way transmission on incoming calls until answer supervision in
response to toll fraud situations.  I also know of one site that
deliberatly set up part of their incoming T1 trunks not to give answer
supervision to avoid billing (they were using another IXC, not AT&T,
at the time).

When I installed my first T1 from an IXC directly into a customer PBX
some years ago, I experimented with answer supervision flags and
network behavior.  The IXC was giving me a complete transmission path,
regardless of the answer supervision I provided. This matched my
experiences in working with CO to CO trunking back when I worked for
the telephone co.  At the time, I figured someone would use this to
defraud an IXC at some point, and even wondered why ROLM could get
away with the way their auto-hold feature (or auto-camp on) worked.

BTW, I always set up my systems to operate the way I knew the network
was supposed to work.  Not only because I was honest, but because I
know that someday someone would be testing, notice the behavior and
turn down the trunks for service ... and I'd get the repair call from
a very unhappy customer.


Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG  +1.216.723.3030  [e-mail] [e-mail]
Telemax, Inc. - F M Systems, Inc. 152 Highland Drive  Medina, OH 44256 USA

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

From: decrsc![e-mail] (Lee Sweet)
Subject: Re: Calling Card Databases
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 13:01:42 EST


We recently had to have a local POTS line (for a modem, of all
things!) disconnected because, in the recent past (few years?),
someone had an AT&T Calling Card hooked to this number.  The number
appears to have been stolen/posted on Phreaker BBS/who knows what, and
we regularly got bills for hundreds of $ monthly for calls from/to
Peru (billed to the Calling Card).

Point is, C&P Telephone/AT&T LD both said that *nothing* could be done
to invalidate the number in whatever (international?) database it
lived on in as a valid Calling Card number.  What?!  There's no way to
have these things drop dead when the number is disconnected?!

Comments, anyone?

BTW, we finally said, the heck with it, killed the number, got a new
one, and all's fine.  Two positive notes.  AT&T *never* had a problem
crediting for the bogus calls, once the facts were explained, and C&P
swapped the line at no charge, also.

I still find the 'can't kill it' very hard to believe/understand!


Lee Sweet                        Internet *lists* - [e-mail]
Chief Systems Consultant        Internet *e-mail* - [e-mail]
Datatel, Inc.                               Phone - 703-968-4661
4375 Fair Lakes Court                         FAX - 703-968-4625
Fairfax, VA 22033                (Opinions are my own, and only my own!)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T/telco cannot directly control the
input into the database of the PTT's involved, but they can and do
regularly ask the PTT's to remove bad numbers. And, when they have
charged back enough of it to the PTT involved, the number usually gets
blacklisted, but when reaching directory assistance or an inward oper-
ator in certain third world countries takes fifteen minutes for that
function alone, you can imagine how speedy their business office
people operate.

Ever try to reach directory assistance or the operator in Nigeria when
they don't feel like responding (their lunch break or whatever)? And
when they do answer, they ask you five times how to spell the name of
the person you want, then they put the phone down to go away somewhere
to look up the number and come back in maybe five or ten minutes only
to give you a wrong number. That is unless someone else over there
does not walk past, see the phone laying there off hook and 'helpfully'
hang it up without asking if anyone is on the other end, forcing the
AT&T operator to dial back a second time and start it all from the
beginning.  How fast do you suppose they work on fraud stuff in their
'database', if you want to be generous and call it that?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robb Topolski)
Subject: Re: 911 Changes in Toronto
Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279, 714-539-0829)
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 21:08:34 GMT


Tony Harminc ([e-mail]) wrote:

> For these reasons, effective January 1, 1994, the Emergency Services
> of Metropolitan Toronto will not respond to, or act upon any alarm
> transmitted directly to the 9-1-1 system, from any auto-dial alarm
> device.

(Speaking for myself only, as a 911 operator)

It is a good policy.  One thing a 9-1-1 operator does not want is a
couple hundred constituents with these dialers -- ESPECIALLY during a
power failure, earthquake, or other source for false alarms.
Auto-alarm systems also have a tendency to rarely but occasionally
"run away" -- dial over and over and over despite the proper receipt
of the call.

The ones I have heard have a pre-recording that says by voice "There
is an emergency at 123 Elm."  We don't know if they need police, fire,
or paramedics.  Even if these devices got smart and actually relayed
some information, the false alarm thing would clog the 9-1-1 system in
the moments following a storm or power failure.

Here's what I would like: a "Help, I've fallen and can't get up" panic
button with two-way communication that dials 9-1-1 ... that absolutely
would not react to power failures/surges/fluxes or spurient RF.


Robert M. Topolski <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 13:34:24 CST
From: Greg Abbott <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: 911 Changes in Toronto; Auto-Dial Alarm Devices


> NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
> RE: 9-1-1, Auto-dial Alarm Devices

> In order to provide the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto with an
> effective, efficient emergency response service, the Metropolitan
> Toronto ambulance, fire and police service providers utilize the 9-1-1
> emergency telephone system.

[rest deleted]

Illinois State Statutes prohibit the connection of *any* type of
automatic dialer alarm/emergency dialer to dial a the 9-1-1 emergency
number.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Peltz)
Subject: Re: TDD Software Wanted
Date: 26 Dec 1993 20:58:24 GMT
Organization: CERL - University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign


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

> Mike, the phone company is right -- you can't get ASCII to Baudot
> (code used by TYs) communication by software alone.  You're going to
> need a hybrid ASCII/Baudot modem. There are several on the market,
> including the MIC300i, and they have a version for the Mac too.

Baudot is just a 5-bit code, right? Any synchronous-capable serial
chip can do that (such as a Mac). Is the modem encoding itself also
different, possibly different carrier frequencies or such? It can't be
just Baudot coding that causes the problem.

Why don't they start releasing dual-mode TDD machines, that can handle
ASCII and "standard" modem standards, and eventually phase out Baudot-
only machines?

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: Re: Modem Monitoring Question
Date: 26 Dec 1993 18:13:48 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [login: guest]


Mark Case ([e-mail]) wrote:

> location goes down.  The question is: how can the location be
> monitored so that it may be determined whether the problem is with the
> modem or with the transmitter?

Have some area of the transmitter's failure trip a dialer or an
answerback on the modem.  When I ran a voicemail company I set up
dialers with a bunch of relays in series detecting things such as
power outage, high temperature, etc.  If any relay in the series
opened up, the dialer would seize a trunk and dial out.  (I *am*
available for consultations.)

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified?
From: [e-mail] (Chris Farrar)
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 12:43:00 -0600
Organization: C-9 Communications


[e-mail].e said something along the lines of the
following:

> number, like first three digits are 510, so talk to PacBell, but what
> to do about people like ATT who are issuing calling cards but don't
> have local phone numbers? If there's a central clearing house, how big

Bell Canada will issue calling cards to businesses (or replacement
personal cards if yours is lost or stolen) with numbers that do not
match your actual phone number.  When I last had a 416 area code
number, my card was 416-234-XXXX-PPPP, when my wallet was stolen, the
new card that was issued to me was 476-176-0187-PPPP.

For my current calling card, with a 519 area code number, running the
card number through software (on a PC) that will tell if a Visa or
MasterCard number is valid, has the card number come back as being a
valid MasterCard, even though it is several digits too short to be a
MC.


Chris

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 01:43:56 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, fico!fico0![e-mail] writes:

> Someone in our firm is currently experiencing a "different" problem
> with our voice mail system.  She will be leaving a message in
> someone's voice mailbox and the system will interrupt her, saying "To
> Send this Message, Press..."- as if she had punched a key, but she
> hadn't.  The problem has been re-occurring.

> Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens
> when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones
> generated by the keypad.  The system interprets the voice as a key
> being punched.

This is usually called 'talk-off'.  Your vendor's explanation is
probably correct.  The voice mail system thinks it hears a DTMF
(touch-tone) character somewhere in the sound of a user's voice.

A human voice typically generates only one frequency at a time, and
the components of the touch-tone signals are pairs of non-harmonically-
related frequencies, so this problem does not occur very often.  It
takes an unusual combination of vocal characteristics and distortion
to make it happen.

Voice mail equipment vendors attempt to reduce talk-off in several
ways.  The touch-tone detector is usually programmed to require some
minimum duration of tone, often in the absence of energy at other
frequencies, before recognition.  But making the minimum duration too
long, while reducing talk-off, makes the system insensitive to real
touch-tones sent by people who punch keys very quickly, or by tele-
phone sets that generated short tones whose duration is not related to
dial button dwell time.  Most anti-talk-off techniques result in some
compromise of the ability to detect valid tones.

Does the user experience talk-off only from one telephone set?  Try
replacing its handset or transmitter element.  Can the minimum tone
duration on your voice mail system be administered?  Try increasing it
a few tens of milliseconds.  We have found that 50 - 75 msec. work
well.


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 #839
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11659;
          28 Dec 93 17:09 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24072
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Tue, 28 Dec 1993 13:37:56 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12411
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 28 Dec 1993 13:37:31 -0600
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 13:37:31 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #840

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 28 Dec 93 13:37:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 840

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Monopoly For Hong Kong Telecom is Threatened, Cable is Merging (Dan Chun)
    Information Wanted on European E1/ISDN Standards (Doug A. Chan)
    FTP Site For EIA Standards (Rob McConnell)
    FCC Jurisdiction Over 500-Channel TV (Justin Fidler)
    Communication Speeds and Distances ([e-mail])
    Telix and Busy Signals (Eric Walrod)
    Guatemala Calls Canada Looking For Love (James Salsman)
    Dialing in Area 601 (Mississippi) (Carl Moore)
    Re: Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ (Michael Jacobs)
    500 Channel Cable Television (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: TDMA vs. CDMA = Betamax vs. VHS? (Michael G. Capuano)
    Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Martin McCormick)
    Re: TDD Software Wanted (Todd D. Hale)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

Date: 28 Dec 93 17:52 GMT
From: "chun d."@infomail.infonet.com
Subject: Monopoly For Hong Kong Telecom is Threatened, Cable is Merging


Hi everyone,

There are many stories covered on mergers and acquisitions for cable
operators, online information services and home shopping operators,
telcos, etc in the news. Everybody talks about multimedia and
interactive services and information superhighway with ISDN,
fibre-optics and the idea of anywhere-anytime computing concepts.

Are there any interests from the western part of the world to learn
more of the development in Asia and in particular Hong Kong. I have
checked some newswire and some newsgroup but very few are aware of the
development in this part of the world.

In HK, where the local PTT -- Hong Kong Telecom HKT (a C&W plc's
subsidiary) has recently been threatened on its monopoly by the OFTA
(Office of the Telecommunication Authority) which has prepared to grant
three fixed telecom licenses to three conglormerates. HKT stills enjoy
the monopoly of providing local voice services until June 1995.

The three conglormerates are namely:

- New T&T Hong Kong ( backed by Wharf Holdings which also holds first
exclusive Cable TV license for three years, NYNEX is the technology
partner in this case);

- Hutchison Communications ( joined by Telstra, formerly Telecom
Australia and backed by Hutchison Whampoa empire of the richest man in
HK, K.S. Li.);

- New World Communications ( backed by New World Development, another
conglormerate interested in property, infrastructure developments and
to a lesser extent, paging services is also backed by US West, Infa
Telecom, and Shanghai Long-Distance);

In Hong Kong, the facts are that:

1. HKT holds all monopoly for international traffic in voice and data
circuits until 2006;

2. HKT holds monopoly for providing local voice and data service until
1995;

3. HKT has fully digitised all exchanges and had spent major PR efforts
in running up to the last minute including inviting the Governor to
initiate the ceremony;

4. There is no charge for making any local calls in both voice/fax/data
except for a monthly subscription rate;

5. HKT made about 60% of the revenue from enjoying the international
monopoly;

6. The regulatory is begining to prove that it exists now that the
appointed director who used to help deregulate the Australia market
seeing Optus challenging Telecom Australia - now Telstra has announce
the plan for deregulation;

7. In HK, the fax machines are very popular and is only second to Japan
in the penetration of fax.(since fax supports funny images that are
known as chinese or japanese chacracters.) It also supports a primitive
workgroup concept before Lotus notes became a hit;

8. Online information services, BBSs, mobile data, PDAs, value-added
networks, commercial internet gateways, enhanced fax store-forward
services, fax-on-demand, and other advance services are all available
and had made their presenece felt;

Now, my question is do *you*, as a researcher or professional think
the market in HK can substain three fixed telecom license? Debates
and questions are welcomed.

I am happy to continue this discussion based on the assumption that
there are sufficient interests from all of you in the telecom market
in HK and secondly I would like to learn from the deregulating
environment experienced by AT&T some years ago and also the UK Mercury
cutting into BT, etc. from you folks.

I am online in CompuServe at [e-mail] and also here
in Infonet but will be departing before end of year. I am also
obtaining a full internet access via one of the local commercial
gateways soon. So I will be in touch with you folks someway.

Best regards and Happy 94!!!


Daniel J Y Chun    The Extrategic Wizard


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something else to be considered are the
changes coming in 1997 with the change in 'ownership' as the UK pulls
out and China takes over. Will all the deals make prior still be
honored? Will the economy in HK change to the extent that if three are
supportable now, they will all remain viable after the change in the
government?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug A. Chan =-)
Subject: Information Wanted on European E1/ISDN Standards
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 18:27:31 GMT


1) Where can I find out more info about E1 for telephony use?
   I'm looking for very specific details (line coding format, signalling
   format, etc...) for different countries (Germany, France, UK).

   Also, call progress information/tones for each of the countries would
   be very helpful...

2) I'm also looking for ISDN standards in Europe (EEC's NET 5 vs. current
   country specific implementation vs. CCITT specs?)

I know this is quite a bit of information but I'll be quite happy if
someone can point me in the right direction.

I'll post a summary if I get sufficient info ...


Thanks,

Doug   [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob McConnell)
Subject: FTP Site For EIA Standards
Date: 28 Dec 1993 15:52:27 GMT
Organization: UBITREX Corporation, Winnipeg, MB Canada
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Does anyone know the whereabouts of an FTP site for EIA standards,
specifically EIA IS-60?


Thanks,

Rob McConnell
Ubitrex Corporation                | Voice: 204-942-2992 ext 223
1900-155 Carlton St                | FAX:   [phone]
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3C 3H8 | Email: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 00:03:54 EST
From: Justin Fidler <[e-mail]>
Subject: FCC Jurisdiction Over 500-Channel TV


With all this talk of 500-channel television, the medium of delivery
will change as well.  If this medium is carried on private company
equipment, will the FCC still have a right to control/censor the
programming like they do broadcast television (which travels over
airwaves)?


Justin Fidler   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Communication Speeds and Distances
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 00:23:52 GMT


The latest draft of the `Communications Speeds and Distances' chart is on:

129.186.149.1    vincent1.iastate.edu (login: anonymous.jemli)
as either comspeed.eps or comspeed.gif.

The circles represent some protocol (like ethernet or local talk)
positioned at their transmission speed (ethernet = 10Mbps) and as high
as their range (ethernet = .5km).

The ovals (like frame relay and DBDQ) represent their transmission
speed range (frame relay goes from 64Kbps to 37.5Mbps), and their
height is, again, their range.

The colors are arbitrary.

For most thingies I don't know their range (without repeaters) and
just guess. If you can help with this info send a note.

I was thinking that perhaps I should color them all according to their
OSI layer.  If this makes sense and anyone can classify all these
thingies into their OSI layers I would welcome the feedback.


Thanks,

Jeremy |-)

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Walrod)
Subject: Telix and Busy signals
Organization: SEANEWS - Seattle Public Access News + Mail
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 03:15:24 GMT


Okay, I just set up a new PC Logic 14.4kbps Internal Fax/Modem for a
friend, and set-up deltaComm's Telix v3.21 for it.

I CANNOT get Telix to recognize a busy signal.  I am already using
ATX4V1 to no avail (sp?).

Any suggestions (besides TRY x PROGRAM and BUY x BRAND MODEM) e-mailed to
me would be most appreciated.


Eric Walrod
[] SEANEWS [] Seattle Public Access Usenet News + Mail [] +1 206 747 NEWS []
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (James Salsman)
Subject: Guatemala Calls Canada Looking For Love
Organization: BRI
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 09:11:38 GMT


The {Los Angeles Times} reports that in the past few months,
Guatemalan callers have placed 70,000 calls to Canadian phone-sex
lines at $2.95 per minute.  Basic phone service in Guatemala can be
under $1/month.

That is one call per every 2.8 telephones, according to my statistics.
(Guatemala has about 800,000 people and 2% have telephones.)

There was no disclosure of fees as is required by law in the U.S.A.
The calls made so far are over one million U.S. dollars.

I hope the $2.95/minute was an international tariff fee and not a
Dial-IT/900 style fee.  In a country already troubled by civil unrest
and strife left over from the 1982 collapse of the Central American
Market, that a big, wealthy country like Canada was trying to make
money off of the overactive coffee-fed libidos of an impovrished
people would be disgusting.


James Salsman    Bovik Research


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, the same story as it appeared
in the {Chicago Tribune} said that the people in Guatemala making the
calls were finding out too late that the cost (of the call) was rather
high and that many people were protesting the charges when they saw
them on their phone bill. Apparently it is not entirely clear to
people what they will be paying for the service. But the thing to
remember is that it is not a 'big weathy country like Canada' which is
making money off the people in Guatemala, it is whoever is running the
service who made the arrangements with the (Canadian and Guatemalan)
telcos who is making the money.

What about here in the USA where some numbers in the 201 (New Jersey)
area code which connect with horoscopes, astrologists and practioners
of Tarot are being heavily promoted in advertisements in newspapers in
Spain, Haiti, Jamaica and other similar countries?  The people in
Spain/Haiti/Jamaica are getting the same message delivered to them that
the Guatemalans are getting from Canada and that the gay guys in the
USA are getting from the Netherland Antilles: **call for a good time**.
No premium fees; just toll charges apply. We've covered here before how
the payments get divided up among the folks responsible; making lots
of money by taking advantage of the human frailties of others is nothing
new: just the technology has changed. Years ago people went out to some
certain place in their community where they knew they could find what
they wanted for a price. Now they use the modern international phone
network instead.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 12:36:09 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Dialing in Area 601 (Mississippi)


I received the following on 23 December):

 ... we currently do not have to dial the area code within Mississippi.
However, this will change this month (December) when we will be
required to enter the whole 1 + 601 + seven digits.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ - Ten Years Hence
In-Reply-To: [e-mail]'s message of 25 Dec 1993 18:26:24 GMT
Organization: Surf City Software/TBFW Project
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 06:21:41 GMT


On 25 Dec 1993 18:26:24 GMT, TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> A feature I used to do occassionally was called "Ten Years Ago in
> the Digest" and perhaps a few readers would enjoy some of the
> comments from the readers who were on our list back then during the
> final days of the old Bell System and the first few days of the 'new
> way' of doing things.  PAT]

Yes, it can be interesting to go back in the archives.  I remember
seeing a note from the Moderator at the time, Jon Solomon, saying
something to the effect that now that AT&T's breaking up, we can't
have any political commentary in the Digest because of the AUP for the
various nets.  He also said the Net was about to convert from NP to
the newfangled TCP/IP ... amazing how much technical progress there's
been in the Internet in such a short period of time.


Robert L. McMillin  | [e-mail] | Netcom: [e-mail]
13442 Wilson St.    | Garden Grove, CA      | 92644
        voice: 714-638-2459 | fax: [phone]
I'm only a guest at surfcty.com; THEY certainly wouldn't have these opinions!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Acceptable Use Policy has changed
quite a bit over the years also, and I think Jon Solomon was somewhat
mistaken in wanting to totally rule out 'political commentary'. He
later changed his mind on this when I pointed out to him that so much
of what is available today in telecommunications, and the way the
industry implements what is available is due to politics. How can you
therefore separate the 'political commentary' at times from a pure
technology discussion?  The classic example of this is Caller-ID.

Yes, the changes in network technology have been occurring at a
expotential rate. It took how many thousands of years to invent the
telephone and learn to control electricity for our convenience? Then
in the next hundred years ... wow! Computers were 'invented' in the
late 1940's and early 1950's ... 25-30 years later 'home computers'
first began to make an appearance in the late 1970's. Now 15 years
later, more computational resources sit on the desk in my office than
existed at Harvard University in 1960. Several years passed between
the 110/300 baud modem and the 1200 baud modem. After a couple years
2400 baud became available, and then 9600 and 14.4 came through almost
immediatly thereafter. The {Chicago Tribune} in an editorial comment
in 1900 commenting on 'all the tremendous inventions of the past
century' (meaning 1801-1900) asked, "how long will it be before we
run out of things to invent ...". It boggles my mind to think of what
kinds of things we will have at our disposal twenty years from now.
That is, unless we 'run out of things to invent'... :)   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 19:37:50 EDT
From: Michael Jacobs <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ - Ten Years Hence


Regarding the question about why the divestiture and how the terms of
the Modified Final Judgement came to be, the best source I have seen
is a book titled "The Deal of the Century," which should be available
in any larger library.  It includes relevant historical data,
analysis, and interviews with all the major players.  Contrary to
popular belief, top AT&T executives got exactly what they wanted from
the MFJ, namely a lifting of information services and other
restrictions from AT&T.

For more information regarding technical consequences of the MFJ
terms, see "The Rape of Ma Bell" by Kraus and Duerig, who give an
insider's perspective (with some emotional bias) to the subject.  Many
of the technical problems have been worked out since 1984, and a lot
of the horror stories are exaggerated, but the book does point out
some areas still of concern ten years later.


Personal Opinions Only,

Mike Jacobs, [e-mail],
Service Technician, Bell Atlantic-Pennsylvania

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

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 09:39:29 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: 500 Channel Cable Television


Several people have written:

> A. Padgett Peterson writes that he thinks that there is not much of a
> logical reason for a 500 channel system.  Specifically:

and they have all missed my real point - not that there is not a
*logical* reason but there is not a *logistical* structure to support
it and this would be necessary.

There have been several good suggestions. Personally I favor a
built-in computer that could accept a [weekly|daily|hourly] listing in
the background that would be stored in the home.

Several people have suggested that they might be able to edit out
everrything except what is wanted. I doubt that the companies will
offer this since they are interested in selling *more* so will have to
tell you about things you did not select.

Personally, I *want* everything I can get. Just this week some people
overseas mentioned some nuances and it was nice to be able to tune
into "HOBOCTH" on channel 43 and see what was being released
publically.

The real stumbling block is liable to be the old NTSC/PAL/SECAM one
(why foreign shows often are "boxed").


Hippo Hoppidays,

Padgett

PS: I wonder how the Brits licence PC-television boards and multi-channel
    displays.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael G. Capuano)
Subject: Re: TDMA vs. CDMA = Betamax vs. VHS?
Date: 28 Dec 1993 03:42:01 GMT
Organization: General Videotex Corporation


Brendan,

    What is up with E-TDMA.  Has that been thrown in the toilette.
This posting is after reading your analysis of the San Diego "ideal"
CDMA trial.


Mike Capuaon

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos
Date: 28 Dec 1993 05:47:20 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Donald
Army) writes:

> Are there any news groups on ATM??

comp.dcom.cell-relay

That should do it.


Fred R. Goldstein  k1io  [e-mail]
Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin McCormick)
Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:28:41 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave
Levenson) writes:

> A human voice typically generates only one frequency at a time, and
> the components of the touch-tone signals are pairs of non-harmonically-
> related frequencies, so this problem does not occur very often.

    The human voice may produce only one fundamental at any given
time, but it also produces lots of harmonics which contain all of the
intelligence in speech.  It can happen that certain Howell sounds may
produce a harmonic pattern that contains two frequencies which just
happen to produce a valid duel-tone signal.  The question is not
whether this will happen, but how often.  Male and female voices both
produce lots of harmonic output and the possibility for a false
trigger is always there.  The first amateur radio automatic telephone
patches used resonant tuned circuits and phase locked loops to
"listen" for tones and frequently heard them in the harmonic content
of voices.  This caused the systems to frequently malfunction and
either drop calls or randomly do other control sequences at
inappropriate times.  Now, we have digital signal processors which can
be programmed to run more tests on a suspected DTMF signal to see if
it is really a DTMF tone or just somebody's musical voice.

    A good source of basic information plus a lot of very
interesting reading can be found in the "Benchmark Papers on
Acoustics" series by Bell Laboratories.  These research papers
describe the quest to understand how human speech is generated so as
to design machines which could artificially produce it and even
understand spoken words.  Some of the pre-computer era hardware was
truly cleaver and did wonders to aid in understanding even if it
didn't ever have any practical use.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd D. Hale)
Subject: Re: TDD Software Wanted
Organization: Novell, Inc., Provo, UT, USA
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:35:54 GMT


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

> Why don't they start releasing dual-mode TDD machines, that can handle
> ASCII and "standard" modem standards, and eventually phase out Baudot-
> only machines?

I know that ASCII/BAUDOT TDDs are available, and have been for several
years.  But, the transition has been very slow.


Todd D. Hale    [e-mail]   [e-mail]
Unofficially speaking, of course.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #840
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16365;
          29 Dec 93 14:06 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00547
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Wed, 29 Dec 1993 10:15:27 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06653
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 29 Dec 1993 10:15:02 -0600
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 10:15:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #841

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 29 Dec 93 10:15:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 841

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: How are Telephone Calling Cards Verified? (Chris Labatt-Simon)
    Re: 500 Channel Cable Television (Brad Hicks)
    Re: 500 Channel Cable Television (Mitch Wagner)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Charles Reichley)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Mitch Wagner)
    Re: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted (Russell E. Sorber)
    Re: Telix and Busy Signals (Jeffery Foy)
    Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (David Woolley)
    NPA Questions (Bill Hofmann)
    International Dedicated Connections (Patrick Nta)
    Argentine Phone Companies (Telecomm,Telephonic) (Charles Reichley)
    Re: Guatemala Calls Canada Looking For Love (Carl Moore)
    Digital Cordless Phones Question ([e-mail])
    Editor's Comments on Communications/Computer Progress (H.A. Kippenhan Jr.)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Labatt-Simon)
Subject: Re: How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified?
Date: 29 Dec 1993 15:13:55 GMT
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY, USA


[e-mail] (Chris Farrar) writes:

> For my current calling card, with a 519 area code number, running the
> card number through software (on a PC) that will tell if a Visa or
> MasterCard number is valid, has the card number come back as being a
> valid MasterCard, even though it is several digits too short to be a
> MC.

Credit cards use the last digit of the full number as a check digit.
I don't have the specs in front of me, but if I recall, they use a mod
10 translation with the summation equalling the check digit.  I'm not
sure if it's mod 10 or something else though.  It's a fairly common
practice for a lot of types of plastic.  If the first digit of your
calling card is a 5, and you ran it through a credit card
authorization program, it would usually recognize it as a Mastercard.
Hence, if the last digit uses the same checksum, then it would appear
as a valid Mastercard, regardless of its length.


Chris Labatt-Simon                            Internet: [e-mail]
Design & Disaster Recovery Consulting              CIS: 73542,2601
Albany, New York
PHONE: [phone]                              FAX: [phone]
Subscribe to the Lotus Notes Mailing List - e-mail me for info....

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU1=[e-mail]
Date: 28 Dec 93 21:17:28 GMT
Subject: Re: 500 Channel Cable Television


Several people have mentioned, in discussing the topic "500 Channel
Cable Television," that what's wrong with this is the sheer difficulty
of finding anything interesting.  Most of them called for some kind of
set-top computer that downloads listings and offers you multiple ways
to search them.

Whether you ever thought about it or not, those of us with satellite
TV systems =already= have, in theory, roughly 400 to 500 channels of
video available to us, of which maybe 190 or so carry free video (*
see footnote), another 30 or so carry cable-TV type subscription-only
channels, and the rest of which is either part-time rental ("feeds"
for various purposes), private data channels, or just unused yet.  In
any case, at just about any time you turn on even a cheap C-band only
system like mine, there's at least 150 channels available to "surf."

Since this has been around for a while, you might think that the
problem had been addressed.  And it has: exactly that set-top computer
and downloading service already exists, and it's called SuperGuide.
Before you try to reinvent the wheel, go down to your local satellite
TV dealer and ask to see a SuperGuide in use; it's not bad for current
state of the art.  That is to say, it'll show you what's on now, or
let you search for programs alphabetically by name, or show you the
schedule for a particular "channel."  It also connects to the infrared
port on your VCR to let you record events directly off of the on-screen
menus of the SuperGuide.

In other words, I've seen the 500-channel future with interactive
on-line real-time "TV Guide" computer services that y'all are looking
for ... and it's =old= technology.  Unless there's good upstream
communications, and maybe the "everybody's a publisher" open platform
model that the EFF is pushing for, all that the telco and cable TV
"information superhighway" types are bringing to the table is a new
transmission medium, and =maybe= (if we're lucky) higher video
resolution.

* Footnote: of the 190 or so channels of "free" video on the
satellites, probably 50 of them are religious, probably another 50 are
shop-at-home not counting the 10 or so that are non-stop infomercials,
probably another 25 are used part-time for minor sports broadcasts,
and probably another 25 or so are some form or other of (subsidized)
educational channel.  There's a "free" "adult variety" channel that
is, in effect, a non-stop ad for the owners' 900 "hot chat" lines, a
"free" music video channel where they constantly run across the bottom
the 900 number for requesting the video of your choice, and another
"free" music video channel that at least once during each video
shrinks it down about 66% and uses the rest of the screen to advertise
that you can buy the music and/or the video from them by calling their
800 number.  The rest are merely "regular" programming -- that is to
say, advertiser supported.  Even with 500+ channels of video
bandwidth, There (still) Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.  I Have
Seen The Future ... and it's mostly televangelism, sports, infomercials,
and 900 numbers.  (*sigh* *grin*)

I brought all of this up not to divert TELECOM Digest into a
discussion of satellite TV, just to give you a glimpse of what the
500-channel future might (does) look like.  For further discussion of
the satellite TV angle on all of this, see rec.video.satellite or it's
unmoderated mailing list equivalent, homesat at [e-mail],
or see section 8 of forum CEFORUM on Compu$erve.


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The televangelism aspect is a very
interesting one. I can remember years and years ago -- the 1950's
in particular -- when there were no specifically 'religious' radio
stations with the exception of WMBI out of Chicago at Moody Bible
and maybe one or two others; HCJB in Quito, Ecuador comes to mind if
you include shortwave stuff. In that era, FM was very new and not
that many people had FM radios so everything was on AM. But the AM
stations were absolutely loaded with radio preachers every Sunday
all day and all night. WLS (890 AM in Chicago) in those days 40
years ago carried nothing but pre-recorded religious programs from
about 5 AM Sunday morning through 1 AM Monday morning when they
signed off the air. One after the other, usually thirty minutes in
length but a few of 15 minutes; now and again one had a full hour.
The old WCFL (1000 AM back then) was the same way. I guess those
preachers, some of whom are familiar names today paid big dollars
for WLS' clear channel and 50,000 watts of power.

A woman evangelist by the name of Aimee Semple McPherson used to be on
WLS every day of the week along with quite a few other radio stations
in the 1930's and 1940's. She'd preach day after day against the evils
of hard drink, the use of tobacco and marijuana and other things.  WLS
loved her; so did KOA in Denver and WWL out of Cincinnati.  She
brought them huge listening audiences all night long and she paid them
top dollar from her own collection basket which was always running
over. She never hesitated to remind the audience to send those love
offerings to her (" ... send your letters and gifts to me, Aimee
Semple McPherson, Pasadena, California, the United States of America
... that's all the address you need ..."  and if you were listening to
her in Canada, well, there was a post office box in Toronto for you to
write to. Her main 'competitor' was a fellow named Father Coughlin.
He was on every radio station day after day also with the message that
whatever was wrong in the world was the fault of 'the communists'. He
had books and pamphlets that he had written which would explain it all
in detail if you would write him and request your free copy. Of course
your free-will gift had better be enclosed when you wrote him.  Like
Aimee, the good Father got his mail via Pasadena, California (where
his name on the envelope was the only address you needed) and he also
had a box in Toronto. Apparently people ordered his pamphlets and
books; he was the Rush Limbaugh of his time; Aimee even quoted him
occassionally in her broadcasts. How the technology has changed! But
alas, even though the speakers have changed and the level of sophis-
tication on the part of the producers of religious shows has increased
greatly, the hucksterism is still there. WLS changed formats to hard
rock music in 1961 and all the preachers were dropped at one time; WLS
bought out their contracts as part of the format change.

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

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 1:44:48 EST
From: [e-mail] (Mitch Wagner)
Subject: Re: 500 Channel Cable Television
Organization: Open Systems Today


[e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

> Several people have suggested that they might be able to edit out
> everything except what is wanted. I doubt that the companies will
> offer this since they are interested in selling *more* so will have to
> tell you about things you did not select.

The carriers will not have an inducement to sell you those editors,
but I'm sure that third parties will do so.


mitch w.

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

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 14:07:48 EST
From: Charles Reichley <[e-mail]
Subject: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback


It seems that anybody these days who runs a business and has clients
could afford to buy a cellular phone, and not use their client's phones
for calling anybody.  This would obviate the need for an 'alternate'
caller id since the ID of the caller would be tied to their cellular
phone.


Charles W. Reichley,   Loral/FSC???, Manassas, Va.
Reminder : This post has nothing to do with IBM or its subsidiaries

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

From: [e-mail] (Mitch Wagner)
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
Organization: Open Systems Today
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 19:10:55 GMT


drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz) writes:

> I think that supposedly intelligent people (doctors, lawyers, social
> workers, and their employers) should find their OWN solution to that
> issue and not burden the public-switched-telephone-network, and the
> rest of us, with their problems ...

I don't have a problem with that in the case of doctors and lawyers,
who often make scads of money -- or at least a sufficient amount to
foot the bill for a second phone line. What is the cost of a second
phone line, anyway? -- $50/mo. and maybe a few hundred dollars install
charge, right?

However, social workers make teeny-tiny little salaries, and that
$50/mo. is a big deal for them.

Clearly, if we as a nation decide we need CallerID, then we also need
to provide for exceptions where the public might be better served by
NOT having it.


mitch w.

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

From: [e-mail] (Russell E. Sorber)
Subject: Re: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted
Date: 28 Dec 93 23:01:28 GMT
Organization: Motorola Cellulsr Infrastructure Group


Alex Cena <[e-mail]> writes:

> On Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:47:43 EST Jason Demarte <[e-mail]>
> wrote:

>> I have recently been reading about the sytem called Automatic Call
>> Distributor (ACD) and am wondering who are the major dealers for each
>> version of ACD: integrated ACD and stand-alone ACD.  If anyone has
>> some any information on this please post me a response, thanks.

> You should call Aspect Telecom for some information.

Rockwell Switching Systems is also very big in ACD equipment.
Rockwell has much (if not most) of the airline reservation system
market as well as ACD equipment in several large Wall Street brokerage
houses.

Rockwell Switching has a office in Downers Grove Il.  and does at
least some sales/marketing out of that office also.  Call Directory
Assistance for the number (area 708)


Russ Sorber
Software Contractor  -    Opinions are mine, Not Motorolas!
Motorola, Cellular Division
Arlington Hts., IL    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffery Foy)
Subject: Telix and Busy Signals
Date: 28 Dec 1993 23:50:44 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


In a message on 12-28-93, [e-mail] wrote the following:

> Okay, I just set up a new PC Logic 14.4kbps Internal Fax/Modem for a
> friend, and set-up deltaComm's Telix v3.21 for it.

PC Logic? Doesn't ring a bell here ...

> I CANNOT get Telix to recognize a busy signal.  I am already using
> ATX4V1 to no avail (sp?).

You sure it's Telix that isn't recognizing the busy? Go into terminal
mode in Telix and dial a number that's busy. If you don't get any
response (i.e. the word BUSY) then it's the modem not Telix. If, OTOH,
the BUSY is displayed, check Telix's modem response strings. You might
have to manually put the word BUSY in one of the fields.

> Any suggestions (besides TRY x PROGRAM and BUY x BRAND MODEM) e-mailed to
> me would be most appreciated.

Well, you SHOULD try other stuff just as a matter of course. But I
don't think I'll tell you which other stuff to try. 's best to try on
your own. :)


Jeffery Foy -- [e-mail]
[e-mail]  or  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Woolley)
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 17:34:46  GMT


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

> From Oftel Consultative Document June 93:

> The codes that will *not* change at NCC are the existing codes for
> non-geographic services, ie:

My understanding (from {BT Engineering Journal}) is that the only reason
that the non-geographic numbers are not changing is that they would
conflict with the old geographic numbers.  The intention is that, once
a quarantine period has expired on the old numbers, the non-geographic
numbers will be rationalised.  This does not necessarily mean that
firm decisions have been made about these numbers.  (The first digit
will be used to classify numbers (one for geographic land based
numbers).)


David Woolley, London, England           [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Hofmann)
Subject: NPA Questions
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:30:19 PST


In reviewing the various sources (telecom postings, discussions with
LECs, etc), I'm left with a few questions that folks out there may be
able to help with:

1. Does any state publish 1 + NPA+ 7d AND 0 + 7d instructions?  I have
        here that Delaware still does (302).  Carl Moore's note in
        "history" yhat 213 does is incorrect.

2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns
    in that corridor, are there any other localities which
    REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll
    calls, I guess)?

FYI, 510 allows 1+510 dialing, I haven't checked other Bay Area area codes.


Bill Hofmann                [e-mail]
Fresh Software and Instructional Design    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Patrick Nta)
Subject: International Dedicated Connections
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 13:58:20 -0400
Organization: Harvard Medical School


I am looking for telecom companies that offer 56kbs/64kbs or X.25 data
connections to Nigeria.  Or cheap satellite links.

AT&T, Sprint and  MCI  only offer Analog (voice grade) connections.


Thanks.

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

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 15:03:36 EST
From: Charles Reichley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Argentine Phone Companies (Telecomm, Telephonic)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: IBM Federal Systems Company (for now)- Manassas, VA USA


Does anybody have any interesting information about the two Argentine
phone companies?  Like how they decided how to break the country into
two parts, what state of modernization have they achieved, etc.?


Charles W. Reichley,   Loral/FSC???, Manassas, Va.
Reminder: This post has nothing to do with IBM or its subsidiaries

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

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 15:30:04 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Guatemala Calls Canada Looking For Love


Actually, wasn't that Hightstown, NJ which had the numbers (advertised
overseas) for horoscopes etc.?  That is in the 609 area, not 201.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You could be right. PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike S.)
Subject: Digital Cordless Phones Question
Organization: BITS, St. Louis, MO
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 21:24:05 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


I am doing a bit of late Christmas shopping for myself, and have
decided on a 900Mhz digital cordless phone.  The models I have heard
about and seen locally are the usual Tropez/Vtech ($200-$250) models,
the AT&T 9100 ($250), and Uniden EXP9100 ($350).

The Uniden claims to use spread spectrum transmission so I picked one
up under a 30 day trial period.  Sound is, as usual, "almost corded
quality", and uniform throughout my house.  I haven't had time to any
serious range tests yet and I have never hit the almost-out-of-range
beeps around the house.  The manual says they are using MSK
modulation.

I did search the 903-925 MHz band with the trusty scanner and as
expected couldn't find anything intelligble.  The scanner did however
seem to lock up on a few frequencies that seemed to be dependant on
the phone being active, which I wouldn't think possible if they were
really using what I think of as spread spectrum.

Has anyone had the opportunity to do any testing on this model, even a
comparison of the above models and the Cobra/RS/CM units?

The Uniden and AT&T to my ears are roughly comparable in sound
quality, the Uniden has a few additional features and a lighted
keypad.


Mike   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:10:18 CST
From: H.A. Kippenhan Jr. <[e-mail]>
Subject: Your Comments on Communications/Computer Progress


Hi:

On 25 Dec 1993 18:26:24 GMT, Robert McMillan wrote:

>> A feature I used to do occassionally was called "Ten Years Ago in
>> the Digest" and perhaps a few readers would enjoy some of the
>> comments from the readers who were on our list back then during the
>> final days of the old Bell System and the first few days of the 'new
>> way' of doing things.  PAT]

> Yes, it can be interesting to go back in the archives.  I remember
> seeing a note from the Moderator at the time, Jon Solomon, saying
> something to the effect that now that AT&T's breaking up, we can't
> have any political commentary in the Digest because of the AUP for the
> various nets.  He also said the Net was about to convert from NP to
> the newfangled TCP/IP ... amazing how much technical progress there's
> been in the Internet in such a short period of time.

TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response:

> Yes, the changes in network technology have been occurring at a
> exponential rate. It took how many thousands of years to invent the
> telephone and learn to control electricity for our convenience? Then
> in the next hundred years ... wow! Computers were 'invented' in the
> late 1940's and early 1950's ... 25-30 years later 'home computers'
> first began to make an appearance in the late 1970's. Now 15 years
> later, more computational resources sit on the desk in my office than
> existed at Harvard University in 1960. Several years passed between
> the 110/300 baud modem and the 1200 baud modem. After a couple years
> 2400 baud became available, and then 9600 and 14.4 came through almost
> immediately thereafter. The {Chicago Tribune} in an editorial comment
> in 1900 commenting on 'all the tremendous inventions of the past
> century' (meaning 1801-1900) asked, "how long will it be before we
> run out of things to invent ...". It boggles my mind to think of what
> kinds of things we will have at our disposal twenty years from now.
> That is, unless we 'run out of things to invent'... :)   PAT]

It's probably safe to say that technology is advancing at a greater
than exponential rate.  One of the things that is often overlooked is
that there are more scientists alive [and hopefully working - 8-)]
today than the total in mankind's history to date.  It's no wonder
that things are changing so fast.

We want to be careful about 'run(ning) out of things to invent'.
There was a proposal just shortly after the Civil War to close the
U.S. Patent Office because everything that could possibly be invented
had been thought of.  No criticism here (I assume that 'run(ning) out
of things to invent' was a -in-cheek remark).

Just my $0.02 worth.


Best regards,

H.A. Kippenhan Jr.              Internet:   [e-mail]
National HEPnet Management      HEPnet/NSI DECnet:  FNDCD::KIPPENHAN
Fermi National Accelerator Lab. BITnet:       [e-mail]
P.O. Box 500   MS: FCC-3E/368   Telephone:            [phone]
Batavia, Illinois 60510         FAX:                  [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #841
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19844;
          30 Dec 93 3:18 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10840
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Wed, 29 Dec 1993 23:35:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01296
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 29 Dec 1993 23:35:01 -0600
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 23:35:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #842

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 29 Dec 93 23:35:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 842

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Motorola CMT Programming (Mark W. Earle)
    Notice to AT&T Long Distance Customers (Paul Robinson)
    Direct Broadcast Satelites (Jason M. Githeko)
    ITU Method For Writing Telephone Numbers (Anthony D. Vullo)
    Who and What is Tecnet? (Edward van Egmond)
    CLID and PA (Wallace Colyer)
    The PUC(s) And So-Called Tariffs (Al Cohan)
    Super Long Range Cordless Phones (Michael Dimitrov)
    Caller ID/911 Seattle and Article Recommendation (M. Hedlund)
    Swedish Caller ID Hardware? (Claes Gussing)
    Information Wanted on Simon Cellular Phone (Tony Barnecut)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 15:55 EST
From: Mark W. Earle <[e-mail]>
Subject: Motorola CMT Programming


Here are some notes I found regarding programming Motorola cellular
products. I have an 8000H portable phone. Some comments:

 From the keyboard, you must know the security code to get to
programming mode. You may enter programming mode a total of three
times.  After three times, the phone must be returned to the dealer to
have a counter reset. However, at least on the 8000H and Ultra Classic
portables, one can fabricate a jumper, and reset the counter easily.

Before changing anything, I'd use * to step through and record
your present values.

Note that if you install the jumper, you would enter 55# and then
follow the notes for entering the customer/system information.  You
can also first do a 32# to clear all timers and restore features to
standard. THIS ERASES ALL STORED PARAMATERS!

What I found most useful was to step through, record all paramaters
entering programming mode from the keypad without the jumper.

Then, power up with the jumper, use 32# to clear evertying
        power off
        remove jumper
        power up
        reset params entering programming mode from keyboard,
                using 000000 as the security code

This technique let me have two phone numbers in two markets, even
though the phone is single NAM. I'd get to a particular spot on the
road, with a convenient rest area, and reprogram my phone for service
(as contracted for!) in the second city. This was to have a local
number and not pay roaming rates in the second city.  On the return
trip, I'd stop and reprogram for my "home" market.

Disclaimers: You can put the phone in several modes intended for
alignment and testing "on the bench". Don't do it. You could also set
the phone up such that the contracted for service won't work properly.
Don't program paramaters to other than those provided by your carrier.

There is no way (as far as I know) to alter the ESN on these phones.
Well, I'm sure it's possible if you're the vendor but there is no
magic keypad code to do it.

You can also make the phone a cellular receiver: power up with jumper

        353#        Select Handset audio path
        08#         RX Audio ON
        11xxx#      Three digit number, i.e. 11362#
        474#        Set to mid level audio
        11xxx#      Change to another channel

Power off, remove jumper, power up to restore normal phone
operations.

Dec 29, 1993 Motorola Cellular Mobile Telephone programming notes:

Part 1: From the manual included with the 8000H portable phone.

Items to be programmed:
System ID Code                5 digits
Cellular Telephone Number    10 digits
Station Class Code            2 digits
Access Overload Class         2 digits
Group ID Mark                 2 digits
Security Code                 6 digits
Unlock Code                   3 digits
Initial Paging Channel        4 digits (Use Leading 0)
Option Bits                   6 digits
*Internal Speaker             0 for internal
*Local Use                    normally 1
*Min Mark                     Normally 0, 0=disabled
when enabled, unit sends area code on all calls
*Auto REcall                  Always set to 1
*Second PHone number          0
*Diversity                    0=off
Option Bits
*Long Tone DTMF               1 (0 to disable)
*FUTURE USE                   0
*Eight hour timeout           0 to enable

Programming your telephone:

If you have:
Menu and Fcn keys              Sequence 6
FCN key but no Menu key        Sequence 1
No Fcn key                     Sequence 2

Model            Handset      Type   Sequence
3000SCN          2007         A        6
6000SCN          2023         A        2
6000XSL          N2020        A        1
6800XLT          LN2659       A        1
6800XLT          LN2733       A        6
Alpha Hndset     SCN2083      A        6

Sequence
1                FCN, Security Code entered twice, RCL
2                STO, #, Security Code entered twice, RCL
3                Ctl, 0 + SC twice, RCL
4                Ctl, 0 + SC twice, *
5                FCN, 0 + SC twice, MEM
6                FDN, 0 + SC twice, RCL
Security code is programmed 000000 at the factory

After successfully entering program mode, 01 appears on the display

* steps thorugh
SND stores information

Step 1        SID
Step 2        Area Code
Step 3        Phone Number
Step 4        Station Class Mark
Step 5        Access Overload Class
Step 6        Group ID
Step 7        Security Code
Step 8        Unlock Code
Step 9        Initial Paging Channel
Step 10       Options (6 digits)
Step 11       Options (3 digits)

Part 2: From a programming Cheat Sheet, not normally included with the
phone: Assumes one has fabricated a jumper or has a test jig.  These
functions available only if you start the phone with one pin jumpered
to ground as below.

CHAN      \/   PWR LVL
x   x   x     x   x   x <--Rx Sig Strength, 00-99
SAT -->x   x   x  x  x   x   x <--1=TX Audio OFF
    ^   ^     ^   ^
1=TX on <-- :   :     :   : 1=RX AUdio OFf
1=SigTone ON    :     : 1=Control Channel

01#    Restart (Turns unit off and back on)
02#    Display current radio stuatus (non-scrolling version
       of above display)
04#    Initiales Unit to Standard Default Settings
Carrier OFF
RF Attenuator to max power
Receiver Audio Muted
Transmit Audio Muted
Signalling Tone Off
Resetting of Watchdog Timer Enabled
DTMF and Audio Tones off
Audio path set to speaker

05#     TX Carrier ON
06#     TX Carrier OFF
07#     RX OFF (Mute RX audio)
08#     RX Audio ON (Unmuted)
09#     TX Audio OFF
10#     TX Audio ON
11(CH No)# Sets to desired channel
12#     Set power to x; 0=max 7 = min
14#     10 Khz sig tone on
15#     10 Khz Sig tone off
19#     Display software version number (4 digits)
25x#    SAT Tone on when x=0, SAT = 5970 Hz
        x=1, SAT = 6000 Hz
        x=2, SAT = 6030 Hz
26#     SAT Tone off
27#     Transmit Data
28#     1150 Hz Tone on
29#     1150 Hz Tone off
30#     770 Hz Tone on
31#     770 Hz Tone off
32#     Clears all timers and resets User's programmable features to
        standard, also clears user stored memory.
33x#    Turn on DTMF Tone for X, X = 0-9, * or #
34#     DTMF Tone(s) off
35#     Display RSSI ("D" Series portable only)
35x#    Set Audio path to xx = 0, VSP mike
        (mobile only)x = 1, speaker
        x = 2, Alert
        x = 3, Handset
38#     Display ESN in Hex, 2 char at a time use * to step
        (Compandor OFF (D series portable only))
39#     Compandor on (D series portableonly)
41#     Enables Diversity (on f19cta series only)
42#     Disables Diversity)
43#     Disable Diversity
44#     Disable Diversity
45#     Display current rssi
46#     Display cumulative call timer
47x#    Set Rx audio level, 0-7 i.e. 474# is mid level
48#     Set side tone on
49#     Side Tone off
53#     Enable Scrambler option when equiped
54#     Disable scrambler
55#     Programming customer/system information
        Enter 55#, display shows U5 '
        Enter 55# again, proceed as if you've
        followed the sheet included with the phone.
        This allows one to change the phone params
        an infinite number of times.
        However, some of the info is not in sequence
        with the sheet provided with the phone.
58#     Compandor on
59#     Compandor off)
61#     Serial number transfer (for dmt / minitac only)
        (See Esn transfer procedure elsewhere)
62#     Turn on ringer audio path
63#     Turn off ringer audio path
70#     Abbreviated field transmitter audio deviation command
71#     Abbreviated field power adjustment command
72#     Field audio phasing commands
73#     Field power adjustment command (dmt/minitac only)

Fabrication of jumper in lieu of test jig:

8000H and Ultra Classic
To enter diag/self test mode:

1.Remove battery.
2.Looking at rear of radio, ground pin x
3.Re install battery and apply power


Rear Connector:

I  I  I  **  I  I  X
I  I  I  **  I  I  I
         **

* Is the antenna. I is the pins. Note: the case screws are NOT
at ground. The outer silver part of the antenna connector is.

I soldered a piece of stiff resistor lead at the X, and made it just
the proper length. I can then move it to touch the ground to read sig
strength, and then move it to touch nothing for normal operations.

Note that soldering to these pads is tricky, and probably voids the
warranty. A more elegant way would be to use a DC adaptor (Ora and
Celldyne sell them) and drill two small holes to use to connect with
an external jumper. No soldering. Note that the phone is not in power
save mode when in self test/diag mode and the battery will go down
quickly!

The inital display is channel and receive sig strength indicator,
useful for determing how close you are to a tower, or for aiming a
yagi in the desired direction.



Mark Earle   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your documentation above is remarkably
similar to the way Motorola has programmed their phones for the past
several years. Your documentation would work easily on many old phones
 from Motorola I suspect. My old 600 channel Motorola phone also went
into 'local' or 'test/programming mode' with the same grounding of a
pin as you describe it above, enabling one to reset the counter which
supposedly restricted programming the phone number to three times.
Since my Motorola had a 25-pin thing on it which connected to the
battery pack, the way I handled the grounding of the pin was to get a
25-pin connector from Radio Shack. I opened it up, shorted the desired
lead in there to another lead coming from the pin on the back of the
phone known to be a floating ground. Then when I wanted to go into
local or test mode, I'd just slide the battery pack a little back out
of the way, insert the little connector in there which had the changes
I had made, then slide the battery forward again reconnecting it all.
Quite simple and quick; snap in, reprogram quickly, snap out and restart
the phone. Of course I caution anyone doing re-programming of this
sort to have made prior arrangements with all involved carriers.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 19:43:36 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Notice to AT&T Long Distance Customers
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


{Washington Post} 12/29 Pg B3:

NOTICE TO AT&T LONG DISTANCE CUSTOMERS

AT&T filed tariff revisions with the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) on December 27, 1993 to increase its interstate calling card and
operator assisted (except coin) per-minute rates.  Service charges per
call in the following classes will also be increased.

Operator Dialed Calling    From      To
Card Station               $2.05    $2.12

Operator Station:
-Collect                   $2.05    $2.12
-Billed to Third Party     $2.11    $2.18
-Sent Paid--Non-Coin       $2.05    $2.12

These revisions are scheduled to become effective on January 10, 1994.
The average increase for all interstate, operator-assisted and calling
card calls is 3.35%

On December 27, 1993, AT&T filed tariff revisions with the FCC to
increase LDMTS dial station day rates by 7.74%, evening rates by
8.93%, and night/weekend rates by 4.74% for interstate calls within
the U.S.  Dial station rates apply when the person originating the
call has not subscribed to any optional calling plans or volume
discount plans and dials the telephone number desired, completes the
call without the assistance of a company operator and the call is
billed to the calling station.  These rates are scheduled to become
effective on January 10, 1994 and will apply to the general long
distance schedule applicable to non-commercial customers.

On December 27, 1993, AT&T filed tariff revisions with the FCC to
increase rates on international card and operator handled long
distance calls.  These rates will become effective on January 10,
1994.

These revisions will affect international operator handled and card
standard period rates on international card and operator handled long
distance calls.  These rates become effective on January 10, 1994.

These revisions will affect international operator handled and card
standard period rates to 20 countries/areas, with an average price
increase of 8% for a ten-minute call to these countries/areas.  The
increase in transport prices applies to calls to and from the U.S.
Mainland.

The affected countries are:

Algeria, Bangladesh, Burma, China, El Salvador, Hong Kong, Iran,
Jamaica, Laos, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Mexico (applies to schedule 1
rate bands only), Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Republic of South Africa,
Syrian Arab Republic, Taiwan, Thailand.

Effective February 10, 1994, AT&T USADirect* (R) Optional Calling Plan
- Option A, institutes a 30-call restriction on the number of Plan
calls eligible for discounted rates in a one month period.

Also effective on January 10, AT&T USADirect will institute an average
rate increase of 4.3%.  The revision will affect calls from:
Argentina, Columbia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Japan.
USADirect In-Language will institute a 6% rate increase on calls from
Columbia.

On December 27, 1993 AT&T filed tariff revisions with the FCC to
increase rates on general residential International Long Distance
Calls to specific countries.  The rates will become effective on
January 10, 1994, pending tariff effectiveness.

These revisions will affect direct-dial rates to 123 countries/areas
with and average price increase on a ten minute call to these
countries/areas being 3.75%.

The affected countries are:

American Samoa, Andorra, Anguilla, Antigua (incl. Barbuda), Argentina,
Armenia, Ascension Island, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Barbados, Belarus,
Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bermuda, Bolivia, Brazil, British Virgin Islands,
Bulgaria, Burma, Cameroon, Canada, Chad Republic, Chile, Columbia, Costa
Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Dominica, Dominican Republic,
Ecuador, Arab Republic of Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji
Islands, French Polynesia, Gabon Republic, Georgia, Ghana, Greece,
Grenada (incl. Carriacou), Guantanamo Bay, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti,
Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Republic of Ivory
Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Republic of Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait,
Krygyztan, Laos, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Democratic Republic of Matagascar, Malta,
Marshall Islands, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolian People's Republic,
Montserrat, Kingdom of Morocco, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherland
Antilles, Nevis, Nicaragua, Federal Republic of Nigeria, Pakistan,
Republic of Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Phillipines, Poland, Portugal,
Qatar, Romania, Russia, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal Republic,
Slovakia, Republic of South Africa, Spain, Democratic Socialist Republic
of Sri Lanka, St. Kitts, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and Grenadines, Republic
of Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Tanzania,
Republic of Togo, Tonga Islands, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan,
Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, Venezuela,
Republic of Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zimbabwe.

AT&T also filed tariff revisions on December 27, 1993 to separate its
ReachOut Overseas calling plans into separate schedules for Residence
and Business long distance users.  Business users are those customers
who pay a rate described as a business or commercial rate in the
applicable local exchange service tariff for switched services.  As a
result of these revisions, the 15% (special country) additional
discount will no longer be available to business users, who subscribe
to the ReachOut World Calling plan.  These changes will become
effective on February 10, 1994, pending tariff effectiveness.

                                  ---
* USADirect and ReachOut appear in bold everywhere they appear in the text,
with the (R) register mark following.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jason M. Githeko)
Subject: Direct Broadcast Satelites
Date: 29 Dec 1993 23:01:41 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois


I am trying to find out whether:

1. Any of the existing DBSs (especially European) have a footprint
that covers Kenya, East Africa.

2. What specific equipement one needs to receive DBS signal I would
appreciate any one with details of this. Thanks


Jason M. Githeko

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
1310 S. 6th, #345, Champaign IL 61820
e-mail: [e-mail] Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 11:18 EST
From: Anthony D. Vullo <[e-mail]>
Subject: ITU Method For Writing Telephone Numbers


     What is the ITU reference for the standard method of writing
telephone numbers?  I've noticed the following:

          (plus symbol) (country code) (city/area code) (number)

                    eg:  For a US telephone number;

                         +1 NPA NXX XXXX

                    eg:  For Manhattan directory assistance;

                         [phone]


     Thanks and Happy New Year!

Tony

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

From: [e-mail] (Edward van Egmond)
Subject: Who and What is Tecnet?
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 20:45:37 GMT
Organization: Hogeschool van Amsterdam, The Netherlands, E.E. & C.S. Dept.


We have a school asignment in which we have to make a connection
between a X-25 network and a Tecnet machine. The only problem is, we
never heard of Tecnet. What is it? What sort protocol does it use? And
most of all, how can we connect those two?


Thanks in advance,

Roses are red, violets are blue,
I'm a schizophrenic and so am I.
Edward van Egmond  [e-mail]

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

From: Wallace Colyer <[e-mail]>
Subject: CLID and PA
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 13:33:03 -0500
Organization: Systems Group 82, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


I heard an unsubstantiated rumor that Gov. Casey as one of his first
acts after taking the reigns of leadership back signed a Caller-ID
bill for PA which includes blocking provisions.  Can anyone substantiate
that and give more information about how and when it will be available?


Wallace


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Have you considered asking the
Governor's press relations or public information department for
details? I'd think if this is true, the telcos in PA would all be
rushing gleefully to tell their subscribers the news. I might be
wrong.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 15:19 EST
From: The Network Group <[e-mail]>
Subject: The PUC(s) and So-Called Tariffs


For all the years that I have been in the telecom business, the
various LEC's when they don't want or know how to deliver a particular
service or request tell you something like: "Well, it's not available
because it isn't in our tariffs, so therefore ..."

Being a long time Contel subscriber and having enjoyed a very close
relationship with Contel, I see General Telephone's creeping influence
and attitude getting into Contel's policies. Has anyone else -- in
particular in California -- noticed this? Especially little things
like "Assumed 9 Centrex" no longer being offered because "We're not
tariffed for that" ...

Has anyone even considered that a telephone utility as part of their
monopoly on local service has not only a duty but a right to offer
anyting that the C.O. switch is capable of delivering. My position is
that if there is to be a charge for this delivery it is up to the LEC
to then go to the PUC and prove to them that a charge should be made.
I don't think that it is correct and may possibly be illegal to
withold service based on the old "historic" position if it's not in
the tariff it doesn't exit.

I am not speaking of any major custom designs like four wire delivery
on POTS lines or some such request for custom circuits, but rather for
simple adjustments like on the DMS-100 C.O.D. Cutoff on disconnect for
lop and ground start lines to allow fro fine tuning of PBX to customer
equipment.

Any thoughts, experiences and comments would be appreciated.


Al Cohan   The Network Group   Mammoth Lakes, CA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the past, Illinois Bell always had a
miscellaneous tariff on file covering 'special customer applications
and requirements'. I'm not sure if that was the exact name of it or
not.  What it did was allow them to custom design the service as
needed and then file a 'tariff amendment' covering what they had done.
For example, during the early to middle 1970's, I operated a telephone
recorded announcement service here in Chicago. I gave a three minute
daily message of news and events going on in the Chicago area which
was paid for by various sponsors each day who were announced in the
course of the recorded message.  Incoming calls to my main listed number,
HARrison 7-1234 were distributed to about 35 lines which were in a
hunt group. So far so good; hunt groups are tariffed. The recordings
were on equipment rented from IBT -- large, bulky, *very* heavy things
normally used for intercept service in central offices ("the number
you have dialed is not in service") -- with round, spinning drums inside
them coated with what appeared to be mylar tape. A ringing line would
activate one of the 35 or so such machines (each one handled one line)
and as the drum inside would spin around and around a 'finger' would
drop down onto the drum to read it, just like a phonograph needle touches
a record when the arm is mechanically lowered. Again, so far so good,
these were tariffed even if not in common use.

What was *not* tariffed orginally however was having the machines all
wired so that one was a master and the others were all slaves to it
for the purpose of recording the messages. Originally, IBT suggested
to me I should record my message 35 times in a row, once on each machine.
We discussed the feasability of that -- none whatsoever -- and the
phone guy showed up at my office one day with a boxful of odds and
ends, various little wires and things, and after diddling around for
about three hours informed me of his improvements: a little toggle
switch mounted on the wall was to be used first to 'busy out' all 35
lines when it was time to record a new message. New calls would not be
accepted but calls in progress would be allowed to finish playing out
or until the caller disconnected, whichever came first. Then I was to
use the telephone associated with machine one to record my message in
the usual way, but it would be simultaneously recorded on all machines.
Following that, if satisfied with my recording, I was to flip the little
toggle switch on the wall back to its normal position and all lines
would go back in service with the 'busy out' condition removed.

I asked him what was his tariff authority for this. His answer was
that a miscellaneous tariff covers special situations and allows Bell
to report after the fact any 'special constructions' done for subscribers
and that the Commission would always approve it at Bell's 'suggested'
pricing for the service. I had no arguments with that; I was thrilled
they had done this. The phone guy was one of these old men who had
been with the company for decades and he told me in all his years with
the company he had never seen anything quite like what I had there. He
said I was the first subscriber of Illinois Bell to 'do recorded messages'
that were not religious, most of which were just on one line, never
a hunt group of 35 lines.

He also put in call registers for me. Each line had a register which inc-
remented by one whenever a call came on that line. In addition there was
a register which showed a grand total for all lines and a register which
incremented by one each time all positions were engaged (thus causing a
new caller to get a busy signal) although this was not evidence that a
call had been turned away, merely that *if* there had been a call it
would have gotten a busy signal. All the registers could be reset by hand
whenever desired. They also put an 'annunciator board' on the wall
with 35 beehive lamps to illuminate when the line was in use or a new
call was ringing in. They were apparently quite proud of their work
and for about a year afterward every visiting executive of a telco
somewhere in the USA who came to IBT headquarters was always brought
over to my office to see this unusual system the old guy had developed
for me. Some exec from IBT would come in, bringing one or two people
with him who he'd introduce as vice-president of whatever from Ohio
Bell, Michigan Bell or wherever. They'd poke and prod at my machines,
say they had never seen anything like it before, and have it all
explained to them.

About six months after it was installed I got a formal letter from the
Illinois Commerce Commission stating that IBT had petitioned them for a
'single subscriber miscellaneous tariff' with the monthly fee
requested. I had to sign off and return it to the ICC stating I had no
objections to Bell's petition and found the arrangements and tariff
to be satisfactory. Oh, I almost forgot: I had automatic reverse
toll service on it also; 'Enterprise 5748' would connect from anywhere
in northern Indiana, northern Illinois or southern Wisconsin.  Call
volume was typically seven to eight thousand calls per 24 hours with
my busiest times each day logging five to six hundred calls per hour. My
sponsor/patrons paid me money to talk about them and their services to
whoever called 427-1234 eight thousand times each day.   PAT]

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

From: octela!![e-mail] (Michael Dimitrov)
Subject: Super Long Range Cordless Phones
Organization: Octel Communications Corporation
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 21:53:45 GMT


A few months ago I saw an ad for a long range radio telephone -- it
works like cordless, but it's range is about 100 miles (right, one
hundred miles).  Of course, it said "Not for sale in the US".  A
friend of mine from Eastern Europe would like to buy one of these, but
I've lost the ad since then.  Could anyone provide information about
similar telephone systems -- manufacturers, reteilers, technical
details etc.


Thanks,

Mike

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

From: [e-mail] (M. Hedlund)
Subject: Caller ID/911 Seattle and Article Recommendation
Date: 29 Dec 1993 18:27:04 GMT
Organization: Reed College,  Portland, Oregon


I recently read a law review article covering legal/privacy issues of
Caller ID, cordless and cellular phones, and automated dialer and
recorded message players; it was the best review of current and
upcoming issues I have read.  "'Sorry, Wrong Number," The Effect of
Telephone Technology on Privacy Rights," 26 Wake Forest L. Rev. 669
(1991), by Robert Asa Crook.

I also saw a news piece about 911 technology and cellular phones,
saying that Caller-ID/Signalling System Seven had speeded response to
home calls (as discussed) but that only _some_ systems could ID
cellular phones -- Seattle was mentioned as considering cellular-
Caller ID to improve 911.  Apologies if this overlaps a thread I
missed, but anyone in Seattle with info?


[e-mail] : M. Hedlund : <standard.disclaimer> : Ourselves Alone // S.F.

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

From: [e-mail] (Claes Gussing)
Subject: Swedish Caller ID Hardware?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ericsson
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 16:25:32 GMT


In Sweden and maybe also Germany, the public phone-operators are
planning to provide CID in a different style than the American.
According to the specifications, the public exchange will deliver the
calling party's number as a sequence of DTMF-signals before the first
ring-signal. Is there any providers of consumer electronics out there
who are planning to support this?

Please respond to [e-mail].


Claes
The opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Barnecut)
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 10:33:28 EST
From: [e-mail] (Tony Barnecut)
Subject: Information Wanted on Simon Cellular Phones
Organization: CMHC Systems
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 15:33:15 GMT


I am looking for information on a cellular phone called SIMON. I saw a
picture of it in a recent issue of {InfoWorld} but it did not say who
the manufacturer is or where it could be purchased. From the short
description that was included I found that it has an LCD panel where
the keypad would be with interchangable cards that make it act as a
phone, pager and other things. With different cards, different icons
appear on the LCD panel for the functions for that particular card.
Any information anyone could give me on this this product would be
greatly appreciated.


Thank you,

[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #842
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa20297;
          30 Dec 93 4:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17108
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 30 Dec 1993 01:04:34 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32199
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 30 Dec 1993 01:04:08 -0600
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 01:04:08 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #843

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 30 Dec 93 01:04:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 843

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    New Service From NY Tel - 'Reverse Directory' (Danny Burstein)
    "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous (Danny Burstein)
    Prepaid Phone Pass by Bell Canada (David Leibold)
    Use a 9600 Baud US Modem in UK? (Mike Carlton)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (John R. Levine)
    Re: NPA Questions (Jean-Marc Fortier)
    Re: NPA Questions (Carl Moore)
    Re: NPA Questions (Brian Nunes)
    Re: NPA Questions (Mike King)
    Re: NPA Questions (David Leibold)
    Re: NPA Questions (Paul Robinson)
    Re: ATM News Groups Wanted (Harry Schroeder)
    Re: 500 Channel Cable Television (Todd D. Hale)
    Re: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted (Doug Gurich)
    Re: Caller ID in Software? (David Jones)
    Re: 911 Changes in Toronto (Robert L. Ullmann)
    Administrivia - A Few Lost Messages (TELECOM Digest Editor)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: New Service From NY Tel - 'Reverse Directory'
Date: 29 Dec 1993 23:03:04 -0500


Just caught the following public notice ad in {Newsday}, Dec 29, 1993
(tore it out without markking down the page number):

"Notice of proposed changes in Telephone company regulations"

"Notice is hereby given .... to be effective Feb 4, 1993 ... for Reverse
Directory Assistance:

RDA provides callers with the listed name, listed address, including
zip code if available, for a given business or government telephone
number.

The ad goes on to say that it will be available in the 'Downstate
Metropolitan LATA", and explains how useful it will be.

Charge is listed at $0.45 "per given telephone number."

Note a few points: This is ONLY for business and government listings.
Also, it's not clear from the wording what happens if you ask for a
residential or an unlisted number. Also unmentioned is what happens if
you call NYC directory assistance using a long distance carrier.


Take care,

danny     (10288) 0-700-864-3242
[e-mail] adds: all the usual disclaimers regarding liability,
intelligence, accuracy apply. spelling disclaimer is doubled.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If it works like the same service in
Chicago, it won't be reachable through directory assistance. You will
dial a seven digit number. That number will carry a toll charge of
45 cents per call/lookup, and on long distance calls, only the
regular toll charge (from wherever the person is calling) will apply.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous
Date: 29 Dec 1993 23:09:23 -0500


A new service offered in the NYC area by NY Tel (soon to be called
Nynex) is called "Anonymous Call Rejection." This tariff allows you
(at a fee, of course) to take calls coming from caller-id BLOCKed
numbers and reroutte them to a recording saying something like:

  We're sorry, the person you called does not take calls from anonymous
  callers. If you want to reach this person, please redial from an
  unblocked line ...

For good measure, this also does -not- ring your phone until the
person tries again from an unblocked line.

  Now, aside from the obvious problems of a friend calling from a line
which they don't know is blocked, and not knowing how to unblock it,
there's another issue.

  Many of the COCOTS get their CNID blocked in an attempt to reduce
fraud (or, perhaps I should say, other people's fraud ...). So there
you are, sitting at the COCOT, trying to make the call, and wasting
quarter after quarter ...


[e-mail] adds: all the usual disclaimers regarding liability,
intelligence, accuracy apply. spelling disclaimer is doubled.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No not really, because the call will
not supervise, thus the COCOT will not collect your coin if it is
properly programmed to return money for lack of an answer or in the
event of a busy signal, etc. PAT

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

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 22:14 WET
From: [e-mail] (woody)
Subject: Prepaid Phone Pass by Bell Canada


Bell Canada's Hello Phone Pass is the Canadian answer to such long
standing services as Talk Tickets and many other prepaid calling
schemes worldwide.

The idea of the pass is that it gives $20 worth of calling time via a
special 800 number. Each pass has a serial number which is used when
placing the calls and is entered via touch tones. There are voice
prompts to indicate how much time can be had on a call, and when only
a minute is left for the call. Another 800 number is used for
assistance.

The costs of placing calls through Bell Canada's phone pass (CAD$):

Calls within a province                        50c/min
Calls within Canada, outside home province   $1.00/min
Calls from Canada to U.S.A.                  $1.50/min
Calls from Canada to U.K.                    $2.00/min
Calls from Canada to Europe/Americas         $2.50/min
Calls from Canada to Pacific/Asia            $3.00/min

Each 50 cents is set up as a "unit" of calling time; thus a $20 pass
will have 40 units. Local calls are considered to be a call within
province, so these will cost 50 cents a minute using the pass (whereas
a payphone only gobbles up 25 cents for unlimited local time).


David Leibold

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Carlton)
Subject: Use a 9600 Baud US Modem in UK?
Date: 29 Dec 1993 19:34:14 -0800
Organization: USC Information Sciences Institute


I've got a friend who'll soon be moving to the UK (Durham actually).
She's got a Hayes compatible 9600 baud modem that she would like to
take with her and use there.

Can anyone tell me if she can expect it to work with the British phone
system?  Is there a special initialization necessary for the modem?
Do they use the same standard phone jacks as used in the US?


Thanks,

mike ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 12:17:28 -0800 (PST)


Said by: Mitch Wagner

> foot the bill for a second phone line. What is the cost of a second
> phone line, anyway? -- $50/mo. and maybe a few hundred dollars install
> charge, right?

This brings up an interesting point: What DO the various telephone
companies charge as their basic rate?  Out here in PacBell territory,
we pay 8.95 for unmeasured service.  What about other areas?  Is this
low?


Steve    [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015

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

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 23:26 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> I think that supposedly intelligent people (doctors, lawyers, social
> workers, and their employers) should find their OWN solution to that
> issue and not burden the public-switched-telephone-network, and the
> rest of us, with their problems.

Funny about that.  I think that supposedly intelligent people
(computer nerds, telemarketers, etc.) who feel that they want to know
who's calling before picking up the phone should find their OWN
solution to that issue and not burden the public-switched-telephone-
network, and the rest of us, with their problems.

CL-ID is a solution looking for a problem.  Or maybe the other way
around.

Pat: we've demonstrated many times in the past that nobody's going to
be persuaded by these arguments.  Can we cut this thread off here?


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Snip, snip, snip. Thread cut off.
How long will it be until it comes back around again?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jean-Marc Fortier)
Subject: Re: NPA Questions
Date: 29 Dec 93 17:11:10 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jean-Marc Fortier)
Organization: Ingres Corporation, A subsidiary of The ASK Group, Inc.


Bill Hofmann ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns
>    in that corridor, are there any other localities which
>    REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll
>    calls, I guess)?

Toronto with the split 416-905 does the same thing.

   in 416 to call 905 (local) dial 905 + seven digits;
   in 905 to call 416 (local) dial 416 + seven digits;

   in all cases long distance is 1 + areacode + seven digits;

   if you dial (from 416) a 905 + seven digit number that is
   not a local call you get an intercept message to dial 1 + area + seven.


Jean-Marc Fortier

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

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 12:18:41 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NPA Questions


[e-mail] (Bill Hofmann) writes:

> 1. Does any state publish 1 + NPA+ 7d AND 0 + 7d instructions?  I have
>    here that Delaware still does (302).  Carl Moore's note in
>    "history" yhat 213 does is incorrect.

Is the "1 + NPA + 7d" intended to refer to long distance within area
code?  I have continued to see 1 + 7D for long distance within Delaware
(302); how do you arrive at your remark about 302?  As for 213 (which
has 7D for long distance within it), I did write in the PAST tense
about its continuing to publish 0+7D for 0+ within it; because of your
apparent confusion, I have added "but for some time" to the next
version.

> 2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns
>    in that corridor, are there any other localities which
>    REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll
>    calls, I guess)?

Yes, the NPA + 7D scheme is seen for some other local calls: within
the DC area (area codes 301, 202, 703) across the 301/410 border in
Md.  (and this affects some of the DC area suburbs, such as Silver
Spring) across 416/905 border in Ontario.  But I think local from 215
area to other area codes (and from New Jersey to out of state)
requires 1 + NPA + 7D.

FYI, 510 allows 1 + 510 dialing, I haven't checked other Bay Area area
codes.  510 does publish 7D, rather than 1+510+7D, for long distance
within it.  But as I say in the history file, the suggestion exists
that any call within +1 be makeable as 1 + NPA + 7D.

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Nunes)
Subject: Re: NPA Questions
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 21:08:12 GMT


On Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:30:19 PST Bill Hofmann ([e-mail]) wrote:

> In reviewing the various sources (telecom postings, discussions with
> LECs, etc), I'm left with a few questions that folks out there may be
> able to help with:

(material omitted)

> 2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns
>    in that corridor, are there any other localities which
>    REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll
>    calls, I guess)?

Depending on your locale, the following calls may be non-toll:

NPA 310 (East Los Angeles) to/from NPA 714 (Orange County)
NPA 310 (East Los Angeles) to/from NPA 213 (Metro L.A.)
NPA 818 (L.A. Valleys)     to/from NPA 213 (Metro L.A.)
NPA 714 (Orange County)    to/from NPA 909 (Inland Empire)
NPA 818 (L.A. Valleys)     to/from NPA 909 (Inland Empire)


Brian Nunes=*-*-*-*-*-* [e-mail] -*-*-1-213-656-9117
7985 Santa Monica Blvd. #109-473, West Hollywood, CA 90046-5112

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: NPA Questions
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 14:43:32 PST


Virtually all the non-toll inter-NPA calls in the C&P service areas
near the District of Columbia (MD, VA, and DC) require the NPA to be
dialed.  Dialing '1' is optional, though, and if the call is non-toll,
dialing '1' won't incur a charge.  Toll call, however, DO require the
'1'.

These calls include 301<->202, 301<->703, 202<->703, 301<->410, and
possibly, 410<->202.


Mike King ([e-mail])  Usual disclaimers...

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

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 18:28 WET
From: [e-mail] (woody)
Subject: Re: NPA Questions


416/905 requires NPA+7D for local calls between 416 and 905 (Metro
Toronto boundary), mandatory as of March 1994.

Washington DC metro area (202/301/703) already does.

Rochester Tel now requires 1 + 315 + 7D for local calls from its 716
points to local 315 NPA points.

And no doubt there will be more ...


David Leibold

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

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 21:31 EST
Subject: Re: NPA Questions
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


In the National Capital area, for interstate local calls between DC
and its Maryland and Virginia Suburbs, one must dial the 10 digit
number, e.g. 202 Nxx-xxxx, 301 Nxx-xxxx or 703 Nxx-xxxx.  The ten
digit number will be accepted for all local calls even if it is the
same area code, so you don't have to reprogram a speed dialer if you
use a phone in a different area code than where you programmed it.

In Virginia, dialing 703 before a local number makes the call take
longer than dialing the 7 digit number alone.  (Dialing the area code
on a local call used to not work at all).  In Maryland, using 301 does
not add any extra time to the call setup, except it provides one
useful feature: if the number being dialed is outside the local area
you get a recording saying it can't complete your call; if you dial
that same call with 301 first, you get a recording telling you to dial
1 before the number.

The reason being that many exchanges that are non-local from Maryland
and Virginia Suburbs were local exchanges in DC or the other state and
before the area code was required on local interstate calls, you could
dial a number anywhere in DC or the VA and MD suburbs by dialing the 7
digit number.  Callers outside of Washington could call someone in a
Maryland suburb by dialing either 301 or 202 and Virginia suburb
numbers worked on both 703 and 202.

> FYI, 510 allows 1+510 dialing, I haven't checked other Bay Area
> area codes.

In Maryland, I know that you can dial 1 first even if the call is
local. I haven't tried testing the other two areas much, as I don't
get to Virginia more than once a month and I try to stay out of the
District of Cocaine as much as is humanly possible.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought that Our Nation's Capitol
was located in the District of Crime, not the District of Cocaine. I
know the street violence there is almost as bad as Chicago, maybe even
worse. Cocaine or crime, its not surprising considering the Congress
of the USA provides local Washington DC government.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harry Schroeder)
Subject: Re: ATM News Groups Wanted
Organization: Community_News_Service
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 13:33:50 GMT


Donald Army ([e-mail]) wrote:

:>>Are there any news groups on ATM??

:>>Thanks,

:>>[e-mail]

There is the comp.dcom.cell-relay group which has quite a bit of ATM
discussions. You might want to check there.



Harry Schroeder      MCI Mail: HSchroeder
Internet: [e-mail] or  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks also to Rudof Meyer and several
others for providing identical answers not printed here.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd D. Hale)
Subject: Re: 500 Channel Cable Television
Organization: Novell, Inc., Provo, UT, USA
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 17:51:17 GMT


Also, about 500+ channels: they need not all be allocated.  We could
only dedicate 100 or so, and use the rest for ON DEMAND programming.
Sure, that's only 400 or so households being serviced on demand, but
that can be overcome by splitting subscription areas into small enough
regions (mega mega bit backbones with 500 channel local bandwidth).

Perhaps I missed this discussion earlier in the thread??

BTW, when I say on demand programming, I refer to anything from local
to world news to sports news to movies to sitcoms to WHATEVER.  Can't
wait, myself.  Imagine sitting down to local news and hitting some
NEXT story button when you're ready to move on.  Or, select a set of
stories from a table of contents and play it through.  Etc, etc ...


Todd D. Hale    [e-mail]   [e-mail]
Unofficially speaking, of course.

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

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 14:30:34 CST
From: [e-mail] (Doug Gurich)
Subject: Re: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted


> I am looking for recommendations for introductory books on
> telecommunications.  I'm familiar with Pierce's "Signals" but would
> like something more recent.

One such book that I have read recently, and would eagerly recommend,
is called, "Guess Who's Listening at the Other End of Your Telephone?"
by Barry H. Harrin.  It provides an insider's look into the management
of the telecommunications industry.

Told in a humorous, entertaining manner, the book details Mr. Harrin's
true life experiences in the telecommunications industry.  The stories
provide a good "behind the scenes" look at such companies as AT&T,
Southern Bell, Claydesta/Fiberline and NTS Communications.


Some chapter titles are:

Ma Bell's Indoctrination
Management-New York Style
Welcome to Southern Fried Bell
Attack of the Clay People
Bringing Civilization and Fiber Optics to Texas
The Texas Dial Tone Massacre
Pirates of the Potomac

This is a great book for learning how the industry has evolved in
recent years.  It especially provides a good look at how the decision
makers work and the things they will do to get ahead in the business.
I very much recommend it.  It is available from Commanche Press at 906
Lightstone, San Antonio, TX 78258 and is $19.95 plus $3.00 S&H.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Jones)
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software?
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 21:05:49 -0500


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (P D H)
writes:

> I take it that a lot of people are interested in which modems do
> include the hardware feature and have cooresponding firmware to deal
> with it.  I would suspect one reasonable way to deal with it is when
> the "RING" message comes from the modem, the second one can include
> the caller-id info.  Then your host software can choose to do with it
> as it wants.

Let's get down to specifics:

The ZyXEL U-series modems do caller ID.  Here's a typical terminal
trace:

RING

TIME: 29-12-93 21:08:26
CALLER ID: 416 555 1212

RING

I've tried this out on my ZyXEL, and it works fine for me.  I have
heard reports of problems with some exchanges, but my modem works fine
in 416-463.


David Jones, M.A.Sc student, Electronics Group (VLSI), University of Toronto
email: [e-mail], finger for more info/PGP public key

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert L Ullmann)
Subject: Re: 911 Changes in Toronto
Organization: The World in Boston
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 02:50:17 GMT


My opinion: clearly, it is very bad news if the 911 service ignores a
call and it turns out to be a real emergency.

I'd suggest a city bylaw that states that there is a mandatory $5000
service charge for false alarms generated by automatic devices. (NOT A
FINE, note; just an ordinary bill for city services; this makes it
much easier to enforce.)

I understand that U.S. cities typically have this sort of rule for
false fire service alarms, whether automatic or not.


Robert Ullmann        [e-mail]    [phone]

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 00:48:55 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: A Few Lost Messages


Due to a bug in my script here a few of the messages you sent me on
Monday and Tuesday were lost in processing. I've finally figured out
*why* this happens at irregular intervals; now the trick will be to
find the solution, but I think I can. So if you wrote to the Digest
on Monday or Tuesday of this week and your message has not yet
appeared *as of this issue and what appears above* then it got sent
to dev/null in error, and I ask you to submit it again with my
sincere apologies.  I know, I asked you this same thing a couple
weeks ago and part of the growing pains around here involves making
some serious modifications to message processing because of the
huge volume of stuff arriving which has to be sorted and picked
through, etc.  So anyway, mostly it was whatever you sent me on
Tuesday.  Replace it if you can please, as we wind down another
year here together.

There will be a couple more issues of the Digest this week to wind
things up, then publication will resume sometime over the weekend
with Volume 14.  Sometime over the weekend the Index of Subjects
and Authors for volume 13 will be compiled and added to the exist-
ing indexes of same in the archives. A new archives roadmap or
directory will also be published. In addition, I have a special
report on Digicom modems for you to read, and that will be mailed out
in the next few days. See you again tomorrow.


PAT

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #843
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23416;
          30 Dec 93 15:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10874
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 30 Dec 1993 12:09:34 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13438
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 30 Dec 1993 12:09:07 -0600
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 12:09:07 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #844

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 30 Dec 93 12:09:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 844

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Super Long Range Cordless Phones (Mark W. Earle)
    Re: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous (Jack Hamilton)
    Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (M.A. Karinen)
    Re: New Service From NYTel - 'Reverse Directory' (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Direct Broadcast Satelites (Mark Chartrand)
    Re: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted ([e-mail])
    Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (George Zmijewski)
    DC Area Calls (was Re: NPA Questions) (Carl Moore)
    Radio Religion (was 500 channels...) (A. Padgett Peterson)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 11:37 EST
From: Mark W. Earle <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Super Long Range Cordless Phones


Michael Dimitrov wrote:

> A few months ago I saw an ad for a long range radio telephone -- it
> works like cordless, but it's range is about 100 miles (right, one
> hundred miles).  Of course, it said "Not for sale in the US".  A
> friend of mine from Eastern Europe would like to buy one of these, but
> I've lost the ad since then.  Could anyone provide information about
> similar telephone systems -- manufacturers, reteilers, technical
> details etc.

These usually turn out to be nothing more than 1/2 duplex, two way
radios (hand held or mobiles) with a telephone interconnect similiar
to an amateur radio "autopatch". The reason they are not for sale in
the US is that, to use such a device requires a business or other
license; the gear must be FCC type accepted.

The range stated is usually "optimum", assuming the base station part
of the system were atop some high structure or land feature. More
typically, the range of such systems is 20 or so miles if installed at
150' above average terrain; less if lower.

Such systems typically do not include directions to the user, antennas
and coax for the base station, service literature, etc. The stuff not
included drives the cost up, of course.

While you could conceivably purchase such a system, and get it legally
licensed in the US, you'd typically have no support. Such units also
tend to be of low quality; the portable radios in particular will not
withstand rugged use; and the cost usually is not much less than
getting a "first rate" system with quality components from a local two
way shop.

Note that these things usually include no details of how to license it
for legal use "overseas" either! Many of the same problems apply.
Usually, most foreign phone companies take a dim view of anything
connected that they haven't "approved" or taxed. Same thing with the
foreign authority which approves radio transmitting devices.  If you
simply buy one and put it on the air as equiped, usually you are on a
frequency already in use by someone, and you will have your gear
siezed, pay a fine, etc.

So usually, save your money and ignore these things. Consider
cellular, or talk to a local two way communications shoo for options
to cellular if you think you need something non-cellular.

                   --- Technical Notes ---

Some of these system use a full duplex base station, and half duplex
mobile units. These sound "OK" and the caller usually can't tell the
difference from a "normal" call, except if the party on the radio is
talking, than they can't hear "uh huhs"; the radio only talks or
listens.

Some systems use a 1/2 duplex base. Typically, it transmits using
voice sensing, sampling the callee; these can be problematic if the
callee is in a noisy environment. Still others key the transmitter,
but very quickly (once/second for xx milliseconds) drop the
trransmiter and if the mobile / portable has been switched to
transmit, than the base stays in receive mode, and the callee can hear
the mobile.  >From the mobile side, the callee has little "holes" in
their speach.  These types of systems are generally used on amateur
radio frequencies for a very low cost phone interconnect.

These "interconnects" used to be very popular in the U.S. as add ons
to two way radio systems. Typically, during the day, an operation
would have a "base" station and mobile or portable radios; a
dispatcher could talk to their field units. After hours, field units
could make calls from their mobiles without anyone having to be at the
office.

IMTS mobile phones (the fore runner to today's cellular phones) were
impossible to get in major markets - there was literally years waiting
list. Someone had to die or give up their service before a new
customer could be accomodated; so although of less quality, these
interconnects became very popular. As cellular became dominant and
readily availble, they're not as widely used as in years past.

One segment still using these interconnets is the "3rd Network" you
hear advertised on Rush Limbaugh and other shows. Usually, the angle
is you invest monies and get some % of revenues. These systems are two
way conventional or trunked 800 Mhz radios. The user buys/leases a
mobile or portable. The "service provider" sets up a base station
system and installs a full duplex interconnect. Since on 800 Mhz the
mobiles are full duplex, call quality is quite good. The mobile
usually keys a mike, pushes *, hears dial tone, and dials; # to
disconnect the call.  Some systems provide mobiles with telephone -
like handsets. Some have fairly sophisticated computer driven billing.
Some allow incoming calls; usually, the callee dials a common number,
hears a tone, and keys in a "unit number", which the base station
computer than translates to a mobile unit, generates a "ring", and the
mobile user pushes * to answer the call.

Compared to Cellular, there are some advantages: usually lower cost or
even flat rate/month unlimited calling. But, these systems work over a
smaller geographic area; whereas a cellular phone will generally work
no matter where you travel. The "3rd Network" type systems also
require a bit more of the callee to reach a mobile. Service quality
may be good to medium, or excellent; usually, the base station is one
or two sites, and so if you are far away from the site you may get
static/noise; cellular usually has more sites in a given market to
minimize this problem.

There is generally less fraud problem with this type of radio phone.
(I.E., no ESN "tumbler" call shop activity)

I know of one construction company which uses them for this reason:
they get a flat rate, and it only works over a limited area. So they
don't care/worry if employees make "personal" calls on the truck
phone. So in some cases, these system can be advantageous.

Generally, there is no "roam" capability. If you travel beyond the
area of your system, the radio/phone cannot receive or place calls.
There is some discussion of developing a name/ network similiar to
Cellular One for these "3rd Network" users, but there are many more
technical issues and regulatory issues; and ultimately, the cost of a
true "network" would probably be more than just using a cellular
phone. Cellular enjoys volume pricing.

Equipment costs to the end user may be higher than cellular; usually
the cellural provider pays the agent a subscription fee equal to the
cost of the phone, so that the agent can sell the phone for almost
$0.00; whereas on the "3rd Network" type systems, the user pays around
$500 for a mobile unit.

Another consideration is that the cellular providers usually offer
extended area dialing, where you pay only air time for calls that are
long distance to neighboring cities on a "regular" phone. On a "3rd
Network" type phone/radio, such plans are usually not offered.

Also, you're dealing with a local, sometimes "small" company, instead
of a regional Bell subsidiary or Cellular One agent; this can be a
plus or minus, depending on your needs.

Oh, the "3rd Network" calls are much easier to intercept with a
scanner, and legal to do. A call stays on one channel of a possible 5,
10, or 20 channels of a base station system for the entire call.
Cellular calls are illegal to intercept; and on a heavily used cmt
system, a call will "jump" from frequency to frequency, making a
particular call tough to target or follow for the hobbyist level
scanner user. (Note that LE/detectives/those with $$ can purchase
"cellular call followers"). Use of such devices is a legal and wire
tap grey area, but it does happen, especially in big $ divorce and
drug cases. The evidence may never be admitted in court, but it gives
the listener pointers at other evidence, or allows the detective to be
at the right place and time to snap photographs of afternoon
encounters, etc .  :-)

Another factor may be, in the coming years, Personal Communications
System (PCS) low cost, short range portable phones being test marketed
in limited areas (one of our Digest correspondants reports once in a
while on how his test experiences are going). PCS should not be
confused with the above described systems; they're totally different
animals. Be especially careful when listening to slick ads asking you
to invest :-)

Another market that uses interconnects is near off shore oil
exploration. Around Texas, several compaines off "RTI" Rig Telephones
Inc. At the oil rig, a regular looking phone controls a radio; on a
tower near shore, a radio/interconnect are hooked to the regular phone
system. The oil exploratoin/service company pays a flat fee to the
owner, or leases eqipment, etc. For high call volumes, this is cheaper
than cellular. Of course, it only works to about 40 miles our so off
shore. Then point to point microwave relay, satellite, or some other
method must be used, at higher costs.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 06:43:31 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous


In TELECOM Digest V13 #843 [e-mail] (danny burstein)
writes:

> A new service offered in the NYC area by NY Tel (soon to be called
> Nynex) is called "Anonymous Call Rejection." This tariff allows you
> (at a fee, of course) to take calls coming from caller-id BLOCKed
> numbers and reroutte them to a recording saying something like:

>   We're sorry, the person you called does not take calls from anonymous
>   callers. If you want to reach this person, please redial from an
>   unblocked line ...

> For good measure, this also does -not- ring your phone until the
> person tries again from an unblocked line.

I caught this about two weeks ago (the same time as the Reverse
Directory announcement).

I have CLID and receive calls from about three people who have their
lines blocked and my feeling is that they are a relative or friend, it
is worthless to me.

{Newsday}, which Danny refers to usually publishes NYTel and AT&T
tariff filings on Wednesday and if I come across one that might affect
me, I'll try it.  I've had a 95% success ratio so far and this is
before the effective date.

What I've found is that the tariff announcement is made after the mod
is put into place and available and then the public announcement via
the bill is about two months later.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Hamilton)
Subject: Re: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 16:49:05 GMT


[e-mail] (danny burstein) wrote:

> A new service offered in the NYC area by NY Tel (soon to be called
> Nynex) is called "Anonymous Call Rejection." This tariff allows you
> (at a fee, of course) to take calls coming from caller-id BLOCKed
> numbers and reroutte them to a recording saying something like:

>   We're sorry, the person you called does not take calls from anonymous
>   callers. If you want to reach this person, please redial from an
>   unblocked line ...

Do such services offer a way around the blocking in an emergency,
either by subscriber (911 and other services could call all numbers
without being blocked) or on a per-call basis through the operator?


Jack Hamilton            POB 281107 SF CA 94128  USA
[e-mail]           kd6ttl@w6pw.#nocal.ca.us.na


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes they do. The person placing the
call need only dial the appropriate 'unblock code' (what is it,
typically *67) before dialing his call and it will go through just
fine.  PAT]

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

Date: 30 Dec 93 02:57:25 EST
From: M A Karinen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?


What caller ID is provided on Calling Card calls?  What should it be:
Number of orignating (physical) phone, or originating calling card
(phone number part), i.e. the "logical" phone making the call?  If the
caller ID showed the calling card (phone) number, wouldn't that solve
the need for an "alternate calling ID" at the same time. I realise
that even this scheme is not necessarily easy to implement: we are
seeing more and more calling cards where there is no trace of the home
or office number as part of the card number.  This could be solved by
a database the card operator keeps on each card, that would include
the caller-id number to transmit when the card creates a call.

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 06:35:20 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: New Service From NYTel - 'Reverse Directory'


In TELECOM Digest V13 #843 [e-mail] (danny burstein)
writes:

> Just caught the following public notice ad in {Newsday}, Dec 29, 1993
> (tore it out without markking down the page number):

> "Notice of proposed changes in Telephone company regulations"

> "Notice is hereby given .... to be effective Feb 4, 1993 ... for Reverse
> Directory Assistance:

> RDA provides callers with the listed name, listed address, including
> zip code if available, for a given business or government telephone
> number.

Test deleted - dwn

The first time I saw that ad was about two weeks ago.  I tried it for
a NYC number and it worked with no problem.  I don't know what the
cost was since I did it from work.

There was something in there about residence service being available
but I think it was left out since calls like these would be to
businesses where the exact address is needed.

BTW: It took quite awhile (>2 minutes) to find out since the request
had to go through two or three levels before I reached someone who
could understand what I wanted.

I haven't tried it from home to see what happens.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

From: [e-mail] (mark chartrand)
Subject: Re: Direct Broadcast Satelites
Date: 30 Dec 1993 08:57:46 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


In article <[e-mail]>,
Jason M. Githeko <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I am trying to find out whether:

> 1. Any of the existing DBSs (especially European) have a footprint
> that covers Kenya, East Africa.

No, none of the existing DBS satellites covers East Africa.  The
closest you can do is some weak coverage of northern Africa by some
of the European systems.

There are plans for a DAB system for Africa, but none for DBS
television (officially known as BSS-TV).  The planned DAB system is by
Worldspace, Inc., and will be called Afristar.  They are saying they
plan to be operational in 1996, with a planned 1995 launch.  It will
have 50 20-watt transponders in L-band and X-band, circular
polarization, and a beam-center strength of 33dBW.

> 2. What specific equipement one needs to receive > DBS signal.

Depends on the system.  BSS-TV has requirments for minimum signal
strength on the ground at beam center of 51 dBW, so a very small (say
12-inch) antenna can be used.  At beam edge it will have to be larger.

This information taken from the 1993 Satellite Systems Handbook,
published by Phillips Business Information.

Hope this helps.


Mark Chartrand    [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 10:55:10 EST
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeff
Sokolov) writes:

> I am looking for recommendations for introductory books on
> telecommunications.  I'm familiar with Pierce's "Signals" but would
> like something more recent.

Call the folks at Telecom Library in New York, 1-800-LIBRARY.  Ask for
a catalog then pick out one of the intro books at the appropriate
level.  As for general books James Martin has an adequate book.  I
might also recommend the _Telecommunications Factbook_ published this
year by McGraw-Hill.  Yes I work with one of the authors but I hope
that hasn't biased me too much.  Of course your mileage may vary.


"standard disclaimer" -DW

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

From: [e-mail] (George Zmijewski)
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?
Organization: MGZ Computer Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 15:53:08 +0000


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

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

>> From Oftel Consultative Document June 93:

>> The codes that will *not* change at NCC are the existing codes for
>> non-geographic services, ie:

> My understanding (from {BT Engineering Journal}) is that the only reason
> that the non-geographic numbers are not changing is that they would
> conflict with the old geographic numbers.  The intention is that, once

The idea is to be able to distinguish between POTS numbers and other
services by loking at the first digit of the STD (the S-digit):

01xxx, 02xxx  -   for geographic STD codes
03xxx         -   for mobile phones,
04xxx, 06xxx  -   reserved for future,
05xxx, 08xxx  -   for free numbers,
09xxx         -   reserved for further expansion of numbering scheme

It has not been decided yest if the codes with S-digit 2 will overlap
current STD areas or a different scheme will be used (ie use of
shorter code and 8 digit subscriber number, allocation of STD to
operator specific geographic zones) And for the record: On 16 April
1995 UK numbering scheme will change as follows: All geographic STD
codes will get 1 added in front ie.  0222 248700 -> 01222 248700
(international: +44222 xxxxxx -> 441222 xxxxxx)

In addition, in order to provide sufficient numbering capacity number
structure in five cities vill change as follows

BRISTOL     0272 XXXXXX    becomes   0117 9XXXXXX
LEEDS       0532 XXXXXX    becomes   0113 2XXXXXX
LEICESTER   0533 XXXXXX    becomes   0116 2XXXXXX
NOTTINGHAM  0602 XXXXXX    becomes   0115 9XXXXXX
SHEFFIELD   0742 XXXXXX    becomes   0114 2XXXXXX

Codes that will *NOT* change (non geographic):

     0336  0338  0345  0374  0385  0500  0640  0645  0660

     0800  0802  0831  0836  0839  0850  0860  0881  0891

     0898  0910  0941  0956  0958  0973  0976


George Zmijewski

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 10:38:40 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC Area Calls (was Re: NPA Questions)


[e-mail] (Mike King) writes about local calls between area codes:

> These calls include 301<->202, 301<->703, 202<->703, 301<->410, and
> possibly, 410<->202.

I do not think 410<->202 can be local.  After I learned of the 301/410
split three years ago, I found that, aside from the "strange" case of
301-688 at Fort Meade: if you are local to Washington, you stay in
301, and if you are local to Baltimore, you switch from 301 to 410.
If you leave Washington and go northeast toward Baltimore or east
toward Annapolis, you enter 410 as soon as you leave the DC calling
area.

Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

> In Virginia, dialing 703 before a local number makes the call take
> longer than dialing the 7 digit number alone.  (Dialing the area code
> on a local call used to not work at all).  In Maryland, using 301 does
> not add any extra time to the call setup...

Are you saying there is difference in setting up a call between these
cases?

1. use of 703 + 7D for a local call within 703 in the Virginia suburbs;
2. use of 301 + 7D for a local call within 301 in the Maryland suburbs;

Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

> Callers outside of Washington could call someone in a
> Maryland suburb by dialing either 301 or 202 and Virginia suburb
> numbers worked on both 703 and 202.

Formerly, incoming long distance could reach Maryland and Virginia
suburbs using area code 202 in lieu of 301 or 703, but this is gone
now (as of Oct. 1990) because of the prefix shortage. The NPA + 7D
scheme for local calls between area codes in the DC area was working
by then, but 202 + 7D was useable only for calls to DC.  This
shrinkage of 202 is my excuse for writing about this in the history
file, even though no new area code was created.

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

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 10:17:54 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Radio Religion (was 500 channels...)


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The televangelism aspect is a very
> interesting one. I can remember years and years ago -- the 1950's
> in particular -- when there were no specifically 'religious' radio
> stations with the exception of WMBI out of Chicago at Moody Bible
> and maybe one or two others; HCJB in Quito, Ecuador comes to mind if
> you include shortwave stuff.

Well I have many fond memories of WLAC (Nashville ? 1510 AM ?) keeping
me company during "red-eye" drives in the 60's and '70s from Florida to
Texas when most stations had left the air. One in particular sticks in
my mind -- a lady testifying how her faith had brought her "a new
Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham D'Elegance...".

Of course I have no idea what they broadcast during the day, I never
tuned in before midnight since the "Big Ape" - WAPE was available
then.  Seems to me that there was also a "pure religion" station in
either Tulsa or Broken Arrow about then.


Warmly,

Padgett


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well by the middle 1960's all-religious
stations were starting to be heard in a few places. WYCA-FM in
Hammond, Indiana came on the air I guess about 1963; WMBI in Chicago
started their FM affiliate station sometime in the early to middle
1960's. But prior to that, all the evangelists seemed to concentrate
on getting air time from the big, fifty-thousand watt clear channel
stations across the United States, or else they bought time from small
local stations.  A mark of success for those guys was when they could
afford a half hour or even fifteen minutes on the Mutual Network. The
CBS Radio Network also carried quite a bit of religion nationally on
Sunday morning, but they did not have it all day long like WLS or a
few other 'local' (albeit very large and powerful) stations.

Radio station KSL in Salt Lake City, Utah is a CBS affiliate and they
originated "Music and the Spoken Word" from the Mormon Tabernacle for
about 40 years which CBS sent all over the world; not only did all
their affiliates in the USA run the show, but it went to the Armed
Forces Network and also shortwave station WINB (World International
Broadcasters) in Red Lion, PA. WCBS in New York City fed the Riverside
Church and Harry Emerson Fosdick to the network which in turn gave it
to Armed Forces and WINB plus affiliates all over in the USA. A
station here in Chicago, WJJD (1160 AM) fed the Chicago Sunday Evening
Club out to the Mutual Network which in turn gave it to several dozen
small local stations everywhere along with Armed Forces and WNIB/Red
Lion. Everyone in the USA who wanted it got People's Church from here
in Chicago via WLS on Sunday mornings and the ABC Network. Radio
religion was a big part of commercial radio here through the early
1960's and as the commercial stations began dropping it, the
all-religion stations came into existence to fill a definite need in
the marketplace. BTW, a movie which came out in the early 1960's with
Burt Lancaster ("Elmer Gantry", based on the novel of the same name)
was an excellent and realistic depiction of Aimee Semple McPherson and
her organization which in the 1930's was extremely powerful; she was
the Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson of that era.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #844
******************************