Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1994.volume.14/vol14.iss201-250

Internet Message Format | 1994-05-27 | 1MB

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa20484;
          5 May 94 1:33 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29251; Wed, 4 May 94 21:54:11 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29239; Wed, 4 May 94 21:54:06 CDT
Date: Wed, 4 May 94 21:54:06 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #201

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 4 May 94 21:54:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 201

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Ericsson Presents Its ATM Broadband Products (Terence Cross)
    Cellular Phone Abuse (Jeff Haran)
    Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (Bruce J. Miller)
    Slow Video Over Cellular (Gregory P. Monti)
    Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media? (Tai Duong)
    MCI PC Connect (Hugh Pritchard)
    Tandy 1400HD Acoustic Coupler (Joseph Romero)
    900Mhz AT&T 9530 Cordless: ***CANCELLED*** (Michael Rosenthal)
    NYTel Goes 1+ Dialing (Dave Niebuhr)
    McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Alan M. Gallatin)
    IXC Timing Problem (Steven L. Spak)
    Re: Demise of Newsgroups Feared (David Boettger)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Terence Cross)
Subject: Ericsson Presents Its ATM Broadband Products
Date: 4 May 1994 16:29:14 GMT
Organization: Ellemtel Telecom Systems Labs, Stockholm, Sweden
Reply-To: [e-mail]


ERICSSON PRESENTS ITS ATM BROADBAND PRODUCTS TO SUPPORT U.S. BROADBAND
NETWORKS

Ericsson Network Systems President Bo Hedfors today at Supercomm '94
presented Ericsson's asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) broadband
switching system. The system is designed to enable customers to
optimize the communications in the broadband and multi-media network.
The Ericsson ATM products will fully support the needs of U.S. network
operators for transport, switching and management.

Ericsson's broadband system is flexible and can be adapted to meet the
operators' or service providers' needs. Its patented ATM Pipe Switch
architecture allows the system to be configured for a number of
different applications, including backbone switching, access switching
and multiplexing.

The advantages of the Ericsson system include layered architecture
that will allow operators to rapidly deploy and customize services
throughout the network; separation of call control from the control of
the physical resources, providing flexibility and reducing operating
costs; a distributed architecture using a single platform and an
inherent ability of the system to accommodate additional service
capabilities such as mobility and intelligent networking. The Ericsson
broadband system also has an advanced integrated network management
system.

The system's throughput can grow gracefully from approximately 3Gbps
to more than 80Gbps.

Bo Hedfors, president of Ericsson Network Systems Inc., said: "When
other vendors were upgrading their existing system technology for
broadband services, Ericsson invented a complete new ATM systems
platform to meet our customers' demands for the multiservices networks
era. In addition to providing services, we also considered network
management to be a crucial part of our product development and
developed an integrated Operation Administration Maintenance and
Provisioning solution."

Hedfors added that while the market for broadband in the U.S. and
worldwide is real and significant, the near term future remains
turbulent. "In times like these we believe that operators will come to
Ericsson for a solid approach to the development of broadband
technology and the broadband network.

"Ericsson's new software methods have been vital to the development of
our broadband system. Our evaluation shows that productivity can now
be increased by 200 to 300 percent, which is true for about 90 percent
of the software used in our ATM-based broadband system. System
supliers who cannot match these figures will not be able to stay
competitive.

"Control of software development, handling and distribution is a
matter of survival. Our system has been designed to speed up new
service development through an inherently more adaptable hardware and
software system structure as well as our new software development
methods. Not only can new services be developed more quickly, they can
also be more easily customized to meet changing market needs. The time
to market of new services is critical in an increasingly competitive
marketplace."

Ericsson has been active in the development and prototyping of ATM and
broadband technology and is now focusing on a third-generation ATM
switch as part of its product strategy. Ericsson has also been
involved in several industry activities involving ATM, including the
European research program, RACE. In addition Ericsson has announced
field trials with Deutsche Bundespost in Germany, SIP in Italy, Telia
in Sweden, and Telefonica in Spain.

Ericsson has also been involved in technology cooperations with
companies like Texas Instruments for custom designed integrated
circuits; Hewlett Packard for network management; NET for development
of enterprise switching equipment and Reliance Comm/Tec for access
technologies.

Initial product availability will be later this year with additional
capabilities to be introduced during 1995.

Ericsson's 70,000 employees are active in more than 100 countries.
Their combined expertise in switching, radio and networking makes
Ericsson a world leader in telecommunications.  Ericsson Network
Systems Inc. is based in Richardson, Texas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:

Kathy Egan, Director of Press Relations, The Ericsson Corporation
 Tel. [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Haran)
Subject: Cellular Phone Abuse
Organization: CWA Communications Products, Los Gatos, CA
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 00:56:45 GMT


I've been reading and seeing a lot of television coverage lately about
cellular telephone abuse.  It seems that everything that the cellular
providers use to identify which cellular phone is initiating a call is
transmitted by the calling phone (caller's phone number and electronic
serial number, ESN), therefore its not too tough for the technically
proficient criminal to capture these signatures and encode them into
his own phone and thus steal cellular service.

It strikes me as a technology that invites abuse. Perhaps I'm being
naive, but why don't the cellular providers use a more robust
authentication service. Your cellular phone would contain an
encription key that would also be known to the cellular provider. When
your phone went off hook, it would send its telephone number. The
provider would look up your number to get your key and send you some
random sequence of digits which would vary from call to call. Your
phone would take the sequence of digits, use its key to encode them
and return them to the provider. Since the provider has your key, it
can perform the same encription. If the encoded data that was returned
doesn't match what the provider's copy of the key encripts, then its
because the calling phone doesn't have the right key and the call is
dropped.  The key is never transmitted so the crook would have to
steal the physical phone to steal the service.

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like an obvious solution to
an obvious problem. The thing that I can't understand is why this
service abuse wasn't anticipated by the cellular telephone founders.
Does anybody have any insights as to why it doesn't work this way
today?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See also in this issue a report from
Alan Gallitin about McCaw Cellular One's new anti-fraud program.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce J. Miller)
Subject: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories
Organization: Unisys Government Systems Group, Valley Forge Labs, Paoli, PA
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 15:32:00 GMT


Having gingerly entered the cellular phone world last weekend with the
purchase of what I believe is commonly called a Motorola 550 flip
phone, I soon realized that several accessories (such as a carrying
case and a charger that works in a car) would be nice to have.  The
cost of such items at local dealers exceeds what I paid for the phone.

Based on what occurs in the PC business, one would think that mail
order houses would have sprung up to satisfy such needs at discount
prices.  If this assumption is true, could someone knowledgeable
supply me with the vital data on these companies?


Thanks!

[e-mail] (Bruce J. Miller)  (or [e-mail])

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

Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 12:13:16 EDT
From: Gregory P. Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Slow Video Over Cellular


According to an article in {Broadcasting} magazine, May 2, 1994, GTE
Mobilnet is offering a slow-speed video transmission service over
cellular telephone to broadcasters.  A Tulsa-based firm called FoNet
developed the hardware.

Video is recorded on a portable device that compresses and digitizes
the video as it is recorded.  The station field crew can then choose
the rate, in frames per second, by which the video will be 'uploaded'
to the television studio.  They then place a cellular call to a
digitized receiving device at the TV station and upload the news clip
or story.

According to the article, a 15-second clip sent at a quality of 24
frames per second would take 16 minutes to upload.  Reducing the
quality to 7 frames per second would cut the upload time to 5 minutes.
The story doesn't say how those slower frame rates are correlated back
to 30 frames per second for broadcast.

'Inverse multiplexing' is also possible to save time.  The mobile
places two cellular calls and use twice the bandwidth to halve the
time.

The field compression and cell phone hardware are $16,900.  The host
and playback hardware are $22,995.  GTE Mobilnet is letting
broadcasters use the equipment for free as a promotion.  Some
broadcasters are not convinced that this is a substitute for
electronic news gathering (ENG) [sending real-time, full-resolution,
30-frame-per-second video over microwave or satellite links].  The
FoNet video quality, when played back in real time over the air, is
equal to or worse than VHS home video quality.  Also, at many disaster
and accident scenes, it's impossible to get a cellular channel because
they're all used up by emergency services on the site.


Greg Monti   Arlington, Virginia, USA   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tai Duong)
Subject: Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media?
Date: 4 May 1994 15:59:27 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor


Can anyone give me leads to find a way to record phone conversations
on hard disk in my computer?  I am working for a trading company that
does business mostly by phone and fax.  They want to organize
"projects" which can contain documents, faxes, and stored phone
conversations all on hard disk media.  I know voice recordings take up
lots of disk space but they are willing to buy many gigabytes of disk
space if necessary.  Money to implement this is not really an issue.

Taking it one step further ... they want to be able to play back the
recorded messages for any particular project to update others on the
progress of deals.  An advance feature would be to be able to search
the many recordings from hard disk for words or patterns (eg. for all
recordings that contain a particular name)

Implementing this from normal magnetic tape recordings might be
possible but searches would be very slow and they will not be able to
organize recordings to projects.  Correct me if I am wrong.

Appreciate any leads to vendors, consultants, or ideas.


Tai Duong    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 4 May 94 12:35 EST
From: Hugh Pritchard <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI PC Connect


This came from the April 25 issue of {MCI This Week}, which is a
newsletter that's distributed in the public lobbies of some MCI
buildings.  I'm not an MCI employee; and I have no opinion as to the
convenience or value of PC Connect.


Hugh Pritchard     [e-mail] ]


Take a Byte Out of Long Distance Bills (sm)

         MCI PC Connect Reduces "Tolls" on Info Highway

[Accompanying picture, captioned "Sysop Partner Marketing manager
Shelly Carrick and PC Connect product manager Bill Schmidt at the BBS
Expo trade show."]

    One of the most painful bumps on the information superhighway can
be the tolls.  Computer afficionados quickly realize that toll calls
to reach far away bulletin board systems (BBS) can mount up.  Ask
anyone who's tried to download a multi-megabit file on a 2400 baud
modem.

     Now MCI has created MCI PC Connect (sm), a long distance plan
specifically designed to lower the cost of long distance BBS calls by
offering two low, fixed rates during the day and evening/weekend hours
for a low monthly fee.  Daytime plan hours are 8 am to 5 pm Monday
through Friday; any other calling hours receive reduced
evening/weekend rates.  In addition, CyberSurfers can add their
favorite BBS to their Calling Circle (r) to receive the 20 percent
additional discount (if the BBS is an MCI customer) -- or even name
one board as their Best Friend to receive up to 40 percent savings.

     There's even a program for the bulletin board owner/operators.
BBS System Operators (Sysops) can join the Sysop Program and earn
commissions for each customer they sign up for MCI service.

     For more information, call [internal phone number], or send an
MCI Mail (r) message to PC Connect.
(Internet E-mail address:  [e-mail]).

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Tandy 1400HD Acoustic Coupler
Date: Wed, 04 May 94 10:45:36 PST
Organization: Mt. San Antonio College


I have a TANDY 1400HD, does anyone know where i could get a eight-pin
din acoustic coupler ... or do you have one you want to sell?  If not,
does anyone know the pin assingments for this beauty?  Please post
or email, preferably the latter.


Joseph Romero [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosenthal)
Subject: 900Mhz AT&T 9530 Cordless: ***CANCELLED***
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Lehman Brothers
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 20:07:12 GMT


I called AT&T today to find out the status of the LONG AWATED model
9530, 900Mhz cordless phone -- you know -- the one they claimed would
have one mile range etc. etc.  They told me they cancelled it, claiming
it didn't meet their quality requirements (implies someone else was
making it?) They said they would design a new long range cordless but
it will not be available anytime soon.

This really annoyed me since I have delayed purchasing any cordless
for the past nine months when I first learned of the imminent release
of this phone. So, being back in the market I would appreciate
everyones opinion of their 900Mhz phone.  I haven't heard anything
about some newer models such as those from Uniden. Is anyone using
those? What is the range, sound quality, digital?, SS?


Thanks,

Michael Rosenthal     [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The best one on the market is the one
sold by Radio Shack. I strongly suggest you check it out.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 4 May 94 17:27:18 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: NYTel Goes 1+ Dialing


In the new phone book delivered today, I noticed on page 15 of the
White Pages that NYTel (oops NYNEX) is already going to 1+ dialing for
long distance.

What is written is this:

Inside Area Code 516: 7D
Outside Area Code 516: 1 + AC + 7D

No other information about cutover dates was given, though either AC +
7D or 1 + AC + 7D has been available for a few years.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  1+[phone]
                                          FAX   1+[phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin)
Subject: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program
Date: 4 May 1994 10:58:47 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Here's a new one ... saw a brochure for this at a Cellular One center
on Long Island yesterday.

In an effort to thwart would-be counterfeit phone users, Cellular One
just started up an anti-fraud program.  A customer participating will
simply pick a four digit PIN.  Usage is something like this:

If you dial *56 + PIN (SND) the fraud protection is turned on.
Cellular One will refuse to complete any calls from that phone EXCEPT
611 and 911.  Incoming calls, however, still work.  Dialing *560 + PIN
(SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls.  This is, of
course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself.

Another neat part of the program is that once your phone is off (or out
of area) for 20 minutes, the fraud protection goes on automatically.

Apparently, many (though not all) roaming areas work with this fraud
protection program.  According to McCaw Cellular One, if the roaming
area does NOT understand the *56 and *560 codes, calls will go through
without a problem.  Of course, they want to see as many roaming areas
cooperating :-)

Cell One advocates use of speed dial locations in phones for the lock
and unlock codes.  While anyone with the phone can view the contents
of the location, the important thing to remember is that this is not
meant for the phone's protection.  Rather, it is designed to make a
clone useless.

For me, all I have to do is type 99(SND) to dial the memory location
with my Cell One unlock code.  The "inconvenience" (if you want to
call it that) of having to do that once per time the phone is on that
I want to make calls is more than worth the trouble it could save me
if someone cloned my phone and was succesful in using it.

One more tidbit I found interesting: When I called Cellular One to
pick my PIN, they asked as many security type questions as they could
come up with.  (Granted, the dealer who did the activation and had a
copy of my application, NAM and ESN could've posed as me, also, but
we'll just hope that the dealer has SOME ethics ...)  AFTER they
entered my PIN in the system, they wanted to make sure that I
understood that they would NEVER call me for my PIN. They explained
how some people with a cloned phone would want to call my cellular
number, hoping to reach me, then pose as Cellular One so they can get
the unlock code.  They advised that if anyone claiming to be Cellular
One called me that I should refuse to talk with them unless I called
them back and reached a designated extension.  Banks, long distance
companies and computer service providers should make such elaborate
warnings about PINs and passwords.


Alan M. Gallatin      [e-mail]
[e-mail]   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are we to assume then that since the
lockout occurs automatically twenty minutes after the last use of the
phone that when one starts out each morning it is necessary to use the
*560 unlock thing as part of making the first call of the day?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven L. Spak)
Subject: Re: IXC Timing Problem
Date: 4 May 1994 11:15:53 GMT
Organization: George Washington University


I'm fairly certain that Bellcore does work on IXC/LEC interconnect
standards.  They probably have some TR's or TA's on signalling and
timing for IXC/LEC handoffs.


Steven Spak    [e-mail]   Transmission Engineer
Tel: [phone]   Fax: [phone]

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

Date:  Wed, 4 May 1994 07:41:00 -0500
From: david (d.) boettger <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re: Demise of Newsgroups Feared


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That First Amendment always has been a
> troublesome thing ...

Utter pap.

> all the Bill of Rights was written under the mistaken assumption
> that citizens in the USA would take *responsibilty* for their actions
> and words; under the mistaken assumption that people

This is simply false. The Bill of Rights was written for one purpose: to
keep the government from stealing freedom from the citizens.

> would know the difference between *freedom* on the one hand and *license*
> on the other. Sadly, that is becoming less and less the case. The Bill
> of Rights will cause the ultimate demise of the United States. Not today,

You are totally clueless. I don't think that I've ever heard anyone
berate the Bill of Rights as the "ultimate demise of the United
States". I can't believe that you actually presented this idea for the
entire Usenet to see.  You sound like a GenX malcontent or a champion
of political correctness, taking your freedoms for granted because YOU
have been spoiled by them.  Shame on you. Perhaps you should go live
in some third-world toilet like Haiti so you could have all those
pesky freedoms taken away from you at the point of a gun.

There's an old saying that goes something like, "Be careful of what
you wish for; you might get it."

Shame on you, again.

David Boettger    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I *do* live in a third world toilet; it
is called Chicago. And I have had lots of my freedom taken away from
me at the point of a gun, or in the government's case the implied threat
that guns could always be produced to make me comply if I did not do
so voluntarily. Lots of people in Chicago have had their freedom taken
away from them at the point of a gun; their freedom to travel outside
their home, their freedom to go to school or shopping, even their freedom
to stand at their window and look outside. If one stands at the window
of one's home or walks on the street outside even in broad daylight in
large areas of Chicago at present, one will be gunned down in sniper
fire and killed. Simple as that. Police are helpless to do much about it
because a group calling itself the 'American Civil Liberties Union' says
high-rise apartment snipers have Fourth Amendment rights. Unless the
police can tell *exactly* which apartment (in, let's say a 25 story
building covering an entire city block with 400-500 relatively tiny little
apartments) is occupied by the sniper(s), they can't go into *any* of the
apartments therein looking. See -- it has all been arranged nice and
conveniently so none of the snipers gets their liberties violated. Little
children continue to get killed every day on their way to school and other
folks go out absolutely when they must to get groceries, etc. In the
meantime I get cock-eyed letters from someone in *Canada* who hasn't the
foggiest notion what is happening here. If you ask me, you'd do well to
shut your mouth and mind your own business up there in Canada. Of all
the people to talk about liberties, *your* government certainly did a
number on free speech, didn't they?  No, political correctness is not
my thing at all -- most any long time readers here could tell you that --
but I would like to see eight-year old children in Chicago be able to
play outside this summer and/or walk to and from school without the risk
of having their head blown off or getting crippled for life. It won't
happen while the ACLU is active here! Its not the Bill of Rights per se;
its the bizarre and obnoxious interpretations that have been made of
this precious document that I detest, by lawyers and judges who do not
even live anywhere near the scene of the messes they have created.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #201
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa20750;
          5 May 94 2:08 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29950; Wed, 4 May 94 22:35:09 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29941; Wed, 4 May 94 22:35:07 CDT
Date: Wed, 4 May 94 22:35:07 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #202

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 4 May 94 22:35:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 202

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway (Lauren Weinstein)
    Sprint BBS List (Stuart Whitmore)
    800 Numbers for Radio Shows (Paul Robinson)
    Dumb Question: DID - Centrex - Help! (Rob Allender)
    Internet White Pages (Jan Richert)
    Re: Fight A*vertising! Petition! (John Evans)
    Re: Fight A*vertising! Petition! (Mike King)
    Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature" (Laurent LECHELLE)
    Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature" (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Alan M. Gallatin)
    Re: NANP and Switches (David Esan)
    Re: Getting Phone Bills Over the Internet (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Ry Jones)
    Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF? (William C. Fenner)
    Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line (Paul Bates)
    Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Probably Dead (Edwin Green)
    Re: Equal Access in Canada (Vance Shipley)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 4 May 94 18:19 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Information Superhighway


"TV & MOVIE MANIA" RADIO SHOW HITS THE INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY

LOS ANGELES -- In a first for an entertainment-oriented show, a
version of the popular "Professor Neon's TV & Movie Mania" radio
program begins worldwide distribution directly to listeners this week
via the Internet (or as it is becoming popularly known, the
"Information Superhighway").

"The Internet now includes over 20 million users in more than 30
countries, and is growing at an enormous rate," pointed out the show's
producer, Lauren Weinstein of Vortex Technology.  "Professor Neon's TV
& Movie Mania has also broadcast via over-the-air stations, but it's
apparent that the time has finally arrived when the global facilities
of the Internet can bring this audio show to an even wider audience.
Nobody has ever used the Internet to transmit a show like this
before," he added.

"Professor Neon's TV & Movie Mania" is a unique show which features a
look at a broad universe ranging from classic to current television,
films, and videos, with a special emphasis on the unusual, odd, silly,
strange, bizarre, cult, surreal, and weird.  The shows include
reviews, interviews, and a wide range of special audio clips,
trailers, and many other features.

The interview guest for the debut Internet version of the show is
Robert Justman, a man whose work has greatly influenced classic
television programs ranging from "The Outer Limits" (on which he was
assistant director) to both the original "Star Trek" and "Star Trek:
The Next Generation" (on which he was associate producer and
co-producer, respectively).  Many of the most familiar aspects of
these programs were the result of his ideas, and he speaks candidly
with the show's enigmatic host, Professor Neon, about the production
of these programs in this fascinating interview.

Professor Neon has featured programs focusing on topics ranging from
"Plan 9 From Outer Space" (with guest "Vampira" who starred in the
classic cult film), to Forrest J. Ackerman (publisher of "Famous
Monsters" magazine), to shows focused on topics from "The Twilight
Zone" to "The Three Stooges".

The half hour Internet version of the program is being distributed
biweekly on the Internet via the Internet Multicasting Service in
Washington D.C., on the "Internet Town Hall" channel, and is also
available as a file for retrieval by any Internet user from the many
Internet Multicasting / Internet Talk Radio archive sites around the
world.  Users retrieving the audio files can then play them on
virtually any workstation, PC, Mac, or other computer with even simple
audio facilities.

The most recent show, as well as other information regarding the
program, can also be heard by calling Professor Neon's TV & Movie
Mania Machine" on [phone].

The Internet version of the show is freely distributable via computer
networks and BBS systems.  Use by over-the-air broadcasters requires
the permission of Vortex Technology.  For more information regarding
accessing the show via the Internet, please use the contact below.
Inquiries regarding other access and versions of the show for
broadcast use are also invited.

CONTACT: Lauren Weinstein at Vortex Technology, Woodland Hills, CA.
     [phone] (9:30-5:30 PDT)
     [e-mail]

Notes to Internet folks:

Information regarding the show, including current guest schedule, etc.
is also available via FTP from site "ftp.vortex.com" (in the
"tv-film-video" subdirectory) or via gopher from site "gopher.vortex.
com" (under the "TV/Film/Video" menu item).

For a list of Internet Multicasting Service / Internet Talk Radio
archive sites to obtain (via FTP) the audio file for playback, send a
message (content is not important) to:

    [e-mail]

The debut of the Internet version of the show will run via Internet
Multicast from Interop on Thursday, May 5.  FTP to site
"ftp.media.org" or "www.media.org" for schedule information.  The
audio file of the show should become available in the archive sites
for retrieval within a few days, though exact timing is variable.  The
filenames will probably be "mania1.au" for the audio and "mania1.txt"
for the accompanying descriptive text file, though the archive
maintainers may change the names at some point to fit their overall
naming system.  If you have trouble locating the files after a few
days, please let us know.  If you have any other questions regarding
the program, feel free to email or call.

In two weeks, our interview guest for the next show will be Joel
Engel, the author of the definitive Rod Serling biography: "The Dreams
and Nightmares of Life in the Twilight Zone," and of the newly
released and highly controversial new book, "Gene Roddenberry: The
Myth and the Man Behind Star Trek."

If you have any questions for Mr. Engel please email them to:

   [e-mail]

as soon as possible.  Thanks much!

 --Lauren--


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lauren Weinstein is a long time participant
in the Internet, and a charter subscriber to TELECOM Digest, dating back
to 1981 when this journal was first published. From time to time I like
to reprint his classic message, "The Day the Bell System Died", and
before long it will be time for it again. His latest venture, the "Neon"
thing, has been enormously successful and if you have not called to
listen to it, you really should.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 18:33:13 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Rattlesnake Stu)
Subject: Sprint BBS List
Organization: Central Washington University


To reply to those who questioned how the Sprint BBS list I've started
will be published, here's what I plan on:

1.  It'll always be available for free download from the data number below;
2.  I'll distribute it to all large BBS's that I normally call;
3.  If it gets big enough, I'll attempt to get it included in the SimTel
    FTP archives and keep it updated regularly (quarterly?);
4.  Also if it gets big enough, I'll try to do the same to keep current
    copies on new Night Owls CDs;
5.  I'll e-mail it to anyone who wants a copy;
6.  I'll post it in one or more appropriate newsgroups if people want it
    and don't complain about wasted bandwidth (perhaps quarterly, or
    less/more frequently as requested).

I hope this answers the question -- essentially, I don't have the funds
to do any formal "publication" but will use the same channels as
shareware and freeware to get it distributed.

If you run a BBS and use Sprint for your long distance carrier on
outbound calls on at least one BBS line, send me e-mail to get a copy
of the info submittal form.  I hope this list will serve both SysOps
and callers who use Sprint.


Stuart Whitmore          FAX:  [phone]      Data: Same as FAX
[e-mail]                            [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 22:28:49 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


> [Telecom Digest Editor's Note:... Very few [radio call-in shows] are
> willing to provide an 800 number for you to camp out on at their
> expense.

A nationally syndicated one comes from here in the Washington, DC area.

The phone number to call into it is 1-800-G-G-Liddy.

The name of the host of the show is left as an exercise to the reader. :)

Anyone else know of any beyond Rush Limbaugh, which was posted here
earlier?  Another local station has its own 800 number for its call-in
programs.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A place where I frequently eat breakfast
always has the Gordon G. Liddy show playing on the radio while I am
there. He never interested me a lot. Limbaugh is interesting sometimes
and quite funny sometimes. Liddy is sort of blah IMO.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Allender)
Subject: Dumb Question: DID - Centrex - Help!
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 19:44:25 GMT
Organization: Business & Financial Services


I've been looking for a network fax server for awhile and need to get
inbound routing of faxes to peoples desktop PCs.  A few companies have
this capability but it requires DID.  I know that we have Centrix
lines, but I'm not sure if it will work with the wink-start and
loop-start that the fax board companies are needing.  Anybody know?


Rob Allender      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Richert)
Subject: Internet White Pages
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 18:38:26 +0200


Hi,

Could anyone email me the exact title of the Internet White Pages,
publisher and ISBN number?


Thanks,

Krefcom Communication Services | Internet:   [e-mail]
  Jan Richert, Krefeld, FRG    | Datex-J:    02151399843-0001
Voice:  [phone]        | IBM VNET:   I1006214 AT IBMMAIL
GSM:    [phone]        | IRC-Nick:   jrichert
FAX:    [phone]        | NIC-ID:     JR482

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

Date: Wed, 4 May 94 16:46:49 BST
From: [e-mail] (John Evans)
Subject: Re: Fight A*vertising! Petition!


Michael P. O'Leary <[e-mail]> wrote..

> Read with great interest the article quoted below, it IS the future of
> the internet.  BUT, it shouldn't be.  People like this have no right
> to waste bandwidth on a valuable resource like the internet.  We must
> stop happenings like this with legislation so that the 'information
> highway' (or whatever you want to call it) doesn't become expensive
> and riddled with a*vertisi*g.  (And oh yeah, I use the wild card so
> people with the wor a* in their kill file still get this message.  I
> am taking upon myself the burden of collecting a petition from this
> group (and eventually other groups as well) stating our opposition to
> this practice and our support for legislation to stop it.  We must act
> fast though, because the bills that will govern the future are quickly
> advancing through Congressional committees.  Here is what to do:

I must admit, I am a little confused with respect to the way in which
people in the U.S. regard the Internet and Usenet -- that is, that it
stops with that country's boundaries. I am in Ireland, my Usenet server
is in Sweden, how would legislation in the U.S. congress relate to me?
 -- it wouldn't.

If laws are passed in the US outlawing advertising on Usenet, surely
ill-mannered advertisers will just obtain access in other countries to
the US? What then? Censor every message entering sites in the US?

In my view legislation and the Internet/Usenet do not sit well
together.  What we are seeing now is a shift in the rules of
nettiquette. Up until now system admistrators have dealt with network
abuse using the powers available to them in their companies and
educational institutions, because if they did not, the hassle in
flames would make their jobs difficult.

Commercial providers will act similarly, making their contracts such
that, if a user abuses their access, termination can be easily -- and
legally achieved.

At the same time, Usenet users are going to learn to use kill files
more, to ignore those messages that annoy them, and use moderated
groups more.


John
J.Evans. Ericsson Systems Expertese, Clonskeagh, Dublin4, Ireland, EU.
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: Fight A*vertising! Petition!
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 10:03:29 PDT


In TELECOM Digest, V14 #191, Michael P. O'Leary <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> ... We must
> stop happenings like this with legislation so that the 'information
> highway' (or whatever you want to call it) doesn't become expensive
> and riddled with a*vertisi*g.  (And oh yeah, I use the wild card so
> people with the wor a* in their kill file still get this message.  I
> am taking upon myself the burden of collecting a petition from this
> group (and eventually other groups as well) stating our opposition to
> this practice and our support for legislation to stop it.  We must act
> fast though, because the bills that will govern the future are quickly
> advancing through Congressional committees.  Here is what to do:

This bothers me.

I really *fear* the day when the government gets involved in
controlling the 'net.  I can't think of one thing that is controlled
by the government that works right.  And the last thing I want is a
bunch of bureaucrats who haven't the slightest clue as to how Internet-
working works sitting around making laws that affect those of us who do.

As soon as there is regulation, there will be organizations created to
oversee and control.  These organizations will then get bloated and
bogged in red tape.  And we *all* will have to pay for it.

Quite honestly, I think use of the 'd' key while reading mail and the
'n' key when reading news is quite effective in dealing with trash and
advertising on the 'net.


Just the personal *opinion* of...

Mike King    [e-mail]

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

From: Laurent LECHELLE <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature"
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 07:20:17 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jay
Hennigan) writes:

> [In reference to AT&T disconnecting unanswered direct-dial calls]

> This seems a bit hard to swallow.  How many incoming trunks does Larry
> King have?  Maybe a dozen.  Maybe two dozen.  How many million calls a
> day does AT&T carry?  So ten or twenty people listen to ringing for an
> hour or so.  Are you suggesting that this is going to have enough
> impact on AT&T's revenue that they are going to re-engineer their
> network to prevent it?  Thousands more get busy signals.  If AT&T
> would improve their call processing time by one second, they would
> free up the thousands of busy signal circuits one second sooner (and
> AT&T indeed has very fast setup times).

I can't discuss AT&T revenue. But for your information, France Telecom
does not let people ring more than 30 seconds. After the line is down
you hang up.  In the same way, when you use a phone terminal in France
(a phone, a modem, an answering machine, ...) It needs to have an
agreement from France Telecom. And in the special case of modems, it
means that the dialer must not called twice within two minutes a busy
number.

So that, it means that companies probably spend a lot in calls that do
not provide benefits.


Laurent Lechelle, Courbevoie, France   e-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Pelliccio)
Subject: Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature"
Date: 4 May 1994 14:25:32 GMT
Organization: Brown University


Our esteemed Moderator wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, not at all. Your machine turns itself
> on after 12 rings, or approximatly one minute. AT&T is letting calls
> ring for at least two or three minutes before cutting them off. Anyway,
> how often would it be the case that you forgot to turn your machine on
> and an out-of-town call was the first one to arrive thereafrer (instead
> of say, a local call, or your own call checking for messages, etc?)  PAT]

If you happen to have animals of the feline variety that like to walk
on your answering machine this function is VERY useful. :)


[e-mail] (Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR)
Box 1908, Providence, RI 02912 Tel. [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is true. My two cats like to
climb on the fax machine and lay there.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin)
Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding
Date: 4 May 1994 10:45:40 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In a previous article, [e-mail] (Bruce
Mchollan) wrote:

> A person I work with has a cellular phone with call forwarding.  When
> he forwards his calls to another number and then calls his own
> cellular number he is not charged for the call ($0!).  This works even
> when he forwards his calls to a number within our LATA that would
> invoke toll charges if dialed by land line.  He takes advantage to
> save the toll charges.  Is this legal?

Legal?  Yes.  Believable?  No.

I've seen a couple of different ways cell companies handle the
forwarding charges.  Basically, they don't like to give unlimited
forwarding for free 'cause of the scenerio you described above.

Setup 1)  The cell company charges prevailing airtime per minute of the
          forwarded call.  No land or toll (unless long distance) but full
          airtime.  (This is the most common setup)

Setup 2)  Same as 1, except they only charge off peak rates on forwarding
          (recognizing that this isn't even an airtime usage problem but they
          need some rate to charge)  (I think Sprint Cellular does this)

Setup 3)  This one I consider quite interesting:  The cell provider first
          sees how many minutes of actual cellular calls (incoming and
          outgoing) that you made during the month.  You then get up to
          that many minutes of free forwarding.  Anything past that
          "flexible allowance" is treated under 1 or 2 above.  (Unless I'm
          mistaken, some GTE Cellular One companies do this)

What company is it that doesn't charge anything on the forwarded call?


Alan M. Gallatin              [e-mail]
[e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: Re: NANP and Switches
Date: 4 May 94 14:15:57 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY


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

> codes.  But it's been known (certainly in the Digest) for years that
> NNX area codes were coming.

True.  But that does not mean that switch or other telecom gear
manufacturers actually ramped up to meet the deadline.  One well known
builder of telephone cost monitoring systems was warned by a long time
reader of this Digest that 1995 was coming.  In fact, the warnings
have been coming for at least five years.  They are finally ramping up
to make the changes by September.  They will not say what year
however. ;-).  I assume similar situations exist in other companies.


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Getting Phone Bills Over the Internet
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 09:14:57 -0700 (PDT)


Said by: Robin Fairbairns

>> I would like to be able to receive my phone (and other bills) over
>> the Internet. As I pay them by Direct Debit in any case their function
>> is to inform me what I have spent the money on. It would be cheaper
>> for my phone company (who would not have to print and mail a bill, and
>> save time for me.

> It would be nice, wouldn't it?

> information.  Since the internet is inherently insecure, that means
> that the bill as transmitted would need (at the least) to be
> encrypted; authentication information (e.g., digital signatures)
> wouldn't come amiss either.

Thst wouldn't be that big of a deal; the telco could encrypt using the
calling card (main one I guess) number.  Let's hope no one else as
that!

> I agree with you that electronic billing is highly desirable.  I
> disagree with the assertion that it's presently doable.

Pacific Bell already offers electronic billing; unfortunately, it is
on disk, and costs between 8-15 dollars per month (I can't remember
the exact amount, but it was something that sounded outrageous
considering that floppies cost anywhere from .50 to $1.00).


Steve    [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015

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

Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 09:16:48 -0700
From: Ry Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone?


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it is illegal, and yes people listen
> illegally to cellular calls. However there is very little risk of fraud
> by passing credit card numbers in this way. One, there has to be someone

PAT: ugh, wrong, this stuff goes on all the time. What you are
dismissing as "very little chance" is a popular pass time with
"phreaks". Trust me. National press (Newsweek, Gray Areas) have both
reported on this phenomena.

> listening to a scanner which is in the proximity of the tower from which
> the message is being transmitted. Two, they have to have their scanner
> land on the channel (out of 832 such channels) during the five seconds
> or so that the card number is being read. Third, credit card verification
> involves reading the number, the expiration date and the amount of the
> sale -- not the name and address of the card holder.

The most fatal flaw. You don't need the name and address of the
cardholder to commit fraud. You don't even need a valid credit card to
commit fraud.

> Fourth, without having physical possession of the card they cannot
> make purchases in stores.

True.

> Fifth, with only the number but no name or address to go with it they
> cannot very easily engage in mail order fraud.

Not true. Very few companies verify with the bank on small purchases.

> Sixth, without having actual possession of the card they cannot see
> who the issuer of it was -- unless they have the list of four digit
> (starting with three for AMEX, four for VISA, five for MC or six for
> DISCOVER) codes telling which bank (or credit grantor) issued the card
> -- thus no calls can be made to customer service putting in bogus
> inquiries or name/address changes.  In short, a non-issue here.

Wrong. There is a widely available program called Credit Master that
you can use to verify cards which has a list of all banks in it. It
also generates algorithmically correct credit cards for any given
bank.

> If I were going to rip off credit card numbers, PINS and related data, I
> would find it far easier to tap the phone line used by an ATM machine
> and put some kind of data capture device on that instead ... yet people
> use ATMs quite willingly. So what's the beef about cellular phones and
> credit card numbers?  On the one in a million chance someone *might*
> happen to hear your credit card number read, what is it gonna get
> them?  PAT]

Everything. 1 800 CAL LATT is the best thing to happen to credit card
fraud in a long time.

Sorry to be so pessimistic, but it's true. Instead of gaining tighter
control over the credit card market, banks have ceded even more control
to customers.


Ry

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

From: [e-mail] (William C. Fenner)
Subject: Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF?
Organization: NRL Connection Machine Facility, Washington, DC
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 17:16:14 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, mark boylan <boylanm@iia.
org> wrote:

> Is there a modem that can accept and decode DTMF tones after it's
> answered an incoming call?  And also, how can I send the output of a
> SoundBlaster card over the same phone line?

You can solve both problems at once with a ZyXEL modem.  Not only will
it decode DTMF tones, but it will also play audio directly to the
phone line.  If you convert your WAV files to, say, 3-bit ZyXEL ADPCM,
you can probably use one of the many shareware packages out there and
get up and running very quickly.


Bill Fenner   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul N. Bates)
Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line
Date: 4 May 1994 19:13:58 GMT
Organization: A World of Information at Your Fingertips


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

>> My home is wired for two residential telephone lines.  Because of my
>> proximity to an am radio transmitter (am 1550khz), many of my audio
>> and telephone devices suffer from "radio noise", from that one station
>> only though.  Some days it is worse than others, some days there is no
>> interference at all.

> This is an increasingly common problem.  Newer more electronic devices
> have more opportunities for rectification and internal amplification.
> This makes them more susceptable to this kind of interference.  I have
> an AM Spanish-language station 3/4 of a mile from the house -- same
> problem in my bulletprook ole' 1A2.  The problem is occurring in the
> music-on-hold receiver or amp.

I know that the local AM broadcast station in my area provides filters
specifically designed for the interference from AM broadcast freq.'s
to people in the close proximity to their tower (free of charge). They
provide these when you call and complain. Try the station there, maybe
they have something that will work. I know for a fact the filters
designed for the ham frequencies don't work.


Paul N. Bates              Celerex Corporation
[e-mail]          14712 NE 87TH ST
Phone: [phone] x20    Redmond, WA 98052

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

From: [e-mail] (Edwin Green)
Date: Wed, 4 May 94 07:33:52 EST
Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Probably Dead
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> Hans-Gabriel Ridder
<[e-mail]> writes:

> I was in the Alaska Airlines terminal at the Seattle-Tacoma airport
> two weeks ago, and saw a couple of Public Phone 2000's *with
> keyboard*.  I didn't have time to check them out ... I assume they
> were working since after the tariff problems all the keyboards seem to
> have been removed.

Not true at all.  We have not been removing any keyboards due to the
problems with the FCC.  We simply turn that feature off.  Some sets
are installed with keyboards, some are not (usually at the agent's
request).  All the sets with keyboards still need them for TDD usage.


>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's a shame, because the 2000's were
>> a very useful service. Too bad it did not work out.   PAT]

> Since John based his remarks on his experience in one airport, and not
> from any offical announcements from AT&T, it's probably a bit premature
> to be speaking in the past tense, don't you think?

I sure hope so.


Edwin G. Green
AT&T Bell Laboratories    Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
INH 1A-519                317-845-3659
[e-mail]

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

From: Vance Shipley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Equal Access in Canada
Organization: XeniTec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 12:38:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Pat injects:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have been told it will by and large
> follow the USA numbering scheme; i.e. 10288 for Mother, 10222 for MCI,
> etc. with Canadian-only carriers getting a few numbers as well.   PAT]

Well your Mother (AT&T) isn't in Canada, neither is MCI.

AT&T has a twenty percent stake (maximum foriegn ownership of a
facilities based carrier allowed) in Unitel, our largest competing
carrier.  I don't think they will be using 10288 as their main CIC but
I wouldn't be at all suprised if they did capture calls placed by
roving Americans with it.  (We at Northquest just might get a few
misdialed AT&T calls having 10289 :)

MCI have partnered with Bell Canada, they will be sharing technology.
Bell may also trap thier CIC (10222) when dialed by travelling
Americans through an agreement with MCI but I doubt it.

> etc. with Canadian-only carriers getting a few numbers as well.   PAT]

Yeah, suprise, suprise our own national carriers will also get to have
their own CIC codes, just like the REAL American carriers.  Sheesh.


Vance Shipley, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #202
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23252;
          5 May 94 4:31 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA02735; Thu, 5 May 94 01:25:02 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA02726; Thu, 5 May 94 01:25:00 CDT
Date: Thu, 5 May 94 01:25:00 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #203

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 5 May 94 01:25:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 203

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? (Chuck Forsberg)
    Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Alan Leon Varney)
    More E1 Questions (Ralph Walker)
    Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device (Fred Blonder)
    Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers (Ashley L. Brandwood)
    Looking For Phone Number/Directory Anecdotes ([e-mail])
    Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? (Kelly Breit)
    Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop? (Jay Hennigan)
    Re: Cellular Privacy (Scott Townley)
    Re: Cut-Rate Domestic and International Calling Cards (Kevin Anderson)
    Re: FAX Mailbox Services (Jack Bzoza)
    Re: Pac Tel / Air Touch Communications (Lon Lowen Jr.)
    Kernels and Lt. Kernels (Randy Gellens)
    Need Used Mitel PAV Dialers (Al Cohan)
    800 Market Growth (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Pagemart 15-Digit Restriction Update (Doug Reuben)
    Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? (Barry Bond)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: omen!caf (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX)
Subject: Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary?
Organization: Omen Technology INC, Portland Rain Forest
Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 20:53:04 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (William J
Rehm) writes:

> On 4 Apr 94 18:16:45 GMT, Matt Silveira wrote:

>> With regard to ZMODEM, it is not proprietary and there are many
>> "shareware" programs available for Macs, PCs, and UNIX boxes, check a
>> "mirrored" INTERNET site or sumex.aim at Stanford for Macs.

> As I understand the situation, zmodem is indeed a proprietary
> protocol.  It's use on hosts is only free under certain restricted
> contexts, academic use being one of them. Clients, on the other hand,
> are free to incorporate zmodem protocols, since a host is required to
> use them.

> I have admittedly limited knowledge of this situation, but this is how
> it was explained to me when I contacted the author's company.

The 1986 ZMODEM is public domain, as are the rz/sz sources of that
vintage.

Omen Technology has improved the performance and reliability of ZMODEM
over the last decade.  The Good Stuff is not public domain.

One should carefully study the Copyright notices in all parts of rz/sz
(and Columbia Kermit) software before making decisions that might
violate Copyrights.

Typical Copyright notices include:

  may not be, in whole or in part, licensed or sold for profit
  as a software product itself, nor may it be included in or
  distributed with commercial products or otherwise distributed
  by commercial concerns to their clients or customers without
  written permission

   This software may be freely used for educational (didactic
   only) purposes.  This software may also be freely used to
   support file transfer operations to or from licensed Omen
   Technology products.  Use with other commercial or shareware
   programs (Crosstalk, Procomm, etc.) REQUIRES REGISTRATION.

   Any programs which use part or all of this software must be
   provided in source form with this notice intact except by
   written permission from Omen Technology Incorporated.

  Use of this software for commercial or administrative purposes
  except when exclusively limited to interfacing Omen Technology
  products requires a per port license payment of $20.00 US per
  port (less in quantity).  Use of this code by inclusion,
  decompilation, reverse engineering or any other means
  constitutes agreement to these conditions and acceptance of
  liability to license the materials and payment of reasonable
  legal costs necessary to enforce this license agreement.


Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX       [e-mail]      503-621-3406
Author of YMODEM, ZMODEM, Professional-YAM, ZCOMM, GSZ and DSZ
   Omen Technology Inc      "The High Reliability Software"
TeleGodzilla BBS: 503-621-3746     FAX:-3735    CIS:70007,2304

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works!
Date: 4 May 94 23:35:12 GMT
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Fred
Heald) writes:

> To my surprise this morning I found that a feature I've been asking for
> forever finally works!

> My phone is in 818 (but I'm travelling all over LA, 213, 909, 310,
> 714, 805, 619, and all.  Not 524 yet, but soon I'm sure.  So I tend to
> always dial the entire number (1-NPA-NXX-XXXX) first, and get the
> ridiculous message "We are sorry, it is not necesary to dial one and
> the area code for this call".  Well, this morning (in fact, calling
> Netcom) I accidentally dialed the 1-818, and the call went through!

> Since I'm in PacBel land, I'm hoping they've implemented this all over
> the area.  FINALLY! and yet with no fanfare or even notice -- I guess
> they'd be admitting a mistake.

   No mistake, just evolution of the dialing plan.  The following
states have indicated they will permit 1+10-digit dialing for ANY
number in the NANP (the first column indicates if Home NPA Toll calls
can also be dialed as 7D, or requires 1+ for Toll)

 7D   California - by 5/94
  1+  Dist. of Columbia - see below
  1+  Maryland - see below
  1+  Nevada - by 7/94
 7D   New Jersey
 7D   New York - date unknown (works for 212, 718, 917 now?)
 7D   Pennsylvania
  1+  Virginia - see below
 7D   West Virginia - by 10/94
  1+  Wisconsin - by 10/94

   The Washington, DC metro states (Maryland, Virginia and DC itself)
support 1+10D dialing for all numbers, but non-metro NPA 703 and the
rest of Virginia may not be ready until mid-94.  These states also
support 10D dialing of Foreign NPA LOCAL calls, and non-metro Virginia
areas support 7D dialing of such calls.  (NPA 703 in Virginia will
permit 7D or 10D or 1+10D local calls, except into the Washington
metro area, where 10D or 1+10D is required.)

   Illinois is the ONE state that REQUIRES 7D dialing for all Home NPA
calls, even Toll calls (i.e., does not PERMIT 1 + 10D for such calls).

   New Hampshire (by 8/94) will permit either 7D or 1+10D for Home NPA
Toll calls, but requires 7D dialing for Home NPA Local calls.  Foreign
NPA Local calls require 1+10D.

   Some states are requiring 1+10D for Foreign NPA Local calls
(Louisiana), others are requiring 7D (Oklahoma) and still others
require 10D (Texas).  There's probably some place at their
intersection where moving in a small circle will hit all three dialing
patterns.

   This analysis does not include Maine or Massachusetts, because I
have not received IN WRITING any indication of their plans ...


Al Varney - just my opinion

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

From: [e-mail] (Walker, Ralph)
Subject: More E1 Questions
Date: Wed, 04 May 94 16:44


Coming from a T1 background, I have limited knowled in regards to E1.
My company is involved in selling products into Europe. But it very
hard to obtain expertise on practical applications in the E1 realm. I
have a few general questions:

1) At loss of signal from the DTE, what is the proper signal to
emanate from the CSU/DSU towards the line side (using CAS signaling)?
What comes out of Timeslot 0, 16 and the remaining data payload.

2) What is IRSM switiching mode and how and where is it implemented?

3) What is the repeater spacing on an E1 line and is there an end
section (last repeater berfore entering the customer's site) repeater
specification?

4) What are the variances from country to country in repects to the use
of the national bits and international bits.

If there is some place/person on the internet that will provide this
information, I have a ton of questions.  Any help you can provide will
be greatly appreciated.

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Blonder)
Subject: Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device
Date: 04 May 1994 23:42:40 GMT
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center


> Has anyone heard of a digital writing device presumably using
> lightpens or something equivalent, that has two "terminals" for
> people to use to communicate over the phone as if by writing? ...

Back around 1967 or so I saw a system in use at the TWA terminal at
what was then Friendship (now BWI) Airport.  It consisted of a fairly
normal ball-point pen connected to a plastic tab going into a box. It
also had a wire coming off, giving a simple switch closure when the
pen was pressed against the piece of paper on the top of the box.  The
box read the pen motions and sent them to a receiver elsewhere in the
terminal, which operated a stylus to duplicate the writing onto
another piece of paper in real-time. The paper on the transmitter and
the receiver where both adding-machine type paper rolls which could be
pulled out a few inches at a time, and torn off, and stuffed into a
pocket.  The pen on the receiver had no visible ink reservoir, so I
suspect that the paper was electrically or heat sensitive.


Fred Blonder         [e-mail]
Hughes STX Corp.     [phone]
7701 Greenbelt Rd.   Greenbelt, Md.  20770

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

From: Ashley L Brandwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers
Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 10:57:32 GMT


Hi,

I have been given the 1-800-xxx-xxxx numbers of four companies in the
US that I need to contact -- unfortunately I do not have any other
number for them, and was hoping that someone in the US could tell me
either the normal number or a fax number for them.

The companies are:

Smart Micro :      1-800-ROM-BIOS
Bios Upgrades:     1-800-800-2467
Cmos Solutions:    1-800-266-7462
Rom Bios Upgrades: 1-800-541-1943

Any other means of contacting them would be most helpful.

(All I do know is that they are supposed to be in the CA phone books!!
 -- not a lot of help in the UK ! )

Thanks in advance for any assistance ...


Ashley
A.L.Brandwood       Mathematics & Computer Science
Brunel University   London, England
[e-mail]   <----<< Prefered Address     [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 17:26:15 ADT
From: PEI Crafts Council, Charlottetown, PE Island <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking For Phone Number/Directory Anecdotes, Lore, Predictions


As part of a series of short radio pieces for our local CBC Radio
affiliate called "A User's Guide to the Future," I'm preparing an item
which centres on the past, present and future of everything to do with
telephone numbers.

I'm looking for anecdotes, lore, predictions, etc. about telephone
numbers and telephone directories.  I'm not looking for specific
technical details, just interesting information about different ways
of communicating telephone numbers, compiling telephone numbers,
spelling things with telephone numbers, about the history and future
of the "phone book" (how having all of North America's telephone
listings on a set of CDs changes telephony, for example), personal
"portable" telephone numbers, etc.

I've been impressed with the quality of the "asides" that correspondents
often to contribute to the Digest and wonder if I might impose upon you
all to contribute some by email to me :-)


Thanks.

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

Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 14:30:21 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP?


Does anyone know if the FCC maintains a public ftp site?

I would like to research more information on "Tariff 12" pricing for
long distance services. One of my clients is interested in renego-
tiating their rates. We had discussed several options including
using a marketing agent for "Option 51 - EPSCS" as we have seen it
referenced many times.

I have only limited knowledge in this area and agreed to do some
research on their behalf. If you can provide me additional
information, I would greatly appreciate it.


Sincerely,

Kelly Breit
Enterprise Wide Systems Integration Consultant
Breit Companies, Inc.   PO Box 47567
Minneapolis, MN 55447-0567
612-449-0951    612-449-8960 Fax   Internet: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why yes, in fact recently the FCC can
be reached via FTP. We've touched on it here recently and perhaps one
of our readers will be so kind as to send you the help file showing
how it is done.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jay Hennigan)
Subject: Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop?
Date: 04 May 1994 09:38:48 -0700
Organization: Regional Access Information Network (RAIN)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Dick O'Connor) writes:

> Strange thing happened recently on my second of two residential lines.
> Suddenly one day the voice mail card stopped answering on that line,
> but when I switched lines it worked fine. Handsets that ring just fine
> on our first line stopped ringing on our second line in tests.  Yet,
> if I called the second line from the first, I hear the "ring", and if
> my kid picks up a phone attached to the second line, it answers and we
> can talk.

> Is voltage somehow involved in "ringing" so that a decrease would
> cause to small a *something* for devices like modem cards and handsets
> to respond to?  Where does this happen, and what's the fix?

Ringing is a low-frequency AC signal applied to the line (Typically 90
volts at 20 Hertz).  Tell the repair desk that "ringing voltage is not
being applied".  They will likely find the problem to be the line
equipment (printed circuit card in modern exchanges) feeding your
line.


Jay Hennigan    [e-mail]

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

From: Scott Townley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy???
Date: Wed, 04 May 94 16:42:41 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


<[e-mail]> writes:

> I saw a copy of RCD newsfax talking about cellular privacy.  The gist
> of the article is that the Illinois Attorney General said "persons who
> use a telephone which transmits by radio waves have no justifiable
> expectation of privacy."  The Cellular Telecommunications Industry
> Association quickly pointed out that this is not what the federal law
> says and then goes on to say "As an industry, we are totally committed
> to the personal privacy of cellular telephone users."

> Hah!  If they were that committed then they would encrypt the
> transmission and not depend on silly laws.

Ruling in circuit court in Louisiana (if I remember right) a
few years ago held that the use of cellular telephones constituted the
use of a *radio device*, therefore was subject to the de facto
principles of radio reception, i.e, that no reasonabl e expectation of
privacy was afforded radio users and therefore none could be
guaranteed by a court of law.  Note that this principle applies only
to the air interface; once the call gets into the wired system, it's
called wiretapping and is still illegal without court order.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However the court ruling to which you
refer is a very grey area. The FCC thinks otherwise, as do the federal
courts in some jurisdictions. Best not listen to cellular calls.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (KevinAnder)
Subject: Re: Cut-Rate Domestic and International Calling Cards
Date: 04 May 1994 18:48:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Heikki Ketola) writes: question about $0.45 rate to Finland deleted.

The 24 hour/day 7 day rate to call anywhere in Western Europe
(including Finland of course) is $0.45/minute on Cyberlink.  The UK is
$0.35/minute.  Japan is $0.45/minute.

Agent opportunities are available.


Kevin Anderson   FAX: [phone]

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

From: Jack Bzoza <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FAX Mailbox Services
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 20:41:00 -0400


On Thu, 7 Apr 1994 09:31:27 PDT Les Reeves <[e-mail]> wrote
and asked about: FAX Mailbox Services

>> Does anyone have any info on companies that provide a
>>  FAXMAIL service?

>> What I am looking for is a FAX Number I can give out that receives
>> faxes and then allows me to retrieve them from any fax machine by
>> dialing up my code.

> AT&T came out with a bunch of services for "professionals on the go"
> about a year ago, and a FAX mailbox was part of the package.  The
> disadvantage was that callers had to dial an 800 number and then enter
> a bunch more digits for your mailbox.  Most business users won't stand
> for this nonsense; they punch the number into the fax machine and walk
> away.

Delrina (the makers of WinFax and PerForm) has just announced a fax
mailbox service exactly as you describe.  It will ship (i.e. be
available) in about two weeks time.

It provides you with a personal 1-800 telephone number which can
receive faxes or voicemail.  It also has a paging notification feature
which you can have page you when a fax arrives for you in your
mailbox..

To receive your faxes onto your computer, just click on 'Retrieve From
MailBox' from the Service's menu found in WinFax PRO 4.0.  Type in
your password, and your faxes will automatically be sent to you.  If
you don+t have your computer, or access to one, you can instruct the
service to send your faxes to a fax machine.  Your faxes are retrieved
from the same 1-800 number so there are no long distance access
charges.

It is currently the ONLY way to retrieve a fax sent to your fax
mailbox directly to your hotel room with your laptop.

You can call your Fax MailBox either from WinFax PRO or using a touch
tone phone to find out if there are any faxes waiting for you.  The
service will let you know how many faxes you've got, how many pages
are in each fax, and at what time each fax was received.  And you can
even pick and choose the faxes you want sent to you immediately, while
leaving others in your mailbox for retrieval at a later time.

Other options are available including DID numbers (for international
access), and voicemail options (the same mailbox can also take your
voicemail messages).

Also your telephone company's "call forwarding" service lets you have
your faxes forwarded directly to your MailBox.  If you want to receive
your messages immediately, either to your office or an out of town
location, simply call forward your Delrina Fax MailBox number to your
current location.  Your messages will be automatically transferred.
And if that line is busy, your transmission can be rerouted back into
your MailBox through your phone company+s "call forward when busy"
service.

For more info you can call Delrina in California at 1-800-268-6082.


Jack Bzoza    [e-mail]    Delrina (Canada) Corporation

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

From: [e-mail] (Lon Lowen Jr.)
Subject: Re: Pac Tel / Air Touch Communications
Organization: Netcom Online Communications
Date: Wed, 04 May 1994 05:31:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Larry Jones <larry.jones@
sdrc.com> wrote:

> Recently, Pacific Telesis (by the way, is that pronounced TEL-uh-sis
> or tuh-LEE-sus?)

TEL-uh-sis.


Lon Lowen Jr.                     Wayne State University
Netcom Online Communications      Detroit, Michigan, USA
[e-mail]                ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 04 May 94 18:20:00 CST
Subject: Kernels and Lt. Kernels


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you Colonel. Tell me this: any ideas
> how Colonel came to be pronounced 'kernel' rather than 'call-on-nell'?
> Or put another way, why is it we make popcorn and have left over kernels
> rather than left over colonels?  And even though this is April Fool's
> Day, there *was* at one point in the Army an actual person of Colonel
> in rank whose last name was Korne. At least it was not spelled 'corn'.
> And why do we call it the kernel in Unix instead of the colonel?   PAT

The Unisys A Series operating system (known as the Master Control
Program or MCP) has a module called the Kernel, and another one called
the LtKernel.


Randall Gellens      [e-mail]
Net**2 656-6350      (Please forward bounces to
Mail Stop MV 237     [e-mail])

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

Date: Wed, 4 May 94 14:18 EST
From: Al Cohan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Need Used Mitel PAV Dialers


I need some used Mitel 4 Port PAV Dialers. If anyone out there has a
few spares I'd appreciate a direct reply.


Thanks in advance,

Al Cohan

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

From: [e-mail] (Judith Oppenheimer)
Subject: 800 Market Growth
Date: 4 May 1994 16:09:59 -0400
Organization: The Pipeline


A 1994 Gallup survey found that much of the $7 billion 800
market is still up for grabs.

So in 1994 its a $7 billion market.  Can anyone tell me how big the
800 market was in 1993?  And in 1992?


J. Oppenheimer     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Cid Technologies)
Subject: Pagemart 15-Digit Restriction Update
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 12:54:33 PDT


Just noticed that my PageMart service is once again accepting pages
over 15 digits and working as it used to.

I'm not sure if someone read the post to the Digest or perhaps a
manager at Pagemart was made aware of the situation by my inquiries,
but whatever the case may be, it seems to be back to normal, at least
for the past two days it has been!

I'll keep checking to make sure that they don't try to go back to 15
digits. (No big deal, most of my pages are over 15 digits so in the
event that limit is set back down at 15 I'll know about it shortly
after they enact it, which of course I hope they don't!)


Doug    CID Technologies    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Bond)
Subject: Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where?
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Orlando / Winter Park, FL
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 21:31:26 GMT


Greetings!

> So the question remains: Where can I purchase a caller ID box with
> serial port?

     I have a (rather expensive) Caller ID communications device from
Rochelle Communications, but I believe they have cheaper (single line)
units, too.

     Their address is:

         Rochelle Communications, Inc.
         4030 W. Braker Lane, Suite 130
         Austin, Texas  78759
         Telephone:  [phone]


Barry L. Bond, Software Engineer     SAIC
[e-mail]  <- work        3045 Technology Parkway
[e-mail] <- personal    Orlando, FL  32826-3299
72235,1530 (CIS)      <- personal    Work:  [phone], Ext. 377

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #203
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07735;
          6 May 94 15:34 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07700; Fri, 6 May 94 11:27:14 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07691; Fri, 6 May 94 11:27:12 CDT
Date: Fri, 6 May 94 11:27:12 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #204

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 6 May 94 11:27:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 204

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted (John R. Levine)
    Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted (Ken Hoehn)
    Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Probably Dead (Dave Levenson)
    Re: PageMart Changes Services, No Notice (Rob Lockhart)
    Re: Protocol for Alpha-numeric Pagers (Rob Lockhart)
    Re: Equal Access in Canada (Dino Moriello)
    Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway (Mike Godwin)
    Re: Cellular Privacy??? (Neil Weisenfeld)
    Re: Cellular Privacy??? (William H. Sohl)
    Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Alan Leon Varney)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted
Date: Fri, 6 May 94 0:17:12 EDT


Ken Hoehn <[e-mail]> asked:

> What do you think of the future of PCS, and the possible 'jump over' of
> local services in its use?

> I think that may have been what AT&T had in mind!

Hi.  I'm not a pundit, but sometimes I play one on the net.

Second question first -- ten years ago nobody had the faintest idea
that wireless telephony would be the runaway success that it is.  If
you look at projections for cellular usage compared to what's actually
happened, you'll find that the projections were too low by about an
order of magnitude.  Also, nobody anticipated how effective
software-based techniques would be in increasing the effectiveness of
bandwidth usage, viz. CDMA cellular and all of the 900MHz spread
spectrum wireless network and cellular telephone stuff.  For example,
my connection to the Internet is via a 900MHz spread spectrum wireless
Ethernet, giving me a 2MB connection to the next network for a
hardware outlay of under $2000, probably five times cheaper than a
slower link would have cost three years ago.

PCS will be a success, but I think that the main financial effect will
be to make the wireline telcos even richer than they are now.  For one
thing, PCS runs at much higher frequencies than even cellular uses,
which means that each PCS cell is going to be real small, and there'll
be a lot of them, with a lot of wiring needed to connect to all of the
base stations.  Also, unlike cellular, PCS can be integrated much more
tightly with the wireline network -- I read in America's Network (a
trade rag that all telephone engineering managers read) about a test
in Chicago in which fairly dumb PCS base stations were connected by
ISDN, which runs over regular T1, to the wireline exchange, a 5ESS.
All of the PCS fanciness including handoff from one cell to the next
was handled by an upgrade to the 5ESS software.

This means that to get PCS going, basically all you have to do is to
wire up each PCS base station like an ISDN customer line.  Compare
this to what cellular requires, with large base stations that can cost
hundreds of thousands of dollars and dedicated phone switches.  If I
were getting into the PCS biz and I didn't happen to be the local
telco, I'd try to cut a deal with the telco to use their switch,
greatly cutting both the time to get the system up and the capital
cost.  Remember, the telco's cost of capital is very low, since
telephone bonds are considered to be extremely low risk, and in any
event for the first few years PCS would be small enough that it'd be
an insignificant increment to their existing capacity.  Naturally, the
telco isn't going to make this deal for free, so they'd end up with a
big chunk of the revenue.  If the telco owned a PCS franchise, they'd
only make PCS deals with themselves, and they'd be at a huge advantage
since they could get going real fast.

Sure, there's some dial tone competition coming over the horizon, e.g.
CAPs and cable companies.  But I've never seen a cable company with
the technical smarts to blow their own noses, and I don't think I'd be
the only one to be very reluctant to trust my phone business to the
same clowns who maintain the cable TV.  (Here in Cambridge, for
example, the cable company announced with great fanfare several months
ago the availability of 500Kb Internet connections via cable.
According to people who've tried to order it, it doesn't actually
exist.)

CAPs are starting to skim the cream, sort of like the pre-equal-access
MCI.  But dial tone competition from CAPs, PCS, or cellular isn't
going to be much of a threat until there's local number portability,
something that the existing telcos view with less than no enthusiasm.
(Yeah, some of them say they welcome local competition, but their idea
of a level playing field looks more like a ski jump.)  I doubt
portability will work for another decade, during which interval I
expect that they'll lobby their way into being allowed to buy up cable
and PCS companies, thereby eating the competition.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Organization: The W8HD Group
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 22:53:35 EDT
From: Ken Hoehn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted


> What do you think of the future of PCS, and the possible 'jump over' of
> local services in it's use?

I think that may have been what AT&T had in mind!


[e-mail]
Ken Hoehn - Teletech, Inc.         Compuserve: 70007,2374
N8NYO       P.O.Box 924            FAX: [phone]
            Dearborn, MI  48121    VOICE: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Probably Dead
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 04:21:38 GMT


I have made good use of the AT&T Public Phone 2000: I once used one at
the airport in Dallas to log into this Unix system, to read the
telecom digest while waiting for my flight.

More recently, as we have all noted, they no longer have keyboards on
them, and the screen mostly just displays advertising.  I did,
however, plug the internal modem in my laptop machine into the RJ-11
jack provided on these keyboard-less telephones, and place a data call
that way.  Less expensive (you only pay the telco for the phone call,
no `keyboard rental' add-on) and faster.  The PP-2000 internal modem
is limited to 2400 bps; my laptop has a V.32 modem in it.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (RLockhart)
Subject: Re: PageMart Changes Services, No Notice
Date: 6 May 1994 08:08:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Cid
Technologies) writes:

> Since Monday, I noticed that PageMart -- a local and nationwide paging
> company -- has REDUCED the number of digits per page to only 15. They
> used to take at least 22, perhaps even more (24 Max).

> It seems all so silly me to that they think they are going to speed up
> paging so much by going from 24 digits to 15; how many people do a
> full 24 and how much time would 9 digits less really save?

Doug ... do you mind if I send a copy of this to a friend of mine at
PageMart?  Real customer feedback usually has an effect on things like
this 'specially at his level.

Hmmm ... wonder what sort of savings dropping from 24 to 15 numeric
pages gives?

Let's see ... a standard POCSAG block is 20 bits with 12 check bits.
20 bits is five numeric digits, so 24 digits is 5 blocks with one
burned digit and 15 digits is 3 blocks with no burned digits.  This
gives a two block difference.  Two blocks is about a single POCSAG
paging address, sooooo every time they send a reduced length page for
one that would've been 21 digits or longer, they can add a tone only
page.  Save two pages worth and they can add a numeric page with 10
digits or less.  If they average 10K pages per day and 10% (just very
conservatively SWAG'ing numbers here on call rates) were 20+ digits,
that would give an extra (10% or 10K -> 1K -> 1 extra 10 digit page
for every 2 of the 10%'rs ->) 500 pages per day.  This would allow
them to add 500 pages per day.  At a .1 call rate, this would give an
extra (500/24 pages per hour at .1 call rate per hour ->) uhmmm .. a
little over 200 customers -.. real rates, though, would be vastly
different.


Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems
Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc.
Desktop I'net:  [e-mail]
Wireless I'net (<32K characters):  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (RLockhart)
Subject: Re: Protocol for Alpha-numeric Pagers
Date: 6 May 1994 08:25:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary Morris
@ignite) writes:

> I would like to write some software for a specialized computer system
> to send pages to alpha-numeric pagers.  Is there a standard protocol
> that these services use to accept messages via a modem?

The protocol you seek is called TAP (Telocator Alpha Paging .. PET and
IXO are different names for the same alpha paging) protocol.  The only
formal supplier of the spec for TAP is PCIA (Personal Communications
Industry Association ..  formerly Telocator) in Washington, DC, at
202.467.4770.  Alternatively, if you just want to take a look at the
more commonly used portions of the protocol, I've a thread gleaned
from a now-out-of-print manual of ours that was used by Telocator as
the basis for TAP and would be happy to POST you a copy.

> I haven't selected a pager provider yet, so if some use proprietary
> protocols I would be interested in know which ones to avoid.  I've
> talked to several providers and they have said we can do paging from a
> PC and they have a software package for PC's, but I have a special
> need that requires custom software (and it's running on Sun/Unix).

Several use proprietary protocols (e.g., SkyTel has SkyWord
(proprietary) access to it's SkyWord service), but almost to a carrier
they also support TAP (e.g., SkyTel has SkyMemo (TAP) access to it's
SkyWord service, too).

We publish a freebie called the Motorola Third Party Referral Guide to
Alpha and Data Paging that gets updated on a quarterly basis (current
edition is 04 March 94) and includes sections on platform-specific
support (Mac, DOS, Windows, Unix, OS/2, MainFrames ..), application
and application enablers (e.g., APIs, DDE, AppleEvents, ...), and
manufacturers/publishers.  If that's of interest to you, it's a
Stuffed MacWord 5.1 file available on some of the commercial services
like CIS, AOL, and AppleLink (I'm FTP-challenged in addition to being
chronologically- and gravitationally-challenged <grin>).  Paper copies
are available from our NewsStream/NewsCard hotline at 1.800.542.7882,
but ask for it by name.


Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems
Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc.
Desktop I'net:  [e-mail]
Wireless I'net (<32K characters):  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dino Moriello)
Subject: Re: Equal Access in Canada
Date: Fri, 06 May 1994 09:40:32 -0500
Organization: VE2DM


In article <[e-mail]>, Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Back in January, I went to Sault Ste. Marie, Ont. before turning
> around back into the U.S.  I got to a pay phone on 705-759 there, and
> 10288 didn't work (I then omitted it, got the "boing" for Bell Canada,
> then punched in my AT&T card number and the call, going to the U.S.,
> went through).  The call didn't make it to my phone bill until March,
> and it was in the AT&T part of the bill.  So there are no 10xxx codes
> currently useable in Canada?

All I've seen is a note with my phone bill asking me if I wanted
Unitel to ask Bell to give me access to Unitel by simply dialing 1+.


Dino Moriello
PO BOX 105       Internet: [e-mail]
Radisson,Quebec  Compuserve: 76120,1472  Tel.: [phone]
CANADA  J0Y 2X0  Packet:   VE2DM@VE2FKB        819-638-8281
Please E-mail replies since I can't always read the USENET postings.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael G. Godwin)
Subject: Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway
Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 11:52:42
Organization: BDM International, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lauren
Weinstein) writes:

> The half hour Internet version of the program is being distributed
> biweekly on the Internet via the Internet Multicasting Service in
> Washington D.C., on the "Internet Town Hall" channel, and is also
> available as a file for retrieval by any Internet user from the many
> Internet Multicasting / Internet Talk Radio archive sites around the
> world.

<various info deleted>

What is this Internet Multicasting Service/town hall channel, and how
does one access it???  Is there a more suitable newsgroup foinformation/
discussion on this??


Mike

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

From: [e-mail] (Neil Weisenfeld)
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy?
Organization: NIH Div of Comp Rsrch and Technology
Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 15:58:38 GMT


Scott Townley ([e-mail]) wrote:

> few years ago held that the use of cellular telephones constituted the
> use of a *radio device*, therefore was subject to the de facto
> principles of radio reception, i.e, that no reasonabl e expectation of
> privacy was afforded radio users and therefore none could be

Historically, it has been upheld that users of a radio device should
not be able to expect privacy.  Unless I'm mistaken, however, the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 changed all of this.
Right now it is illegal to monitor cellular phone calls, studio to
transmitter relays, and other things.  This is probably largely due to
pressure from the cell phone services, but I'm not really up on the
political background.  As of April 26, 1994 (if I got that date
right), it became illegal to manufacture in the US, or to import, a
radio *capable* of receiving the cellular phone frequencies.  This
includes radios that can be easily modified (e.g.  certain scanners
that simply needed a diode clipped).


Neil Weisenfeld, Computer Engineer       Internet: [e-mail]
Nat'l Insts. of Health, 12A/2033         Voice:    301/402-4030
Bethesda, MD  20892                      Fax:      [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy?
Date: 5 May 1994 11:42:02 -0400
Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore)


In article <[e-mail]>, Scott Townley <nx7u@delphi.
com> wrote:

> <[e-mail]> writes:

>> I saw a copy of RCD newsfax talking about cellular privacy.  The gist
>> of the article is that the Illinois Attorney General said "persons who
>> use a telephone which transmits by radio waves have no justifiable
>> expectation of privacy."  The Cellular Telecommunications Industry
>> Association quickly pointed out that this is not what the federal law
>> says and then goes on to say "As an industry, we are totally committed
>> to the personal privacy of cellular telephone users."

Practically speaking, however, the existence of legislation (laws)
forbiding the listening to cellular communications have no real impact
on what actually is being done.  The only true privacy for cellular is
with encryption of the call.

>> Hah!  If they were that committed then they would encrypt the
>> transmission and not depend on silly laws.

Ditto this statement per above.

> Ruling in circuit court in Louisiana (if I remember right) a
> few years ago held that the use of cellular telephones constituted the
> use of a *radio device*, therefore was subject to the de facto
> principles of radio reception, i.e, that no reasonabl e expectation of
> privacy was afforded radio users and therefore none could be
> guaranteed by a court of law.  Note that this principle applies only
> to the air interface; once the call gets into the wired system, it's
> called wiretapping and is still illegal without court order.

All essentially true.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However the court ruling to which you
> refer is a very grey area. The FCC thinks otherwise, as do the federal
> courts in some jurisdictions. Best not listen to cellular calls.  PAT]

The fundamental problem facing the user of cellular is that s/he never
knows if the call is actually being listened to by an unauthorized
listener.  Cellular calls use radio and there are probably over one
million or more radio recievers (scanners, etc.) which have the
ability to receive the cellular frequencies.  None of that equipment
is illegal to own (although the FCC, effective 4/26/94, now bans the
importation or manufacture of cellular capable scaners) and it simply
isn't going to disappear because the ECPA says don't listen to
cellular.

Bottom line, if you use cellular, is to treat each call as if it was
being interecepted and, therefore, offer nothing "over the air" that
you would ever want divulged or made known to someone you didn't want
to hear it (e.g. credit card numbers, etc.)  The same can be said for
the use of cordless phones, which have no laws (except for a handful
of individual state laws) prohibiting listening to their (cordless)
conversations.

Personally I have no desire to listen to cellular or cordless, I offer
this advice to caution folks that the existence of federal and/or
state laws prohibiting listening does nothing to actually prevent it
from happening.  In fact, in those rare cases where someone has
possibly been charged for illegal listening, it has only been
"discovered" because the individual was blatant about his/her
listening (usually through some media coverage of a political figure's
cellular phone converstation which was tape recorded by the person
being charged).


Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The same could really be said of wired
landline phones as well. Although probably more secure than any form
of radio, it is still not a good idea to say over the phone anything
you would not like others to know about.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 14:59:35 +0600
Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Forwarded to the Digest by Carl Moore
who received it as a response from Al Varney.  PAT]

You mentioned:

> Since I update history.of.area.splits from time to time, I have
> some questions for Al Varney:

> All my recent NANP statements were derived (or perhaps assumed) from
> a Bellcore Letter (IL-94/01-001, "Status of Numbering in the NANP Served
> Area") dated 3 January 1994.  Obviously, TELCos can change their minds,
> so take this "information", not "truth".

>> If, in your message, "Home NPA Toll calls ... require 1+ for Toll",
>> do you mean:
>> 1. 1+NPA+7D must be used?  (I know this applies to Maryland and area
>>    703 in Virginia; no information yet for 804 in Va.)
>> 2. 1+7D can still be used?  (I have not received information about
>>    Nevada, Wisconsin, or area 804 in Va. requiring 1+NPA+7D for long
>>    distance within area code.)

Sorry I was so unclear -- on re-reading, it was a stupid comment.  I
should have said "Home NPA Toll calls ... require 1+10D dialing".  The
1+7D pattern is not, after January 1995, going to be permitted
anywhere in the NANP, including NPA 809 and Canada.  Many areas, such
as Texas NPAs 409, 806 and 915, appear to be waiting until 1995 to
block 1 + 7D calls.  Canada is uniformly requiring 1+10D for Toll
calls effective 1/7/95.

>> And where do you arrive at 7D being allowed for intra-NPA toll calls
>> in West Virginia?  That would be new information for me.

Just reading the Bellcore "table" -- West Virginia appears to be
following the Pennsylvania model of "7D Toll" calls, rather than the
"1 + 10D Toll" model of Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky and Ohio.  Like
Pennsylvania, 1+10D will also work for such calls.

>>> NPA 703 in Virginia will
>>> permit 7D or 10D or 1+10D local calls, except into the Washington
>>> metro area, where 10D or 1+10D is required.

>> NPA 703 in Virginia does allow 7D for local calls into the Washington
>> metro area WITHIN AN AREA CODE, with the "10D or 1+10D is required"
>> kicking in if calling different area code.

Again I stupid comment make -- 7D local is permitted within an area
code EVERYWHERE within the NANP area.  So perhaps:

  "NPA 703 in Virginia will allow 7D Inter-NPA local calls, except
  when calling INTO the Washington metro area.  Both 10D and 1+10D
  will work for ALL local calls from NPA 703."

The distinction I gather from Bellcore's table is that 7D local calls
to other NPAs will work from 703, so long as the destination is not
the Metro area -- for example, into NPA 804.  The actual term they use
for the 7D-not-permitted is Foreign NPA Local calls to the "WMEA".  So
what is WMEA?  Is all of NPA 301 in WMEA from 703's perspective?  What
about 410?

>>> Illinois is the ONE state that REQUIRES 7D dialing for all Home NPA
>>> calls, even Toll calls (i.e., does not PERMIT 1 + 10D for such calls).

>> Old area 312 never had 1+ for long distance until it needed N0X/N1X
>> prefixes, and at that time it got 1+ for long distance to other area
>> codes.  Are you saying the rest of Illinois is dropping the leading
>> 1 for intra-NPA if it was still publishing 1+7D for such?

Per the "table", NPAs 312, 618, 708 and 815 do not NOW permit 1+7D
dialing for calls.  Intra-NPA calls must be dialed 7D and Inter-NPA
calls must be dialed 1+10D, regardless of "toll/local" status.  The
remaining NPAs (217 and 309) will change to these rules by a yet-to-
be-announced date.  It will probably be before January 1995.


Al Varney - any errors are mine, including this statement

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #204
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00350;
          6 May 94 16:40 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10550; Fri, 6 May 94 12:59:02 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10539; Fri, 6 May 94 12:59:00 CDT
Date: Fri, 6 May 94 12:59:00 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #205

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 6 May 94 12:59:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 205

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    LDDS Take Over of WilTel (Associated Press via David W. Prince)
    Firms Vie for Three-Digit Phone Numbers (Boston Globe via Monty Solomon)
    Three-Digit Phone Numbers (Peter Capek)
    Book Review: "Understanding Computer Networks" by Apple (Rob Slade)
    Verifone Programming Manuals (Ry Jones)
    Help Setting up FTP Server Site (Kenn Krasner)
    Sprint Resellers (Rich Holland)
    When is a 'Page' Not a Page? (Michael Diehr)
    Hackers On Planet Earth (Kevin Crow)
    Wanted: Merlin or Spirit Phones (Drew Benson)
    Fax Cited in Numbers Bust (New York Times via Dave Thompson)
    FCC March Caller ID Order (Carl B. Page)
    Mac Tie-in to T1 Line? (Steve Rogers)
    Toronto Utilities Consider Fibre Local Network (Dave Leibold)
    Directory Formats to Change (Dave Leibold)
    Prices on DFB Laser, Fiber, Mobile Switching Centers (Hanwook Jung)
    Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (Randal Hayes)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: David W. Prince <[e-mail]>
Subject: LDDS Take Over of WilTel
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 04:59:32 EDT


Description: LDDS Makes Offer For WilTel
Header: AP Online

AP 05/04 18:33 EDT V0989 Copyright 1994. The Associated Press. All Rights
Reserved.

   TULSA, Okla. (AP) -- Long distance phone company LDDS Communications
Inc.  has offered $2 billion to buy rival Williams Telecommunications
Group, saying it wants WilTel's technology and base of large private
customers.

   LDDS is the nation's fourth largest long distance telephone
company.  Based in Jackson, Miss., it is chaired by billionaire John
Kluge, one of the country's richest people.

   It serves mostly small- to medium-size customers nationwide and is a
customer of Tulsa-based WilTel, leasing some lines on its phone network.

   WilTel, one of the Williams Cos., caters mostly to large business
clients.  It laid a national fiber-optic network in the late 1980s in
the United States by running cable through decommissioned oil and gas
pipelines owned by its parent. It leases its lines to other carriers
like LDDS as well as to business and government customers.

   A merger would create a long distance company that could begin to
rival AT&T, MCI and Sprint. LDDS had more than $1 billion in revenues
last year while WilTel had just under that amount.

   The president and chief executive officer of Williams, Keith E.
Bailey, said Wednesday in a written statement that Williams is pleased
with the recent performance of WilTel and comfortable keeping
ownership.

   But Bailey added that LDDS' offer "will be taken into consideration
along with a number of other alternatives that we are carefully
examining to continue to enhance the long-term value of this asset for
our shareholders."

   LDDS Chief Executive Officer Bernard Ebbers said LDDS would offer
$2 billion in cash to Williams or in stock paid directly to shareholders,
or in a mix of $1 billion cash and $1 billion stock.

   Williams board of directors meet next on May 19.

   Williams shares closed up $3.37 1/2 at $28.87 1/2 in brisk New York
Stock Exchange trading. LDDS shares rose 25 cents to $23.75 on the
Nasdaq stock market.

   The purchase offer became public after LDDS filed a form disclosing
it with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

   WilTel International Inc. and LDDS were among three companies that
announced earlier this year that they expect to provide long-distance
service to Cuba within the next few months.

   But that plan is stalled because of concerns by the State
Department over a relatively large $4.85 surcharge allowed in the
agreements for collect calls.  The State Department has said it will
allow no such surcharge, which would give the Cuban government sorely
needed hard currency.

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

Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 12:05:45 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Firms Vie for Three-Digit Phone Numbers


Excerpt from {The Boston Globe}, Friday, May 6, 1994

Businesses eager for a new outlet in the information age grabbed up
three-digit telephone numbers awarded in a first-ever lottery by
Southern Bell yesterday.

The company, a unit of BellSouth Corp., assigned the numbers, 211,
311, 511, 711 and 811 in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and Orlando.

Anyone willing to pay a $25,000 start-up fee and a minimum $10,000 per
month was eligible for the giveaway.

The winners were newspapers, the Yellow Pages division of Bell South,
and a few other businesses that see value in the memorable numbers.
None released specific plans for products.

 ... The winners could charge for each call or offer services to
callers for free while tacking on advertising to those services. ...

Petitions for N11 numbers have been filed in most states.  But no
utility regulators outside Florida have endorsed the service, and
BellSouth is the only regional Bell operating company to push for
sales, said Mark Long of the Florida Public Service Commission.


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 6 May 94 10:58:07 EDT
From: Peter Capek <[e-mail]>
Subject: Three-Digit Phone Numbers


I have no further details, but I saw a press clipping summary that
said Southern Bell is going to sell a "limited number" of three-digit
telephone numbers for $25,000 apiece, and a somewhat larger quantity
of four-digit telephone numbers for an unspecified price.

I'd be interested to know further details.  Does anyone know whether,
if this is true, these numbers are likely to be dialable nationwide?
Or does the existing infrastructure assume that all numbers are ten
digits when dialed with the area code?


Peter Capek


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See the related article in this issue.
The numbers will be dialable only from within Southern Bell's service
area. SB certainly has no right to sell away those prime numbers where
other telcos are concerned, to say nothing of the logistics involved
in trying to call them from elsewhere.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 06 May 1994 10:45:42 MDT
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Understanding Computer Networks" by Apple


BKUNDCNT.RVW  940126

Addison-Wesley Publishing Company
Heather Rignanesi, Marketing, x340, [e-mail]
P.O. Box 520   26 Prince Andrew Place
Don Mills, Ontario  M3C 2T8
416-447-5101   fax: [phone]
or
Tiffany Moore, Publicity  [e-mail]
Bob Donegon  [e-mail]
John Wait, Editor, Corporate and Professional Publishing [e-mail]
Tom Stone, Editor, Higher Education Division  [e-mail]
1 Jacob Way
Reading, MA   01867-9984
800-822-6339  617-944-3700
Fax: [phone]
"Understanding Computer Networks", Apple, 1989, 0-201-19773-1, U$10.95/C$13.95

This is sort of the Classics Comics version of computer networking.
In fewer than eighty pages, less than half of them text, you have a
very quick overview of data communications.

While the majority of the illustrations add little to the concepts
being presented, overall this book works reasonably well.  It
certainly is easily accessible and nonthreatening.  The material is
extremely limited, but many longer and more tedious books give no more
accurate information than does this.

As a quick introduction to network and data communications concepts,
this may be handy to the busy executive starting with a related
project.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKUNDCNT.RVW  940126 - Redistribution
permitted on 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 '95, Toronto, ON, February 13-17, 1995, contact: [e-mail]

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

From: Ry Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: Verifone Programming Manuals
Date: Fri, 6 May 94 9:55:30 PDT


With all this talk about Verifones, I am reminded that I have one (a
Verifone Junior, tan model, green LED screen) with no manual. I bought
it at a Tru Value going out of business sale; they didn't have the
manual, or password, or anything. I called Verifone in Hawaii, and
never got a response (and that was not a cheap call!).

So here's the problem: I want to reprogram the thing to use my Visa
validation strings. How can I do this? Some people have suggested
pulling the battery out of it and letting the NVRAM drain (to reset
the password), but I fear this would merely reset it to a random state
(not a null state).

Anyone offer any help here?


Ry

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

From: Kenn Krasner <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Kenn Krasner)
Subject: Help setting up FTP server site
Organization: Mordor International BBS
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 21:36:57 GMT


Can anyone point me to some detailed info on setting up an FTP server
site?  I'd greatly appreciate it!

Please respond to me via email at [e-mail].

Thank you for your help!


Kenn

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Holland)
Subject: Sprint Resellers
Date: 5 May 1994 21:38:10 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University


Does anyone have a list of Sprint WATS resellers they'd be willing to
mail me?  Thanks!


Rich Holland               | Internet: [e-mail]
723 Allison Ave, #8        | Bitnet  : holland@ksuvm
Manhattan, KS  66502-3273  | WWW     : http://godiva.ne.ksu.edu/~holland

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

Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 14:41:38 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Michael Diehr)
Subject: When is a 'Page' Not a Page?


When is a 'page' not a page?  When it is a call into your voicemail
system.

To explain:

Recently, I bought a pager with service package from Costco, one of
those membership wherehouse retail stores.  I took it to Airtouch
Paging (nee' PacTel Paging) here in San Diego and had it activated,
and added their $6/month voicemail package to the plan (one phone
number).  One month later, and I get billed for 113 pager overcalls.
Hmm, sez I, "I know I don't get ten pages per day, this must be an
error."  Two times, I talk to a customer service rep, and they say
they'll look into it.  The third time I call (after they threaten to
disconnect me for nonpayment), someone clears up the mystery: Their
policy is to charge for all pages sent to your pager, AS WELL AS ALL
CALLS INTO YOUR VOICEMAIL ACCOUNT TO RETRIEVE MESSAGES.

Well, I double checked my contract, and it says, clear as day "200
pages per month, with $0.10 / page over 200".  A few calls later, and
I talk to a manager there, who confirms their policy of charging for
ALL calls to the number, and says "I should have been notified".  My
impression after talking to several people is that their policy is not
written down on any brochure, and is certainly not on any contract
that they provide.

So.  They agreed to refund the existing charges, but not change their
policy.  In my mind this is at best deceptive advertising, and perhaps
breach of contract and maybe against CPUC regulations.  Any comments?


[e-mail] (Michael Diehr)

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin Crow)
Subject: Hackers On Planet Earth
Organization: Netsys Inc.
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 22:46:14 GMT


                        It's not Summercon.
                It's not the Galactic Hacker Party.

                |        H    O    P    E        |

                  It's Hackers On Planet Earth.

                   August 13th and 14th, 1994
                        In the middle of
                         NEW YORK CITY

               A celebration of the hacker world
               and the tenth anniversary of 2600.

                  - watch for further details -


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The *tenth* anniversary of 2600? I am
certain the magazine has been around longer than that. I seem to recall
hearing about it back in the 1960-70's ...   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Drew Benson)
Subject: Wanted: Merlin or Spirit phones
Date: 5 May 1994 23:02:59 GMT
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Does anyone have any AT&T Merlin or Spirit phones or phone system for
sale?  If not, where can I get them?  Our budget is limited here.
Actually, a similar phone system would be fine as well.  It doesn't
NEED to be those particular ones, but I'm looking for something
similar.


Thanks,

Andrew Benson ([e-mail])

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

From: Thompson, Dave <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fax Cited in Numbers Bust
Date: Thu, 05 May 94 19:07:00 PDT


 From {The New York Times}, Thu 21 Apr 1994, pp A1,B4 [non-telecom
portions condensed]

Fax Use Spells / Numbers Arrest / To Harlem Ring
(Jump: Use of Fax Leads to Arrest / Of Suspected Numbers King) By Selwyn Raab

    For 30 years, Raymond Marquez was a thorn to law-enforcement
agencies and a legend to countless gamblers in Harlem and East Harlem.

    ... authorities say ... [he] built a gambling empire that raked in
about $30M a year.

    ... conducted from fake stores in ... northern Manhattan, [while
he] lived regally in ... [Long Island and] Florida. ....

    But the authorities said yesterday that they had arrested Mr.
Marquez, 64, and his wife, Alice, 63, on felony gambling charges and
had raided and closed 56 gambling parlors and backroom offices ....

    The Manhattan District Attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, said a
large part of the case against Mr. Marquez stemmed from one mistake:
his use of a fax to get daily reports on his illegal gambling profits
from Manhattan to his vacation retreat in Fort Lauderdale.

    Mr. Morgenthau, who announced the arrests ..., said the faxes,
which were intercepted under a court order, included the names of
gambling sites, accounts over the last month of profits at each site
and the payrolls for more than 100 people employed by Mr. Marquez in
one of the city's largest illegal gambling rings.

    Mr. Morgenthau's office obtained a court order yesterday attaching
more than $35M in assets ....

    "Up here [he] is sort of a legend," said Lt. Gregory J. Levine of
the Manhattan North Public Morals District.  "... this time we got him
good."

    Detective Angel Ramirez ... said Mr. Marquez followed the same
schedule almost every day. .... "... he's got expensive tastes and
 ... acts like a Mafia don."
    ....

    Since the early 1960's, ... officials have described Mr. Marquez
as one of the city's most successful numbers operators.

    In the Harlem neighborhoods ... [one resident said] "They've
destroyed this neighborhood. ... turned into a stinking rat hole."
    ....

    [Police Commissioner] Bratton said no evidence of police
corruption was uncovered [in connection with this case] ....

    ... [the] betting parlors offered several numbers games. ....

    .... Each wager was recorded ... [and sent to] the policy bank
 ... [on] the second floor of a residential building at 3650 Broadway
near 151st Street.

    ... Claudia Hernandez, 25, who was also arrested ... was in charge
of Mr. Marquez's main office on Riverside Drive ....

    Reports on the daily operations were faxed by Ms. Hernandez to Mr.
Marquez and his wife while they were in Fort Lauderdale ....  "We
intercepted 30 to 40 faxes a day .... It [sic] spelled out in minute
details everything about the organization."

    Mr. Marquez['s] ... father was a numbers operator in the 1940's
 ... [and] Mr. Marquez ran numbers games for ... a Mafia leader in
East Harlem in the 1950's, before branching out on his own.

[Comment: no indication of whether they thought fax was secure, or
tried to make it so, although in recent years at least some Mafiosi
reportedly refuse to talk "business" indoors on by phone for fear of
surveillance.]


Dave Thompson, [e-mail]
Logica North America, [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl B. Page)
Subject: FCC March Caller ID Order
Date: 6 May 1994 00:41:59 -0700
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


Private Unlisted Phone Numbers Banned Nationwide.
Law Enforcement Explicitly Compromised.
Women's Shelters Security Threatened.
Telephone Rules of 30 States Overturned.
Direct Marketing Association Anticipates Profit.

The FCC released its Report and Order And Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking of March 29th, 1994 (CC Docket No. 91-281)

With the arrogance that only federal bureaucrats can muster, the
Federal Communications Commission has turned the clock back on Calling
Number ID and privacy protection rules nationwide.

Have you ever had any trouble giving a direct marketer your phone
number?  You won't any more.  Your Per Line Caller ID blocking will be
banned, thanks to the FCC Order which preempts the privacy protections
provided by 30 states.

The order carefully enumerates the concerns of law-enforcement
agencies which need per-line blocking to do their jobs.  It mentions
the need Women's shelters have for per-line blocking.  (A matter of
life and death on a day-to-day basis) It mentions that the customers
who attempt to keep unlisted numbers confidential will be certainly be
thwarted.  (Can one train all kids and house-guests to dial *67 before
every call?  Can you remember to do it yourself?)

But the Order dismisses all of these problems, and determines that the
greatest good for the greater number will be accomplished if RBOC's
can profit a bit more by selling our numbers and if the direct
marketers have less trouble gathering them.

The FCC doesn't seem to trust consumers to be able to decide whether
they want per-line blocking.  It praises the $40 cost of an automatic
*67 dialer as an appropriate disincentive that will benefit the nation
by discouraging people's choice of per-line blocking.

There was one part of the order I was pretty happy about, until I read
it.  The FCC has also banned the sale of numbers gathered by 800-900
number subscribers using the ANI system, unless they obtain verbal
consent.  (Note that no rules prevent sale of numbers from the
presumably blockable CNID system.)  The problem is that the only
enforcement of the rule seems to be that the requirement must be
included in the fine print of the ANI sale contract between the
common-carrier and the ANI subscriber.  So it seems to be up to the
common-carrier to enforce a rule which is contrary to their financial
interest.  How can a person who suffers from publication or sale of
their number recover compensation?

The FCC is soliciting comments, due May 18th in their Further Notice
Of Proposed Rulemaking on two issues:

o       Whether the Commission should prescribe more precise educational
requirements.

o       Whether and how the policies adopted on caller ID should be
extended to other identification services, such as caller party name or
CPNI.

I can think of some suggestions ...


(arl
[e-mail]  Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
Public Access UNIX and Internet in PDX at [phone] (1200/2400, N81)

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

From: suned1![e-mail] (Steve Rogers)
Subject: Mac Tie-in to T1 Line?
Date: 5 May 94 20:06:58 GMT
Organization: PHD NSWC, Port Hueneme, CA


There is a dedicated T1 line used here for video teleconferencing and
I would like to use it after hours transferring large data files from
Mac-to-Mac at other sites that are also on this video net.  Could
anyone please tell me what kind of hardware I would need in order to
interface between a Mac and the T1 line (incl. vendor names, ph.
numbers, etc, if known)?


Thanks in advance,

Steve Rogers          "Once we Americans roared
MHIP Program            like lions for liberty:
                        now we bleat like sheep
                      for security" - Norman Vincent Peale

Port Hueneme Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 05 May 94 21:18:28 -0500
Subject: Toronto Utilities Consider Fibre Local Network
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


[from Bell News, 2 May 1994]

Utilities envisage their own fibre optic network.

Five Toronto-area electric utilities are weighing plans to build a
fibre optic network to rival those of the telcos and the cablecos.

Grouped under the banner of the Metro Utility Taskforce on Fibreoptic
Services, the utilities plan to use a portion of the network's
capacity to control the consumption and metering of electricity, and
lease the unused capacity to those who desire access.

Said Taskforce chairman Clive Chu: "We could probably build this kind
of infrastructure cheaper than anyone else. We've got the poles and
rights-of-way in place. We go out and service our lines on a regular
basis anyway. All we have to do is run another cable."

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 05 May 94 21:18:16 -0500
Subject: Directory formats to change
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


[from Bell News, 2 May 1994]

New-look directories get OK from CRTC

Our customers asked for it. We listened, and agreed.

And so did the CRTC which just approved our proposal to change the
presentation and improve the legibility of our telephone directories.

The new-look directories will initially be introduced in Montreal in
December 1994, and Toronto in April of 1995.

Other directories may be converted at a future time.

Two major format changes are involved.

The first is the separation of residence and business customers into
two distinct sections in the book.

The second applies to the residence section of the book. The family
name will be printed only once, in bold type. Each individual listing
with the same family name (Larissa Jones, Larry Jones) will appear
indented under that name.

This indented style is both a cost saving as well as a legibility
initiative.

Splitting the residence and business listings is a revenue initiative
(about $90,000 per annum for both Bell Ontario and Bell Quebec).

There will be a charge of $2.65 a month for business customers who
choose to purchase an additional listing in the residence section of
the directory.

A recent customer survey showed that of those surveyed, 73 per cent
approved of the change to separate residential and business sections.
Directories in many American markets already use this style.

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

From: [e-mail] (Hanwook Jung)
Subject: Prices on DFB Laser, fiber, Mobile switching centers, etc..
Organization: UB
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 16:04:25 GMT


In future, as the subscription ratio increases to the wireless
services, microcells( a few hundred meters in radius) will be
deployed.  Then, the subcarrier multipled opticla link can be used for
the radio remoting purpose for the microcells.

The major components to construting the subcarrier multiplexed optical link
for the microcell are:

 . DFB laser( or other laser, LED )
 . PIN detector
 . fiber and conduit
 . mobile switching center( exchanges, and real estate)
 . Base station equipment

For those who involved in companies which produce any of above
products, would you give me some approximate prices on those with some
past years' prices also if available?

It will be a great help to have some ideas on real world and products.
I don't need the exact prices at this time to know reality.

Thank you in advance.


H.Jung    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 5 May 94 11:29 CST
Subject: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories


> Could someone knowledgeable supply me with the vital data on (mail
> order for cell phone accessories) these companies?

I received a catalog and brochures from:

     Hutton Communications
     4112 Billy Mitchell Drive
     Dallas, TX  75244-2315
     214-239-0580  Fax-214-239-5264
     800-442-3811

They had quite a few cellular accessories.


Randy Hayes  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #205
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01859;
          6 May 94 17:09 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11682; Fri, 6 May 94 13:36:10 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11662; Fri, 6 May 94 13:36:03 CDT
Date: Fri, 6 May 94 13:36:03 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #206

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 6 May 94 13:36:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 206

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Question About Digital Telephony and Delayed Dial Tone (Sean Peacock)
    Re: NANP and Switches (Paul A. Lee)
    Re: TCP/IP Over X.25/Datapac (Soren Aalto)
    Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Doug Reuben)
    Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Alan Gallatin)
    Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Erik Ramberg)
    Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? (Bob Keller)
    Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? (Michael D. Sullivan)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Sean P Peacock)
Subject: Re: Question About Digital Telephony and Delayed Dial Tone
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 07:40:38 GMT


John Lundgren ([e-mail]) wrote:

> My understanding was at this time, if you have ISDN, or 2B+D, you have
> a full channel all the way to the CO.  That goes for POTS too, even if
> your pots line runs into a SLIC channel bank at the corner.  You still
> get a dedicated 'bit in the bitstream'.  It seems obvious to me that

Not totally true. A SLC-96 for example, takes 96 POTS and places them
on two T-1s with a third as backup. If 48 people are already using the
SLC you'll get blocked.

> this can't continue when the home gets a coax to the nearest
> 'muxer', and then the muxer talks to the central office using fiber
> optics.  But still, if the telco expects to offer the mythical 500
> channels and all the other stuff too, then the bandwidth of all the
> links to the CO, and beyond will have to be increased.  To offer T1 to
> the home, where the home already has ISDN, would mean an increase in
> bandwidth of approximatly 12.  That doesn't sound unreasonable, and
> could be done by the telco.

Possibly, however there are some costs to be dealt with. Some COs run
50Kft of wire from CO to demarc on pots lines. ISDN is limited to
18Kft without repeaters, T-1 is only 5-6Kft between repeaters. T-1
requires 2 pair instead of 1. Due to the explosion of 2nd lines, teen
lines, fax lines etc many areas are out of copper pairs and are going
to SLCs. Providing T-1 to the home would only make things worse. And
for really high bandwidth traffic (video etc) T-1s arent all that
fast. A cd-rom plays at 150KB/sec minimum Converting that into
bits/sec is 1.2 Mbit/sec or 77% of the T-1 used for just 1 channel of
CD quality audio/MPEG encoded movie. Two TVs, two T-1s not good.

With toll-quality audio being trivial in comparison to the data rates
required by these newer apps, (64Kbps compressible down to 16Kbps or
less depending on quality desired) it may be realistic to expect
dedicated channels for phone audio on the fiber/coax systems of the
future so that you're not competiting with net overloading from joe
sixpack's download of the playboy movie while trying to call 911.


Sean

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

Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 09:19:57 -0400
Subject: Re: NANP and Switches
From: Paul A. Lee  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


In TELECOM Digest V14 #197, James Slupsky writes:

> Firstly, if you are using an access code to dial outside calls (such as
> "9"), then your software will not care what digits are dialed after that.

That's untrue in many switches. Dialing "9" is often programmed as
access to the switch's Least Cost Routing routine. Depending on the
architecture and programming of the switch -- and even if dial tone is
returned to the caller after dialing "9" -- the digits following the
"9" may be simply captured for analysis by the restriction and LCR
routines within the PBX, while the PBX itself returns dial tone to the
caller. Only after the PBX analyzes and authorizes the dial string
will it select (based on LCR) and sieze a trunk and send the dialed
digits (or a translation of the dialed digits).


> An exception is if your local area gets an NXX ... that has a "1" or a "0"
> as the second digit. ...  This is not a very large possibility, since it
> will take time for telco's to introduce these NXX's.

CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially
in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc..

> For Toll calls, you would not have this problem.  Just tell all the users
> that Toll calls MUST be 10 digits, and you MUST use a "1" in front of the 10
> digits.  (so a typical toll call might look like -assuming you access
> outgoing trunks using "9"- "9 1 520 447 5003".  Your switch will cheerfully
> pass "1 520 447 5003" to the serving CO.

Several variables can act to contravene such a broad assupmtion. How
does the dialing plan of the serving telco work for toll calls? Is it
HNPA=7D and FNPA=1+10D, or must all toll calls be sent 1+10D? What
kind of lookup and translation can the PBX perform for LCR and dial
string resolution?

With the right PBX capabilities and programming, a lot of other possibilities
exist. Ensuring the desired toll restriction and call routing, as well as
relieving callers of unnecessary dialing, can be accomplished only with
careful analysis of a site's local calling area and dialing plan.

> It is unlikely that you will run into NXX codes using a "1" or "0" as the
> second digit for some time to come.

Not true -- see above.

The phone systems that will be impacted by interchangeable area codes
are those that perform least cost routing and/or toll restriction. The
LCR software of many PBXs requires the "1N0/1X" pattern of initial
digits to locate the area code within the dial string, along with a
table holding area codes and routing codes. The toll restriction
software of many PBXs requires an initial "1" to determine whether the
call is a toll call.

Both of those assumptions are being invalidated. Different software
routines, larger tables, more memory, and more processor power are
going to be needed in many PBXs to handle the complexity left by the
destruction of those assumptions. _Exactly_ how that complexity
affects a particular model of PBX at a particular location is the
crucial question. The answers will vary widely, and will be accurately
determined only with careful, individual analysis.



Paul A. Lee                          Voice  414 357-1409
Telecommunications Analyst             FAX  [phone]
Woolworth Corporation           CompuServe  70353,566
   INTERNET  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>

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

From: [e-mail] (Soren Aalto)
Subject: Re: TCP/IP Over X.25/Datapac
Date: 5 May 1994 15:28:28 GMT
Organization: University of Stellenbosch


> In article <[e-mail]>, Gordon Sawatzky <gord@infomag.
> mb.ca> wrote:

>> Does anyone know of products that allow TCP/IP over X.25 (datapac)
>> connections for Windows?

> I don't know of any for Windows, as PCs in general tend to have lousy
> serial interfaces and synchronous cards are generally very expensive
> (cheaper to build 'em yourself if you have the EE expertise).
> However, IP has been running over X.25 for a LONG time now, so it
> wouldn't surprise me if you could dig up someone who has done it.

For DOS/Windows TCP/X.25, what you need is an X.25 card and a packet
driver that supports it.  The company I am working for has developed
an intelligent (their term, not mine) X.25 card and we have written an
RFC-1356 (Multiprotocol Interconnect over something-or-other) SLIP
class packet driver for it.

The packet driver allows you to associate different X.25 connections
(SVC to a given X.121 address or a PVC) with a different SLIP
interfaces--I'm not explaining this well, so the example:

As you would configure a normal ethernet packet driver for a
given S/W interrupt, i.e.

wd8003e 0x70 ...

loads the wd8003e driver & provides it's API interface on S/W int
0x70, with our driver you can provide interfaces on several S/W
interrupts and each interface will correspond to a different X.25 VC,
typically to different X.121 addresses.  I.e., we can configure it so
that

int 0x63 --> 12111196
int 0x64 --> 1212234260
int 0x65 --> 121012541

(although at the moment each of these addresses has a XXX-pad sitting
on it here and the calls made by the packet driver will be cleared).

Anyway, this packet driver will encapsulate IP traffic in accordance
with RFC1356 & so will talk to most other IP routers that talk X.25.
You can run DOS applications over this or you can run Trumpet Winsock
over this as well.

The main reason people wouldn't typically do this is that you would
have a single user machine monopolizing an entire X.25 port -- and
these tend to cost a fair bit/month.  What is more popular is to use
this card in a PC-based router & use the router to connect a LAN to
the Internet via X.25.  There are a few PC routers on the S. African
commercial Internet doing this at the moment.

I must add that the same card we use for X.25 works for frame relay
(the firmware is downloadable at runtime) and we have a similar packet
driver that encapsulates IP (or other protocols) over several frame
relay PVCs.  Several PC routers were also running this way over
64Kbit/sec frame relay links here in S.A., although these have tended
to be replaced by dinkum Cisco and Wellfleet routers as most of the
commercial organisations with 64K access are service providers.

I don't know what is considered horribly expensive -- and I can't be
held to a quote (other people entirely that _pretend_ to sell the
things), but I guess that our card sells in the R2000 -- R3000 range.
Now what that means in real money (is about 150 -- 200 fresh
chickens?)  is US$600 -- 900, or about the before tax salary of the
better paid school teachers here in S.A.

Feel free to contact my by mail if either interested or disinterested
(as I mostly am myself) ...


Soren Aalto   <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
(commercially known as--but they don't pay for the mail, I do.)
Linkdata    Cape Town, S. Africa

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

From: [e-mail] (Cid Technologies)
Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program
Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 02:27:03 PDT


Yesterday, [e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin) wrote:

> If you dial *56 + PIN (SND) the fraud protection is turned on.
> Cellular One will refuse to complete any calls from that phone EXCEPT
> 611 and 911.  Incoming calls, however, still work.  Dialing *560 + PIN
> (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls.  This is, of
> course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself.

> Apparently, many (though not all) roaming areas work with this fraud
> protection program.  According to McCaw Cellular One, if the roaming
> area does NOT understand the *56 and *560 codes, calls will go through
> without a problem.  Of course, they want to see as many roaming areas
> cooperating :-)

This is not true at all! If the area you ar roaming in is NOT
connected to CO/NY, THEN it is *likely* that the features will be
ignored. Otherwise, if you roam into Connecticut or New Jersey, you
will NOT be able to make calls, and you will NOT be able to use your
features like Call-Forwarding (an of course Three-Way ... forget
Call-Waiting, it won't work there anyhow, regardless of what they say :( )

When my phone was cloned, they put the *56/*560 protection feature on
it, and I thought it was a great idea. This was before they had the
20-minute time-out period - I think I wouldn't want to have to hit
*560 each time my phone was off for more than 20 minutes.

However, when I went to CT (SID 00119) or the ComCast/NJ systems (SIDs
00173, 00575, 01487), UNLESS I turned off fraud-protection (ie, told
the switch "Let me make calls without having to enter my "unprotect"
code), when I tried to make a call from CT or NJ, or use a
Call-Forwarding feature, I could not do so.  Since the EMXs in CT and
NJ are connected to the Ericsson in NY, they "look" to NY to see what
the NY subscriber is allowed to "do" while roaming in CT or NJ. If you
forgot to turn protection "Off", ie, "unprotect" your phone PRIOR to
leaving the NY/00025 system, too bad! The NY switch would tell the NJ
or CT switch "Sorry, this guy can't make outgoing calls, deny him!",
and that's that!  Same holds true for Call-Forwarding.

Not that this was bad enough, but then they came up with this
20-minute deal where if you don't register in THEIR switch in 20
minutes you get denied outbound service and forwarding, so even if you
do "unprotect" your phone before leaving the NY system and roaming to
the CT or NJ systems, after 20 minutes out of NY you will be denied,
and there is NOTHING you can do to make calls, short of calling CO/NY
(from where? your carphone won't work!).

Note that even though Philly is an EMX switch, it's on the NACN (when
they feel like it -- don't expect it to work too well at night...). So
*56 and *560 usually work. However, I've noticed recently that Philly
is doing a lot of switch work on weekends, and *XX/*XXX codes won't
work. Add this to CO/NY's nighttime switch work, and there are
significant periods of time where your phone may not be able to make
outgoing calls.

Additionally, even when roaming in an NACN market, the * codes don't
always well -- I found that the *56/*560 didn't work from LA at all,
which is what promulgated me finally to tell them to just take it off
my account already.

I think they may want to fix this so that *56/*560 works only for the
NY system, but I think that the way the links are set up to CmCast and
Metro Mobile/Bell Atlantic this may not be so easy to do.

If the roaming system you are in has no connection with CO/NY in terms
of call-delivery and stuff like that, the *56/*560 shouldn't make a
difference. Thus, if you roamed to Orange County (where you pay ONLY
your home airtime rates, no daily surcharge or what I'm sure McCaw
thinks is a *very generous* $.99 per min NACN charge, which is a
ridiculous price to pay to roam), you would have no problem completing
calls, but if you drove over to CT, you'd have no way of entering a
*560 and thus no way of placing outgoing calls.

(They may have fixed this in the past few months, but I doubt it ...)

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are we to assume then that since the
> lockout occurs automatically twenty minutes after the last use of the
> phone that when one starts out each morning it is necessary to use the
> *560 unlock thing as part of making the first call of the day?   PAT]

Well, if you leave your phone on all night to see if anyone called,
no. But generally this is correct -- if the switch does not see you
register (NOT use, just register autonomously), after 20 minutes you
gotta "unprotect" yourself all over again.

BTW, on a different issue, CO/SF (also McCaw) has this new policy
where you can check your VM for free for ten seconds to see if anyone
has left messages.  If you listen to them for more than ten seconds,
you pay airtime, but you never pay airtime for land retrieval or when
a caller deposits a message or just hangs up. A much better policy in
my mind than PAYING to have people hang up on your voicemail like GTE
Mobilnet does. Maybe NY should think about something similar ...

(And NO, GTE has not fixed the "caller pays to hear a busy/unanswered
signal" problem yet, although they are now aware of it, and NO, GTE/SF
hasn't been able to get Call Waiting to work in the Motorola systems
owned by Pac*Bell or Air-Head cellular or whatever they call themselves
now ...)


Doug    CID Technologies    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin)
Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program
Date: 5 May 1994 23:14:41 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In a previous article, I wrote about McCaw Cellular's anti-fraud
feature which turns itself on after 20 minutes of your phone being
off ...

Following this, our Moderator noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are we to assume then that since the
> lockout occurs automatically twenty minutes after the last use of the
> phone that when one starts out each morning it is necessary to use the
> *560 unlock thing as part of making the first call of the day?   PAT]

Yes ... according to Cell One, once you turn on the phone, you need to
dial the unlock code -- *560 + PIN (SND) -- before making your first
call.  In that this only needs to be done before the first call and
since this can be simplified greatly via most phones' speed dialing,
Cellular One tries to convince us that this isn't really an inconvenience.
I'm apt to agree.

Incidentally, I forgot to mention in my previous post: This is not a
mandatory feature of the phone service.  You only have it if you ask
for it.  There is, of course, no charge for it.

So far, the only area I know of that offers this feature is McCaw's
NY/NJ market.  I believe that other McCaw Cellular One markets are
also instituting the same program, but I'm just not sure.  Anyone know
of another company doing the same thing?


Alan M. Gallatin           [e-mail]
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Erik Ramberg)
Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program
Date: 5 May 1994 18:59:49 GMT
Organization: ESL Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Alan M.
Gallatin) wrote:

> Here's a new one ... saw a brochure for this at a Cellular One center
> on Long Island yesterday.

> In an effort to thwart would-be counterfeit phone users, Cellular One
> just started up an anti-fraud program.  A customer participating will
> simply pick a four digit PIN.  Usage is something like this:

> If you dial *56 + PIN (SND) the fraud protection is turned on.
> Cellular One will refuse to complete any calls from that phone EXCEPT
> 611 and 911.  Incoming calls, however, still work.  Dialing *560 + PIN
> (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls.  This is, of
> course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself.

 ...stuff deleted

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are we to assume then that since the
> lockout occurs automatically twenty minutes after the last use of the
> phone that when one starts out each morning it is necessary to use the
> *560 unlock thing as part of making the first call of the day?   PAT]

Yes ... but also keep in mind how easy this scheme is to circumvent
... albeit a bit less likely ... all the criminal needs to do is to
track all the pin entries in the area (which also come with their MIN
ESN's) and they've got the new code.  Essentially all that's been done
is to extend the ESN to some more digits, and send these digits out a
bit less often.


Erik

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

Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 08:34:03 EDT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP?


[e-mail] asked:

> Does anyone know if the FCC maintains a public ftp site?

You can FTP or Gopher to the FCC: "ftp ftp.fcc.gov" or "gopher fcc.gov".
Once you get connected to the site, change to the /pub directory and look
around.  This site is still quite new and "under construction" so don't
expect a great depth of information just yet.  Here is a list of the
subdirectories under /pub:

            Daily_Business
            Daily_Digest
            Events
            News_Releases
            Notices
            Orders
            Panel_Discussions
            Public_Notices
            Reports
            Speeches

The FCC plans eventually to set up a mail reflector and/or mailing
list.  Until then, I am maintaining a collection of the five most
recent FCC Daily Digests in my .plan file and update it daily.  You
can get this file at any time by fingering my account: "finger
[e-mail]".  If you don't have finger you can use one of the
e-mail finger servers.  For example, e-mail to "[e-mail]"
with "#finger [e-mail]" in the subject line (don't include
the quote marks and make sure to start the subject line with #), and
you will receive the Digests by e-mail response.


Bob Keller <KY3R>        Robert J. Keller, P.C.        Tel [phone]
[e-mail]    Federal Telecommunications Law    Fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael D. Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP?
Date: 6 May 1994 01:45:44 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


[e-mail] writes:

> Does anyone know if the FCC maintains a public ftp site?

ftp.fcc.gov is accessible by anonymous ftp.  At present, the only
things posted are news releases and speeches, pretty much.  Rules,
texts of decisions, and public notices are not yet online (if they
ever will be).

> I would like to research more information on "Tariff 12" pricing for
> long distance services. One of my clients is interested in renego-
> tiating their rates. We had discussed several options including
> using a marketing agent for "Option 51 - EPSCS" as we have seen it
> referenced many times.

The FCC ftp site won't help for this.


Michael D. Sullivan | INTERNET E-MAIL TO:  |also: [e-mail]
Washington, D.C.    | [e-mail] |   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #206
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa02710;
          6 May 94 18:42 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14517; Fri, 6 May 94 15:12:14 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14508; Fri, 6 May 94 15:12:12 CDT
Date: Fri, 6 May 94 15:12:12 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #207

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 6 May 94 15:12:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 207

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    GSM/DECT Radio Emissions (Stewart Fist)
    Help: Telecom/Radio Equipment Firm Addresses (Christoph Berger)
    Teleglobe Ambitions (Toronto Star via Dave Leibold)
    AT&T Collect Calling Comes to Canada (Dave Leibold)
    Wireless Local Loop in Mexico (Alex Cena)
    LAPD, Q.931 Software Vendors (Joel Estes)
    Need Date of First Undersea Cable (Bill Brasuell)
    Remote Point-of-Presence (Dave Bell)
    PEP Pager Protocol Software Information Wanted (Mathias Koerber)
    Link Two LANs Over Two Wire Leased Line? (Alfredo E. Cotroneo)
    I Have Some Basic Telecom Questions - Help! ([e-mail])
    Northern Telecom Gets Colombia Contract (Dave Leibold)
    Series 5 Digital Loop Carrier System (DLC) (Chen Xie)
    ISDN via Microwave Multipoint (Omar Jennings)
    Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Shawn Gordhamer)
    Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Paul Barnett)
    Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (Aamer Soomro)
    Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (John R. Levine)
    Lastest Update on Info Superhighway Seminar (Roy Kerwood)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 05 May 94 08:32:57 EDT
From: Stewart Fist <[e-mail]>
Subject: GSM/DECT Radio Emissions


The European Commission is about to issue a directive to limit the
amount of EMI that digital phones can produce. The EC is said to be
compiling results from a number of studies on the problem, in
association with a number of universities. The World Health Organization
is also involved in looking at the results and preparing recommendations.

The most probable course of action is for the EC to pass the problem
over to CENELEC to write up the actual standards.  So far they have
concentrated on creating 'immunity' standards (shielding for existing
equipment) rather than emission standards for the producers of the
radio pollution.  This looks like a sea change in their thinking.

Has anyone got more information on any of this?  I'd be very
interested to know who is involved, and what has been found, and what
is being proposed.

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

From: [e-mail] (Christoph Berger)
Subject: Help: Telecom/Radio Equipment Firm Addresses
Date: 5 May 1994 13:10:14 GMT
Organization: University of Rostock (Germany)


Hello,

I am looking for adresses of firms in the area of telecommunication
systems and radio equipment in the USA or Canada. I'm a German student
in telecom and radiotechnic and I want to get a practical training
in a North American company. It would be nice if someone can help me.


e-mail to [e-mail]
christoph berger, friedrich-engels-platz 1, rostock, 18055, germany

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 05 May 94 21:18:04 -0500
Subject: Teleglobe Ambitions
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


{The Toronto Star} reported 4 May 94 of Teleglobe's Montreal annual
meeting. Buoyed by a record net income last year, recovering from the
previous year's loss, Chair/CEO Charles Sirois said "Teleglobe's goal
is to triple its traffic volume by 1998, thereby advancing from
seventh to third place among the world's intercontinental carriers."

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 05 May 94 21:34:19 -0500
Subject: AT&T Collect Calling Comes to Canada
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


AT&T just announced the availability of its 1 800 CALL-ATT service in
Canada. This now allows Canadian callers to place collect calls to
U.S. destinations via AT&T. An introductory offer gives a 20% discount
to the called party's charges, at least for the next several weeks.

MCI's 1 800 COLLECT is still unavailable in Canada. There is a recording
which says the service is hoped to be available "later this summer" -- a
recording which is apparently still in place from *last* summer.

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

Date: Thu, 05 May 94 14:00:46 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wireless Local Loop in Mexico


"Northern Telecom Ltd. (NT) said it has signed a supply agreement with
Grupo IUSACELL, the largest non-telco cellular operator in Mexico, to
deploy the infrastructure for a nationwide basic telephony network.

  The company said the supply agreement is intended to be $330 million
(U.S.)  over three years and calls for Northern Telecom to supply
innovative digital wireless technology based on a time division
multiple access (TDMA) fixed wireless access network for Grupo
IUSACELL ..."

Does anyone have have additional details on this contract or service?

o  Deployment schedule
o  # of Subscribers that will be using the system
o  Where will most of the equipment be deployed
o  Where were the trials held and feedback from the trials
o  Cost of the service

Thanks in Advance,


Alex M. Cena, [e-mail]
Telecom Equipment Analyst  Lehman Brothers
200 Vesey Street, 14th Fl  New York, NY 10285
(P) 212-526-2499 (F) 212-619-6826

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

From: iex![e-mail] (Joel Estes)
Subject: LAPD, Q.931 Software Vendors
Organization: iex
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 20:09:07 GMT


I am looking for vendors of software for Q.931 and LAPD applications.  Any
suggestions?  Please send e-mail to me directly.


Regardz(tm),

Joel Estes    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Brasuell)
Subject: Need Date of First Undersea Cable
Organization: Tandem Computers Inc.
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 18:29:35 GMT


Does anyone know the date of the first undersea cable between the USA
and Europe/UK?

In return I'll supply a bit of trivia, in 1876 it cost $7.50 per word
to send a cablegram between New York and Buenos Aires.


Bill Brasuell            "This is cool." Abraham Lincoln  Feb.1860
Tandem Computers Inc.     Frequently quoted by today's kids.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Remote Point-of-Presence
Date: Thu,  5 May 94 17:54:58 PDT


Is there a procedure whereby I can acquire a number, local to
a remote exchange, from my home area?

Specifically, I want to set up a line, either in my own place of
business in California, or, alternatively, in the state of
Pennsylvania, which can give me a local point of access in PA.  I
should be able to have local calls made from PA. to my p-o-p number
forwarded to my California number, and likewise, be able to place
calls out of the Pennsylvania line, so that they originate in PA.
Naturally, I would incur any toll charges associated with the
forwarding in either direction.

Can this be done by subscribing to a PA telco, and activating
(remotely!) call forwarding?

Can this be done with a Pacific Telephone line, locally?

Thanks for any information available!

I'll watch here for replies, but would appreciate an email note as
well ...


Dave   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The problem with remote call forwarding
is that it only handles incoming calls (in PA) outbound to CA. You can
arrange this with some telco in PA; they will give you a number there
which terminates only in the desired central office and calls to that
number will be forwarded at your expense by direct dialing to California.

If you want to work it the other way around, where you in California
can make outgoing *local* calls to people in Pennsylvania then you
need a Foreign Exchange line. These have largely fallen into disuse in
recent years because of the inexpensive nature of long distance calls
and the use of WATS lines, remote call forwarding, etc, but they are
available.  Again you would need to contact the local telco in the
place in Pennsylvania of your choice and specifically request Foreign
Exchange (known as FX) service.  They might tell you your local telco
in California has to initiate the request. What will happen literally
is that a pair of wires from the selected place in PA will be connected
permanently to a phone at your premises in California. When you lift the
receiver on that phone, the dial tone you hear will be coming to you
direct from PA ... and the calls you make will be handled on a 'local'
basis from the place where it is connected in PA. Whether PA or CA is
the originator of the request, the two telcos will coordinate it and
your local telco in CA will still be the company providing the wires
to you from your local central office (where the PA telco will drop
the wires coming to you). FX service is -- no kidding here! -- quite
expensive. Your permanent, full time wired line from PA will cost you
many hundreds of dollars per month fixed rate, and of course you will
additionally pay whatever charges apply for a business in PA with a
phone there as well. Most likely the billing will all come from your
local telco for the whole thing with your local telco doing inter-
company accounting/billing with the PA telco, AT&T and whoever else
in the middle physically owns the wires and interim switches, etc.

The thing with FX is, you've got to be able to justify the cost with
*lots* of traffic ... like keeping that line loaded several hours per
day minimum. If you can keep the line loaded with traffic several
hours per day it will break even; but less than that, you'll find that
DDD over the public network costs a lot less. People in PA who dial
your 'local' number will in fact unwittingly ring your phone in CA for
the price of a local (to them) call; ditto you in reverse. You cannot
count evening/overnight/weekend hours in the calculations regards
traffic. Nothing beats weekend rates. That several hours of traffic
daily has to come from mid-day business hours.

Another alternative would be to find an answering service in PA which
would hang a call diverter on the wall for you and let you dial into
it via DDD only to outdial through the diverter on a local basis. Of
course phreaking is rampant; anyone else who finds the diverter can
do the same thing, god forbid *their* calls were only local ... <grin> ...
But now you would be paying (1) a long distance call, (2) a local call
and/or local service fees to PA telco, (3) some fee to the answering
service each month and (4) your 'dues' to the United Hackerphreaks of
America just to get your physical presence there. My thinking is you
would be better off with remote call forwarding inbound from PA with a
listing in the local PA phone directory while making your outgoing
calls DDD from California and glossing over the fact that you are
actually in California unless the called party specifically asks your
location. Remote call forwarding will cost you $20-30 per path/month
out of Pennsylvania plus the per minute DDD rate in effect at the
time the call is received. This is much less expensive than FX unless
you are running a phone intensive operation like customer service or
a credit/collection center or telemarketing, etc.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mathias Koerber)
Subject: PEP Pager Protocol Software Information Wanted
Date: 6 May 1994 09:22:40 GMT
Organization: TECHNET, Singapore
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Where can I get info/src about the pep protocol for pagers?  I
couldn't find a FAQ.


Mathias Koerber                          | Tel:    +65 / 778 00 66 x 29
SW International Systems Pte Ltd         | Fax:    +65 / 777 94 01
14 Science Park Drive #04-01 The Maxwell | e-mail: [e-mail]
Singapore 0511                           |         [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alfredo E. Cotroneo)
Subject: Link Two LANs Over Two Wire Leased Line?
Date: Fri, 6 May 94 15:50:28 MET DST


I am looking for a solution to link two Windows for Workgroup LANS
which are 800 metres distant from each other over a (possibly) two
wire leased line. The line is just a wire installed by the telephone
company and has electrical continuity, if that matters.  An
alternative would be to have just file transfer between two PCs, if
network connection is impractical, too expensive or would strictly
require four wires.

Current modem technology at 28kbits (+ with compression) or ISDN at
64/128kbit would be too slow since the data to transfer may be in the
range of one or two Gbytes per day.

(BTW: Did anybody hear of ISDN over a leased line, is that possible?)

An alternative to the network connection (bridge?) would be to have
just file transfer between two PCs, if that is possible somehow at
speeds >= 1Mbit over two wires at 800 metres?

Any pointer to specific products (HW and SW), phones, faxes, of
suppliers, etc. will be gladly appreciated.  Please answer directly,
since I am not getting newsfeeds on a regular basis, and if there is
interest I will summarize.


Thank you,

Alfredo E. Cotroneo, Milano, Italy
E-mail : [e-mail]
fax: [phone], ph: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: I Have Some Basic Telecom Questions: HELP!
Date: 6 May 94 14:33:06 EST
Organization: University of Cincinnati


I recently posted a message requesting help with Telecom ACRONYMS.
The response to my message was huge and I thank everyone who responded
with suggestions.

I am still researching the area of Telecom and have learned a lot in
the past few weeks.  I obtained Newton's Telecom Dictionary which is a
BIG help.  I still am having trouble with a few topics.  I am aware of
what many are but do not know enough about Telecomm to understand many
of the technical descriptions.

1.) Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) concept and the basic (2B+D)
    service.

2.) Broadband ISDN (BISDN) concept.

3.) National ISDN-1.  I have found a lot on ISDN but not much that talks about
    National ISDN-1.  At least not in a way I can understand.

4.) Concept of circuit switching.  Major steps involved in call setup and
    take down.

5.) How do you determine/choose a packet size?

6.) Instead of using a bridge to connect two identical networks, why don't
    system developers just create one larger network?

I realize people don't always have the time to sit and answer
questions so if you could expand on even ONE of these topics, I would
really [e-mail])RN~
eciate it.  ANY ANSWERS WOULD BE APPRECIATED.

In return, I am going to create a FAQ of all basic questions that I
answer or get answers to.  It will hopefully lessen the amount of
questions asked.



Luke


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may want to check out the FAQ for
this group. The telecom Frequently Asked Questions file is sent out
automatically to each new subscriber to the mailing list and is also
posted on comp.dcom.telecom from time to time. In addition you can
get a copy from the Telecom Archives at lcs.mit.edu by anonymous ftp
or email server.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 05 May 94 22:11:36 -0500
Subject: Northern Telecom gets Colombia contract
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


[from Bell News, 2 May 1994]

Nortel to install digital network in Colombia.

Northern Telecom, our sister company in the BCE family, has landed its
largest contract in Latin America with the signing of a $350 million
deal to install a digital phone network in Colombia.

The contract includes 205,000 digital phone lines in ten regions of
Colombia as well as transmission equipment and microwave systems.

The agreement follows one signed only weeks earlier by Bell Canada
International to provide cellular phone service to the eastern region
of Colombia, including the capital, Bogota.

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

From: [e-mail] (Chen Xie)
Subject: Series 5 Digital Loop Carrier System (DLC)
Date: 6 May 1994 12:25:40 -0500
Organization: The University of Texas - Austin


Hi Folks:

I am looking to purchase large quantity of Series 5 DLC systems.
Could somebody tell me who are the players out there besides AT&T?
Small manufacturers are acceptable as long as their products are
compliant to the standards.  Any other information will also be
appreciated.


Chen Xie

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

Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 13:32:42 EDT
From: Omar Jennings <[e-mail]>
Subject: ISDN via Microwave Multipoint


We are interested in any work being done in the area of the (B-ISDN)
user connection via wireless in the microwave bands above 2 gHz. Any
leads would be appreciated.

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 09:09:32 GMT


[e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin) writes:

> What company is it that doesn't charge anything on the forwarded call?

Cellular One in Rochester, MN does not charge anything for forwarding
calls.  However, I haven't seen any way to use call forwarding to make
free long distance calls, and I've tried :).  Our coverage spans two
area codes, so if someone in the 612 area code calls me on my cell
phone, there is no LD charge (I'm in 507).  However, if I call him
from my cell phone or via call forwarding, there is a LD charge.


Shawn Gordhamer   [e-mail]  Rochester, Minnesota  USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Barnett)
Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding
Date: 5 May 94 14:08:11 GMT
Organization: CONVEX News Network, Engineering (cnn.eng), Richardson, Tx USA


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin)
writes:

> What company is it that doesn't charge anything on the forwarded call?

Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems.

Except, in the Dallas Ft. Worth area, when the number that the call is
being forwarded to is a different area code that is normally NOT
long-distance, the prevailing airtime rate is charged.

This is a little hard to explain.  In D/FW, the mobile phone numbers
are 'metro' numbers, which can be called from anywhere in Dallas, Ft.
Worth, and suburbs (most of the 214 and 817 area codes), without a
long-distance toll charge.  Conversely, through some magic I only
vaguely understand, SBMS will place cellular phone calls to land
phones anywhere in the the D/FW 'home' market (it is quite large)
without charging a long-distance toll ... airtime only.

I believe Cellular One (the A-side provider in D/FW) has a similar
policy.

And, unless they have changed it in the past year, US West Cellular
does not charge air-time or any other fees on locally forwarded calls
in the Mpls-St. Paul service area.


Paul Barnett        Convex Computer Corp.
MPP OS Development  Richardson, TX

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

Date: Thu, 5 May 94 13:21:16 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Aamer Soomro)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse


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

> ... but why don't the cellular providers use a more robust
> authentication service. Your cellular phone would contain an
> encription key that would also be known to the cellular provider. When
> your phone went off hook, it would send its telephone number. The
> provider would look up your number to get your key and send you some
> random sequence of digits which would vary from call to call. Your
> phone would take the sequence of digits, use its key to encode them
> and return them to the provider. Since the provider has your key, it
> can perform the same encription. If the encoded data that was returned
> doesn't match what the provider's copy of the key encripts, then its
> because the calling phone doesn't have the right key and the call is
> dropped.  The key is never transmitted so the crook would have to
> steal the physical phone to steal the service.

To me this seems hitting pretty close to the Clipper Chip controversy.
All the service providers and cell phone manufactures would have to
conform to a standard encryption, so that the cell phones could be
used with any carrier service.

The encryption keys analogous to the phone numbers would be another
database to be maintained by the service providers.

Would it be feasable to complicate the registeration process by
introducing two encryption steps and a comparisson step along with two
steps for digit transmission?


Aamer Soomro    George Mason University   Fairfax, Virginia. USA

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

Date: Fri, 6 May 94 12:36 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> Does anybody have any insights as to why it doesn't work this way
> [with per-phone challenge-response passwords] today?

The AMPS system in use in the U.S. was designed over a decade ago, and
has become much more popular than even the most optimistic forecasts
predicted.  There's a balance between cost and function, and ten years
ago the cost of adding the security features would have been quite
high, and the advantage, given the relatively modest popularity they
expected, low.

On the other hand, if the next round of cell phones (CDMA or TDMA)
don't include effective security features, that's just stupid.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Roy Kerwood)
Subject: Lastest Update on Info Superhighway Seminar
Date: Thu, 05 May 94 20:18:15 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a revised copy of the notice
posted here earlier this week which did not have all the details.  PAT]


         All seats are reserved and must be purchased in
                            advance.

             THE 1st TRAVELLERS GUIDE TO THE INFO
                         SUPERHIGHWAY

                At Hotel Vancouver June 24, 1994
                      Vancouver, BC Canada

All the information you need to know about the INFO SUPERHIGHWAY!!

Keynote Addresses

Respected professionals involved with the Info Superhighway will
provide detailed info on the superhighway and a personalized ROAD MAP
for you so you or your company can get onto the SUPERHIGHWAY and get
there at the highest speed.

Hands on displays of the latest Communications Software and hardware.

     Video Tele-Conference.
     On line Databases .
     WORLDWIDE Internet Connections.
     World Wide Information access.
     You will be part of the highest level of the Information SUPERHIGHWAY
        and have access to the leading edge of the latest Communications
        Technologies.
     Lectures on The Information Superhighway.
     Display by hardware, Software, Communications, Information Suppliers.

Timing:

8:00    -   Registration of attendees; explore exhibits
8:30    -   Introduction to show by Roy Kerwood
8:45    -   Honorable Robin Blencoe Minister of Government services
            and Minister responsible for Sport and The Commonwealth
            Games been invited to give a keynote address.
9:10    -   Mr AF Khan of AF Khan & Assosciates will speak on Voice
            call processing remote data processing Interfacing to Host
            Database and I.V.R. Tooolkit as well as Interactive
            Fax/Records Management.
10:00  -    BC Systems Corporation will participate by discussing what
            government is doing today to support the public and private
            sectors access to the information highway and could also
            discuss some future plans which are on the drawing board.
10:20   -   Mr. Mike Patterson, Internet expert informs audience of latest
            developments in the Superhighway from his perspective and
            future visions in panel format.
11:00  -    Mr. Hung Vu of Fonorola will speak on recent developments
            in data-communications from a providers point of view and
            will discuss future directions for the information networks.
11:30 -     Mr. Mark Watson Of Westel Tele-Communications will speak
            on the mst current advances in their compnies services.
12:00  -    Break for lunch and to examine the exhibits
                 ( lunch will be provided.)
1:00   -    Hon. John Manly has been invited to Video Tele-conference
            link to Ottawa.
1:20    -   Det Schmidt of ORB Satellite Communications will provide us
            with an insight into the outer reaches of the communications
            world and let us know how close (or Far) we are from truly
            global instant satellite communications from our own
            computers or homes.
2:10   -    Richard Pitt of Wimsey, a local Internet access, explains
            "point and click" access to the information super highway using
            Mosaic and give live demonstration of the World Wide Web,
            Archie and other exciting new developments in the state of
            the art.
3:00    -   Bruce Woodward of The Cyberstore BBS will do a live
            demonstration of a LOCAL BBS.
3:30    -   A speaker from BCNet the Internet Provider for BC will
            discuss the present state of BCNET as well as their plans for
            the future.
4:00    -   Question and answer session in panel format with audience
            participation.
5:00   -    Wrap up by Roy Kerwood
5:10 - 8:00 Move to the Vancouver Island room for refreshments and
            hands on demonstrations by exhibitors and further discussion
            groups.
8:00   -    Show closes

            Thank you for you interest in the seminar.

PLEASE COPY THIS AND PASS IT ALONG TO ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED OR POST
IT ON YOUR BULLETIN BOARD.

    Time is of the essence!

                        Roy Kerwood & Associates
                            907-1011 Beach Ave.
                               Vancouver BC
                                  V6E 1T8
                           ph-fax [phone]

Tickets Including Lunch $40.00.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #207
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa15156;
          11 May 94 14:29 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29357; Wed, 11 May 94 10:36:26 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29346; Wed, 11 May 94 10:36:23 CDT
Date: Wed, 11 May 94 10:36:23 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #208

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 May 94 10:36:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 208

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    FCC Order on Interstate Caller ID (John R. Levine)
    Searching For High School Classmates ... Help, Please! (Glen Gilbert)
    Cellular Telephone Pirates (Knight-Ridder via Van Hefner)
    Graceful Degradation (Jerry Levin)
    Erlang B Algorithm (James Slupsky)
    AT&T Major Billing Errors!! (Shantanu Jana)
    Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Barry S. Rein)
    SRI Ends Two Bobs' MGR (Alfredo E. Cotroneo)
    Cable Dates (Stewart Fist)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: FCC order on interstate Caller ID
Date: Wed, 11 May 94 02:39:45 EDT


I picked up a copy of the FCC's Caller ID order, which is available by
FTP as /pub/Orders/Common_Carrier/orcc4001.txt or orcc4001.wp.  (Kudos
to the FCC for making this info available so easily and quickly, by
the way.)

Much of the order is straightforward and not contentious, e.g.
delivering CNID between local and long distance carriers is so cheap
to implement that neither may charge the other for the data.  They
also note that per-call blocking is a good idea, and that *67 should
be the universal code to block CNID delivery.

But the arguments they list against per-line CNID seem, to me, to be
astonishingly specious.

There are three blocking options 1) per call for anyone, 2) per line
for anyone, and 3) per line for special groups.  The FCC thinks, not
unreasonably, that it's a mare's nest to ask the telco to implement 3,
since they have to determine who's in the special groups and who
isn't.  Then they say:

     43.  In the NPRM, we tentatively concluded that per line
    blocking unduly burdens calling party number based services
    overall by failing to limit its applicability to those calls for
    which  privacy is of concern to the caller.  The Commission noted
    that even in the case of law enforcement personnel, there may be
    a need to maintain calling number privacy on some calls, but that
    the same number may be used to telephone other law enforcement
    personnel, victims of crimes, cooperative witnesses, and family
    or friends.  The Commission asserted that in these types of
    calls, calling number privacy is not needed and calling number
    identification can actually be a valuable piece of information
    for both the caller and called parties.  The record reflects the
    useful nature of CPN based services, and the comments of
    Rochester illustrate that callers are likely to be interested in
    blocking only a small percentage of their calls.  The comments of
    USCG illustrate the usefulness of caller ID to emergency
    services.  In contrast, Missouri Counsel's analogy to unlisted
    numbers is inapposite because caller ID only permits parties
    called by the calling party to capture the calling party number,
    and then only if the calling party has not activated a per call
    blocking mechanism.  We find that the availability of per call
    unblocking does not cure the ill effects of per line blocking.
    Moreover, in an emergency, a caller is not likely to remember to
    dial or even to know to dial an unblocking code.  For the
    foregoing reasons, we find that a federal per line blocking
    requirement for interstate CPN based services, including caller
    ID, is not the best policy choice of those available to recognize
    the privacy interests of callers.  Thus, carriers may not offer
    per line blocking as a privacy protection mechanism on interstate
    calls.  We agree that certain uses of captured calling numbers
    need to be controlled, and address that issue infra.

In other words, per-line blocking is a bad idea because subscribers
are too dumb to unblock calls when they want to unblock them, although
they're not to dumb to block calls when they want to block them.

In paragraph 47 they note that where per-line blocking is offered,
telcos use *67 as a blocking toggle, so users can't really tell what
*67 does, but it doesn't seem to occur to them that the problem is
easily solved by requiring a different code for unblock than for
block.  In paragraph 48 they wave their hands and say that people who
care about privacy can just buy a box for "as little as $40.00 per
unit" that will stuff *67 in front of each call.  Thanks, guys.

The docket number is 91-281, with comments due by May 18th.  Comments
must reference the docket number.  Send ten copies (yes, 10) to:

Office of the Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
Washington DC 20554

Before you fire off a comment, please get a copy of the order, since
there's a lot of material beyond what I've summarized.  For people
without FTP access, I've put them on my mail server.  Send:

send fcc-cnid.txt    (for the text version)

send fcc-cnid.wp.uu    (for uuencoded compressed WP version)

to [e-mail].


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen Gilbert)
Subject: Searching for High School Classmates ... Help, please!
Date: 10 May 94 21:54:13 GMT


At the suggestion of someone more knowledgeable than I, relative to
the power of computer-aided search, I have been directed to this
group to ask for help.

I am wanting to locate a list of people (or do a search for these
people via net), about 300+ of them, who are being sought for our
thirtieth high school class reunion. One (manual) way is to go to the
telephone books for the general area, available here in out University
library for most all of the US, (Oakland, CA and San Francisco Bay
Area) and go through each of them (there are about two dozen covering
the Alameda County area and outlaying districts!)  to find the names
of the people who are "missing". But, aside from being a gargantuan
task and extremely time consuming, I am wondering if there is a manner
of doing a search of users in that area -- those who are connected to
some computing system that is readable from this net? (My lack of
expertise is about to show here 8-( )

I don't know if a list of names could be given as a list for a script
to do searches of computing resources it that particular area. And,
how time-consuming it would be. But, is it a feasible task? And, how
would I go about it? I have some pretty good resources (personnel) who
could help with the script, but I wanted to throw it out to this group
since the numbers who read/write to this group certainly must exceed
my wildest dreams -- including the depth and breadth of knowledge!!!

Or, would it be a better thing to send a blanket list to cites in the
area (SF/Bay Area) and/or the USA to ask others to look thru the list
for names of friends/employees whose names they recognize and ask that
they ask them to be in touch with me?  [Now _that_ one is a task that
I shudder to think about. How many would be willing to receive a list
of 300+ peoples' names and search through them for people they might
know? But, then again, if I knew someone from the Boston area as a
coworker and read about a class reuniong from that area, I might look
thru the list for his/her name. Then again, I may not! 8-/ ]

Have I given enough information to warrant a thumbs up, =b d=, or a
thumbs down, =p q=, on this thing?  Comments are most welcome. And, if
this is not the most appropriate group, then where would you suggest I
send this? Oh, yes, I was also thinking of setting up a Group called
alt.rec.class.reunions. Does this sound like a good idea?  I've not
done anything like that before. My experiences have been in reading,
replying to and posting articles in the netnews.

Thank you for your help.


Glen W. Gilbert
CSE Operations, UCSD ([e-mail])
Glen Gilbert, UC San Diego
Computer Science & Engineering Dept
[phone]  email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 10 May 94 19:47:42 EDT
Subject: Cellular Telephone Pirates


CELLULAR TELEPHONE PIRATES IN CARIBBEAN COST FIRMS HEAVILY

BY DAVID KIDWELL
Knight-Ridder News Service

MIAMI -- Modern-day pirates of the Caribbean are sailing the waves -- the
high-tech airwaves of cellular telephones.

So pesky and adept have they become at cloning cellular telephones and
running up thousands of dollars in fraudulent overseas bills that
Florida cellular companies have begun to block direct dial service to
the Bahamas and parts of the Caribbean.

BellSouth Mobility this month stopped direct-dial service to Jamaica,
Haiti, the Dominican Republic and the Bahamas. Cellular One blocked
the Dominican Republic last fall and Jamaica in February.

"It's a few bad apples," said Jim Walz, BellSouth's regional vice
president. "This cloning problem didn't really hit us until late last
year.  It's now enough of an inconvenience to our customer base to do
something about it.

"We don't want any more of our customers to get these exploding phone
bills," he said.

"And we want them to know if they do get one of these bills, it's not
their problem. It's ours. We eat it."

Customers can still use their cellular telephones to call the blocked
countries, but must use an operator and a personal credit card.

Here's how the pirates pillage the airwaves:

With a special radio scanner and the right computer equipment, they
can pluck from the airwaves the cellular code numbers of legitimate
customers. From there, they are able to load the codes into other
telephones, then sell them to drug dealers, smugglers or immigrants
who can't afford regular long distance service to their former
homelands.

Charges for the calls, sometimes reaching $10,000 in a month, then
show up on the legitimate customer's bill. When the customer
complains, the phone codes are replaced, making the duplicate phone
inoperable.

But catching the pirates is difficult, especially because they're calling
numbers overseas.

"This particular area -- Miami in particular -- has become a mecca for
cellular phone fraud," said Brian Stafford, assistant agent in charge
of the U.S. Secret Service's Miami Office. "We're getting dozens of
reports every month, and the average for one of these bills is about
$6,000."

Stafford said South Florida's large Caribbean immigrant population
makes it a natural market for cellular pirates.

"It's tempting when they can make free calls home for price of a clone
phone," he said, adding that the phones sell for an average of $150.
Nationwide, the cellular industry estimates fraudulent calls cost
about $1 million per day. South Florida is among the top three
markets, both in legitimate and fraudulent calls. The others are Los
Angeles and New York City.

Walz said the battle against the pirates is being waged on computer
screens.  BellSouth has already persuaded the Bahamas to install
computer software like that used in the United States that makes
easier to detect duplicate phones and shut them down.

"We expect to have service restored to the Bahamas sometime next
month," Walz said.


Van Hefner      Discount Long Distance Digest     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (jerry levin)
Subject: Graceful Degradation
Date: 10 May 1994 23:58:45 GMT
Organization: Trident Data Systems


Can anyone explain to me what is meant by graceful degradation when
referring to a data bus?

Thanks for your help in advance.


Jerry Levin  Voice-mail, 703-802-3685

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 04:57:54 +0700
From: [e-mail] (James Slupsky)
Subject: Erlang B Algorithm


If you are looking for the Erlang-b formula, it is:

B(C,A) = [(A**C)/C!]/[sum from i=0 to C of ((A**i)/i!)], where C=# of trunks
and A=offered load (in erlangs=CCS/36).

A neat recursive formula (for calculating on a computer) is:

(taken from "An introductin to Telecommunications Network Traffic
Engineering", by Dr. Lansun Lee, 1986 Edition, Alta Telecom
International Inc)

B(0,A) = 1,
B(C,A) = [A*B(C-1,A)]/[C + A*B(C-1,A)]

Hope this helps!


James

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

From: [e-mail] (Shantanu Jana)
Subject: AT&T Major Billing Errors!!
Date: 10 May 1994 19:08:25 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


Hi everybody,

This is Shantanu Jana from Los Angeles warning you about the present
misdeeds of AT&T.  I believe that most if not all of you have seen the
aggressive campaigning of AT&T on television, wherein they started by
offering True USA rewards of 20% of all US calls totalling to more
than $25, and True World savings, to all numbers in one country of
your choice, giving 50% off to all the numbers.

Well, I signed up in March 1994, and in the March bill, I did not
receive the 20% off, and also on one weekend, when AT&T went to match
MCI and offered 73 cents a minute on weekends to India. Guess what, I
was billed 86 cents a minute, which is more than half which was
guaranteed otherwise. Calling them is no joke too. I called the
billing inquiries number, and was put on hold for 24 minutes, after
which I went through the operator and managed to reach them. I was
given the figure for the credit, and they also noted my complaint for
their billing irregularities and for the difficulty in reaching them.

Now, a month later, my second bill contains only the True USA credit
and not the True World credit, and my billing for International is far
from the half off at 78 cents a minute. They billed me at $1.33 per
minute. When I spoke to the customer service representative, she could
not even give me the credit amount to appear in my future bills. She
mentioned something about two working days. Then I asked to be
connected to a supervisor, and I was connected to VICKI GARCIA, who
managed to find the credit amounts owed to me. I requested her to send
me a letter of apology mentioning how they mess up the billing, which
she declined, and so I asked her to attach to the bill, a statement
informing the subscribers that the bills were messed up and that they
should go through them carefully. This too could not be done.

At this stage in exasperation, I asked to speak to a person in charge,
who could own up to their mistake and send the apology note, only to
be informed, that in AT&T (A phone company I believe) beyond the
supervisor, you need to write to the Vice President, and you could not
speak to anyone further, even if they cannot answer your questions or
solve your problems. This I believe speaks highly of an establishment
as big and spread out as AT&T. I am really surprised that in a country
like the US, such a firm, with such a terrible customer service exists
and thrives.

GOD SAVE AMERICA!!!

I believe that many subscribers who trust AT&T as a good phone
company, are being cheated out of what is promised to them, unless
they are willing to go through this ridiculous (suposedly customer
service), who are only out to con.  When, in their advertisements,
they have the audacity to ask you to ask them to give it in writing,
they are the ones who are covering the big fraud.

An obviously harassed subscriber,


Shantanu Jana     [phone].


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Part or all of the problem lies in the fact
that AT&T billing is done by the various local telephone companies and
they (the local telcos) seem to not always be up to snuff at having the
right software for billing in place. Probably AT&T should have mentioned
to you when you first enrolled in their various offerings that in the
event your bill -- as prepared and sent to you by the local telco -- was
incorrect you should call them (as you have done) and they would issue a
manual credit covering the differences between what they advertised and
what the local telco in fact charged. I think you may be coming down a
little to hard on them demanding a written apology, etc.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry S. Rein)
Subject: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number
Date: 10 May 1994 23:32:09 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory


We're moving soon and we'll have to get a new phone number.  For
$10.00 Pacific Bell will let me choose any phone number with the right
prefix as long as it's not already taken.

I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to
remember.  Restaurants are supposedly willing to kill for a memorable
phone number, so I wonder if there is any research or recommendations
on how to select one, ie what combinations are remembered; what
combinations are most often mis-dialled, etc.

Incidentally, our exchange prefixes are 398, 791, 794, 797, and 798 -- 818
area code.

Thanks very much for your advice,


Barry Rein    [e-mail]

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

Date: 11 May 94 01:17:28 EDT
From: Alfredo E. Cotroneo <[e-mail]>
Subject: SRI Ends Two Bobs' MGR


Swiss Radio International announces a restructuring of its services
which will come into effect on June 6, 1994, and will bring -- among
other things -- the close down of the popular weekly DX program "The
Swiss Merry Go Round", hosted by the "Two Bobs", Bob Thomann and Bob
Zanotti. Details on what has been heard today on SRI follow.

As reported today by Paul Saffren on the "Grapevine" on Swiss Radio
International, in an interview with Nicholas Lombard, Head of the
English Satellite Project, these are the dramatic changes coming into
effect at SRI on June 6, 1994:

- SRI will establish a 24 hours English service on European satellite
(Astra, current transponder/subcarrier?), with 1/2 hours news
(bulletins, commentaries, press reviews, and Swiss matters to interest
to Intl audience) and 1/2 hour feature programs (life, science,
economy, culture in Switzerland) every hour;

- The current twenty-five people of the news room and English Service
will be amalgamated into a one single Dept. for both Shortwave and
Satellite service;

- There will be an addition of commercial and financial news (advertising?)
to the current programs;

- There will be definitely a loss of emphasis on Shortwave
transmissions, especially in Europe, justified by the "inevitable
further decline of Shortwave", especially after the introduction of
"mobile satellite receivers". Shortwave transmissions in Europe will
be available "only during prime time (morning, midday and evening)",
while at the moment there seem to be "no intention to close down
overseas". (Might this prelude to a close down of Shortwave in
Europe?).  No details were given on where "mobile satellite receivers"
to receive SRI can be purchased, and at which price.

- It was stated that one of the reasons behind the change in broadcast
policy is that "satellite is much cheaper" vs. Shortwave as far a the
technical infrastructure is concerned, although this choice means
"losing autonomy" and depending on other organizations/countries for
satellite usage.

- On Shortwave only the first half hour (i.e. news, no feature
programmes) will be used. Features will be only aired once at 14:30 on
SW to Europe, but not to overseas.

- The Grapevine and the Swiss MGR as they are now will not continue.
As for the two Bob's MGR Nicholas Lombard made a strong comment on the
air stating that as "a DX program we will forget about that particular
program". There might be a replacement -- perhaps -- strictly in the
form of a media program, and on European satellite only, but it will
be very different from the current DX program.

                             -----

No mention of the restructuring was given at all on the MGR this week
(following the Grapevine program), maybe due to the fact that the MGR
was recorded before the announcement was given. Bob Zanotti in today's
MGR, however, seemed to anticipate what might be explained on one of
the next and last editions of the two Bobs', before closing down on
June 6 : "The whole field of telecommunications is changing, moving,
and we are moving with it". You get all the irony and sadness of the
sentence, once you know the full story.

I immediately contacted Bob Zanotti, who has been a good friend of
mine for many years, but he declined to add any further comments
besides what has being heard today on the air. He only mentioned his
sadness and disbelief in hearing himself the complete details of the
project on the air. The restructuring of SRI was apparently announced
internally only a few days ago.

SRI may not be reached by e-mail, but you may contact them by fax on
[phone] for inquires or comments on the above. I am sure the
two Bobs will be glad to have your support, and hear your comments
(maybe there might be a last minute change if there are enough
protests). We have offered to relay any e-mail directed to them to us
here ([e-mail] or Compuserve: 100020,1013).  Well
forward all comments to them, if you want to convey your support or
protest.

We will also appreciate receiving by direct e-mail copy or echo of any
comment on the above which appears on Internet/USENET, and on
other media, since we do not have a direct Internet/USENET
connection.

We will also try to interview the two Bobs and other SRI representatives
on the next edition of the "Hello There" on IRRS-Shortwave on the air
on the week-end of May 15, in an effort to better understand the
reasons behind what appears an insane decision.

Thank You.


73,

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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although there is a lot of nostalgia
and romanticism where shortwave radio is concerned, the SRI people
*are* correct that satellite is less expensive and probably it is
more reliable also. Consider all the changes in the past few years:
radio (in general) yielded much of its influence to television. For
a half century or so, Hollywood reigned supreme with radio in the
lives of Americans at least. Then television began to replace going
to the theatres since talking-pictures were now common in one's own
home. Why just listen to the radio when you could listen and *see*
what was going on? Now television has been to a large extent been
made obsolete by cable and satellite programs. All the inconveniences
of listening to shortwave radio have been rendered moot by the ease
of a couple buttons on a receiver. People went to motion picture
theatres in the 1940's for entertainment which was impossible to
obtain elsewhere and to watch the newsreels. We had a theatre here
in Chicago called The Forum which showed nothing but newsreels; the
news of the day in a 50 minute program which started every hour on the
hour from 6 AM until 3 AM the next day. (They closed for a couple of
hours in the early morning so the janitor could clean the place up.)
During the intermissions between shows they piped in the BBC over
a loudspeaker. People were angry when The Forum closed its doors
about 1960 saying that television news had put them out of business.

And now computers and satellites have largely replaced television and
Hollywood. So, I feel shortwave radio served us well and continues to
serve us to some extent, but if the purpose is communication among the
people of the world over a large geographical span in a very short
period of time -- almost instantly -- then there *are* better ways to
go about it than shortwave radio with the unreliable and unpredictable
problems of radio transmissions as they were done in the past. Which
magazine was it a few years ago that grumbled about how the 'challenge'
behind receiving shortwave transmissions was now gone. They cited all
the shortwave stations which were using repeaters all over the world
and how there no longer was any challenge or need for skill in tuning
in distant, weak transmissions; no longer any need to know anything
at all about how to construct an antenna for best reception.  But that
was the point, you see: the broadcasters of the world did not want a
challenge or stumbling block in the way; they wanted their information
widely available.  As an information provider, I want the same thing.
I don't want it to be hard for you to read this Digest, I want it to
be easy ... in the case of SRI and others, I guess their conclusion is
they can reach more people for less money and less effort by ditching
the old techniques and going with new methods. In that sense, can you
blame them?  I also love to live in the past, but ... well I think you
get the point.   PAT]

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

Date: 11 May 94 07:43:21 EDT
From: Stewart Fist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cable Dates


Bill Brasuell asks:

> Does anyone know the date of the first undersea cable between the USA
> and Europe/UK?

You'll probably get a couple of different replies to this query,
because of the three attempts.  I've got a database on this trivia, so
let me straighten it out now.  This is the main sequence of events:

Back in 1852 the cable crossed the Irish Sea from the UK.  This was
the first essential step.  Dover to Calais had been completed in 1851,
thus making the continental connection possible.

In 1854 Cyrus Field established a company in America to construct the
Atlantic cable from Ireland to be landed in Newfoundland.  Lord Kelvin
led the push on the English end.  It was to be 4000kms (end-to-end)
and laid to maximum depth of 4400 m.

In 1856 two cables were laid from Canada to Newfoundland to get ready
for the Atlantic connection.

On August 7, 1857 laying began on the main Atlantic cable but it broke on
third day. They tried again early in 1858 and failed again.

On the third try later in 1858 they succeeded in laying the cable and
getting messages across it. On August 7, 1858 Queen Victoria and US
President James Buchanan exchange telegraphed greetings.  The cable
only carried messages for 27 days, and failed.

They laid another using the "Great Eastern" in 1866, and on August 4, 1866
the first permanently-operating Atlantic telegraphy cable link was opened
 from New York to London -- and via London onto Paris.

And later:

December 12, 1901 was the first trans-Atlantic radio signal.  The
letter 'S' was send from Cornwall to Newfoundland by Marconi. The
Anglo-American Telegraph Company (cable owners) threatened him with
legal action because they claimed exclusive rights to electrical
communications in the British colonies.

September 25, 1956 was the day the first trans-Atlantic coaxial
telephone cable came into operations.

Let me add another bit of trivia.

November 20, 1871 was the date the first overseas telegram reached
Australia.  It came via India, Singapore, Djakata to Darwin (later
Djakata (then Batavia) was by-passed) and was then carried overland by
horse messager to Sydney.

Because of many problems, the overland link from Adelaide to Darwin
(1937 miles) was only completed on August 22, 1872 when it joined the
cable to Melbourne and Sydney.

The signals needed to be rekeyed 18 times between Sydney and London,
and many of the Morse operators couldn't speak English.

Shortly after the official opening of the London link, a Sydney Reuter's
correspondent sent a news story to the UK about a ground-breaking ceremony
for the new Queensland railway.  His despatch began: "Governer turns first
sod  ..."

Unfortunately, by the time it reached London and went into print it
had been translated by the Morse operators into "Governer twins first
son ..."

As he was 80 years old and well-known in London society circles as a
gay batchelor, this created some consternation!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for a neat article to close this
issue. Does anyone remember the game played by children in the past called
'Chinese Telephone'?  A group of people stand in a circle (the more the
merrier; twenty or more people are recommended) and the first person must
whisper a short sentence one time only to the person to his left. That
person in turn must whisper one time only what he *thought* he heard to
the person to his left; and on it goes until the final person in the circle
tells the person to his left (the originator) what he *thinks* he heard
said by the person to his right. The deviation between the original message
and the final report can be hilarious.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #208
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa15942;
          11 May 94 16:01 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03961; Wed, 11 May 94 12:15:21 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03952; Wed, 11 May 94 12:15:19 CDT
Date: Wed, 11 May 94 12:15:19 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #209

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 May 94 12:15:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 209

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Questionnaire for Telecommunications Directory (Nigel Allen)
    First CAP All Fiber-Optic Transatlantic Videoconfernce (FCC via Bob Keller)
    Electronic FCC Fees Payment Workshop - May 18 (FCC via Bob Keller)
    Hackers On Planet Earth -Update- (Kevin Crow)
    European Real-Time Seminar 1994 (Alf Oennestam)
    Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 Codes (Communications Daily via Gregory Monti)
    Conference: Using ISDN to Work through the Next Earthquake (Bob Larribeau)
    Wanted: X25 Package For SCO UNIX (Michael A. Leo)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 11:25 WET
Subject: Questionnaire for Telecommunications Directory
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-4151  Voice: 416-363-8676


[Note from NDA: Here is the text of a questionnaire that I thought
would be of interest to readers of this newsgroupu.]

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FREE LISTING

TELECOMMUNICATIONS DIRECTORY

An International Descriptive Guide to Telecommunications Companies,
Services, systems, and Related Organizations in the Field

If you would like your telecommunications service considered for
listing free of charge in the Telecommunications Directory published
by Gale Research Inc. and your system or service is described by one
or more of the categories listed below, please complete this
questionnaire and return it by May 31 to:

  Telecommunications Directory
  Gale Research Inc.
  835 Penobscot Building
  Detroit, MI 48226-4094    U.S.A.
  Telephone [phone] ext. 1551
  or 800-347-GALE, ext. 1551 in Canada and the U.S.
  Fax [phone]

  If you are already listed, please ignore this questionnaire.

Please enclose any literature or other information that might help the
editors put together a more complete listing for your organization or
service.

If your organization has multiple services that should be described in
separate listings, please complete a separate questionnaire for each.

1. Company/organization name and address:

2. Unit (particular system/service/unit under discussion):
   Address:

3. Telephone:
   Toll-free phone (if any):
   Fax:
   Electronic mail address (give system name and
   your code or address):
   Telex:
   Year organization founded:
   Year system/service established:

4. Head of unit listed in item 2 (name, position, unit):

5. Public/business contact for additional information
   (name, position, unit):

6. Related organizations (other sponsoring, affiliated, or supporting
organizations - please specify relationship [i.e., wholly owned subsidiary,
etc.] and indicate city/state/country location):

7. Staff of unit listed in item 2 (indicate number in each category):
  Total:
  Management:
  Technical:
  Sales and Marketing:
  Clerical:
  Other:

8. Service Types (Please check those boxes that describe your type of
organizaton, system, or service. For example, a telephone resale
carrier would designate "Long Distance Telephone Service".
An organization that provides consulting and educational services would
designate "Consultant" and "Conference/Seminar/Training Provider".
Item 9, General Description, will ask you to briefly amplify the
indicators checked here.)

Systems or Services
[ ] Data Communications Service
[ ] Long Distance Telephonme Service
    [ ] Intrastate  [ ] Interstate  [ ] International
[ ] Cellular Radio Service
[ ] Local Area Network Supplier
[ ] Teleconferencing
    [ ] Audio Only Service
    [ ] Audio/Video Service
    [ ] Equipment Supplier
[ ] Audiotex Service
[ ] Videotex/Teletext Service
[ ] Videotex/Teletext Equipment or Software
[ ] Electronic Mail
    [ ] Service     [ ] Equipment/Software
[ ] Voice Store & Forward
    [ ] Service      [ ] Equipment/Software
[ ] Satellite/Microwave Networking Service
    (i.e. uplinks, downlinks, transponder leasing, etc.)
[ ] Shared Tenant Service
[ ] Facsimile Service (includes fax-0n-demand, broadcast fax,
    or enhanced fax)
[ ] Telegram Service
[ ] Teletex Service
[ ] Telex Service
[ ] Transactional Service (electronic fund transfer, home banking,
    reservations systems, interactive shopping, etc.)
[ ] Two-way Cable Television

Other Organizations
[ ] Consulting
[ ] Legal Service
[ ] Financial Service/Insurance Service
[ ] Conference/Seminar/Training Provider
[ ] Association
[ ] Publisher/Information Service
[ ] Government/Regulatory/Standards Body
[ ] Research
[ ] Other (please specify):

9. General description of unit listed in item 2:

10. Specific user applications of system/service (what is system/
service used for?):

11. Geographic areas served (cities, countries, or general geographic
regions served):

12. Rate structure (please indicate general rates, fees, or other
charges, including start-up costs if applicable):

13. Clientele/availability (primary types of clients; any restrictions
or limitations)

14. Means of access (how is the system/service accessed? what
equipment is required?)

15. Equipment supplied as part of system/service

16. Publications  (periodicals, books, documentation/user aids;
please indicate title, price, frequency, and where available from);

17. Other communications services (if possible, please send
additional literature on these services for possible inclusion
in the Directory):

18. Planned new services (indicate starting date; please enclose
additional information if available):

19. Key Features Summary (please recap the main advantages and
feastures of your system or service):

20. Questionnaire completed by:
    Name:
    Title:
    Date:
    Telephone:
    Fax:

21. [ ] Descriptive material enclosed
    [ ] Descriptive material sent under separate cover

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:38:16 EDT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: First CAP All Fiber-Optic Transatlantic Videoconfernce


                                                  May 11, 1994


          CHAIRMAN HUNDT WILL TAKE PART IN FIRST ALL FIBER-OPTIC
              TRANSATLANTIC VIDEOCONFERENCE USING COMPETITIVE
               ACCESS CONNECTIONS WITH SIR BRYAN CARSBERG,
             DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FAIR TRADING, UNITED KINGDOM

      Chairman Hundt will make the first all fiber-optic transatlantic
call using competitive access connections by having a videoconference
between the FCC and UK at 8:00 a.m., Wednesday, May 25, in Room 856 at
the FCC headquarters building, 1919 M St., NW.

      MFS Communications Co. is providing the technical demonstration
using solely competitive networks between the Chairman and Sir Bryan
Carsberg, the United Kingdom's Director General of Fair Trading.

      Both officials plan to discuss informally the value of
competition and the benefits of bringing competition to users during
the videoconference.

      The press is invited to attend.

News Media contact:  Stephen Svab at [phone].

                              -FCC-


Bob Keller               Robert J. Keller, P.C.          Tel [phone]
A.R.S. KY3R          Federal Telecommunications Law      Fax [phone]
[e-mail]   (Finger me for FCC Daily Digest)   CompuServe 76100,3333

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:41:17 EDT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Electronic FCC Fees Payment Workshop - May 18


                                                  May 11, 1994

                     FEES ELECTRONIC PAYMENT WORKSHOP
                          WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 1994
                            9:00 AM to 12:00 PM

The Public Service Division will sponsor a Fees Electronic Payment
Workshop on Wednesday, May 18, 1994 from 9:00 AM until 12:00 PM at the
FCC, Room 856, 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, DC.  This workshop is
designed for those firms interested in paying processing and/or
regulatory fees electronically.

Currently, it is proposed that those who pay their fees electronically
will file the accompanying paperwork with the Office of the Secretary,
Room 222, 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, DC 20554 or Route 116,
Gettysburg, PA 17326, depending on the particular filing. THIS NEW
PROPOSED RULE PERTAINS TO ELECTRONIC PAYERS ONLY.

Two types of electronic payment that will be discussed at the workshop are:

    1)'CTX' type payments where money is transferred from the payer's
    bank directly to Mellon Bank, our lockbox bank via mainframe computer.
    'CTX' type payments have been widely used by larger corporations to pay
    their accounts.  Use of the 'CTX' payment system is designed for those
    companies already using electronic computer transfer.

    2) The Customer Initiated Payments (CIP) Program where the payers
    authorize our lockbox bank to debit their bank account.  This is a
    personal computer or touch-tone telephone based system designed for
    companies not currently involved in electronic data transfer.

The majority of the workshop will be devoted to the CIP Program
because it fits the needs of most of FCC's clients.  The CIP Program
is a convenient, safe, and reliable way for your organization to pay
its processing and regulatory fees.  FCC CIP has been developed
especially for FCC fee payments in conjunction with Mellon Bank.

Please join us for a discussion and demonstration of this new and
exciting innovation at the FCC.  Staff from Mellon Bank and the FCC
will be there to answer your questions.  Please contact Kara Casey or
Michelle Mitchell at 202/632-0244 if you are interested in attending.

                              -FCC-


Bob Keller               Robert J. Keller, P.C.          Tel [phone]
A.R.S. KY3R          Federal Telecommunications Law      Fax [phone]
[e-mail]   (Finger me for FCC Daily Digest)   CompuServe 76100,3333

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin Crow)
Subject: Hackers On Planet Earth -Update-
Organization: Netsys Inc.
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 06:54:05 GMT


Hackers On Planet Earth

The First U.S. Hacker Congress

Come together in the summer of 1994 to celebrate the hacker world and
the tenth anniversary of 2600 Magazine. We will have speakers and
demonstrations from around the globe, a collection of films and rare
videos on hacking, and our very own network between all of us and the
outside world!

This is an opportunity to feel the real magic of hacking instead of
hearing about how we're about to destroy the world in some cheap
tabloid or on the news during sweeps week. Government propaganda and
corporate doublespeak have finally met their match!

If you want to help put together this historic event, contact us by
telephone at [phone], through the mail at H.O.P.E., PO Box 848,
Middle Island, NY 11953, on the Internet at [e-mail].  We
need ideas, people, technology, and karma.

H.O.P.E. - August 13th and 14th at the Hotel Pennsylvania, right in
the middle of bustling New York City (Seventh Avenue and 34th Street,
right across the street from Penn Station). We've rented out the
entire top floor (except for the mysterious NYNEX office).  Special
rates of $99 a night are available from the hotel (double rooms, four
can probably fit easily). Cheaper places are also available as is
nearly anything else. This is New York City, after all.

Admission to the conference is $20 for the entire weekend if you
preregister, $25 at the door, regardless of whether you stay for two
days or five minutes. We encourage you to bring a computer so you can
tie into our giant Ethernet and add to the fun. We hope you try to
hack root on the system we'll be running -- all attendees will get
accounts with prizes for the penetrators.

Dancing and merchandising in the halls;

Cellular phone workshop;

Celebration of the Clipper Chip (not);

Hacker videos from all over the world;

Surveillance demos;

Hacker legends from around the globe;

It's not Woodstock - It's The Future;

Many more details are on the way.

Information sources:

2600 Magazine
The Hacker Quarterly
Summer 1994 edition

Off The Hook
Wednesdays, 10:00 pm
WBAI 99.5 FM
New York City

2600 Voice BBS
516-473-2626

alt.2600
on the Internet

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

From: [e-mail] (Alf Oennestam)
Subject: European Real-Time Seminar 1994
Organization: Enea Data AB
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 10:08:24 GMT


ENEA DATA AB and TELELOGIC AB are pleased to invite you to the seminar:

**********  Designing communication systems for future demands  *********

This seminar will give you an overwiew of the possibilities our tools
can offer you in real-time design, to preserve your investment for the
future.

TELELOGIC AB   The product SDT, which is an SDL Design Tool for development
               and ITEX used for test specification of real-time systems.

ENEA DATA AB   which is OSE real-time operating system products, including
               OSE delta, designed for distributed and fault-tolerant
               applications.

Seminars will be held at foolowing places:

Sweden           Stockholm                May    24
Norway           Oslo                     May    26
Finland          Helsinki                 May    27
Italy            Milan                    May    30
France           Toulouse                 May    31
                 Aix de Provence          June    1
                 Rennes                   June    2
                 Paris                    June    3
Austria          Vienna                   June    6
Switzerland      Zurich                   June    7
Germany          Stuttgart                June    8
                 Munich                   June    9
                 Frankfurt                June   10
England          London                   June   21


All seminars are free of charge.

Please request further information by email from:

[e-mail]

or from:

ENEA DATA AB     Phone [phone]   Fax [phone]
Box 232   S-183 23 TABY   SWEDEN

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 07:03:39 EDT
From: Gregory P. Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 codes


A story in the May 11 issue of {Communications Daily} notes that the
FCC has given Bellcore permision to assign NXX codes within new NPA
500.  500 is the special access code that will be used for
non-geographically-based services, mainly wireless ones like beepers,
personal communications services (PCS) and cellular phones.  The idea
is to avoid separate roamer port numbers and roaming charges.

Bellcore had been asked to delay any work on the 500 front until
fairness issues were worked out.  Now that an Industry Carriers
Compatibility Forum has reached consensus on assignment guidelines,
the Commission felt it was time to release Bellcore from their 'hold'.

The FCC cautioned that it does not want to see numbers assigned
"frivolously, hoarded by assignees or prematurely exhausted."  Number
portability among carriers is not required by the order but it is
assumed that numbers within NPA 500 will eventually become portable.

Bellcore will need to negotiate with (and adjudicate conflicts among)
the 126 carriers who have requested 437 of the possible 792 NXX codes
within the 500 NPA.  Bellcore would probably start assignments within
a few months.


Greg Monti          Arlington, Virginia, USA        [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Larribeau)
Subject: Conference: Using ISDN to Work Through the Next Earthquake
Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 21:22:27 GMT


Using ISDN to Work through the Next Earthquake
The California ISDN Users' Group Conference
June 7 & 8, Sheraton Newport Beach

The California ISDN Users' Group is holding a conference on how ISDN
and other new communications technologies can be used to keep people
working after a major disaster.  The conference will include
presentations and demonstrations of disaster backup, internetworking
and network access, voice, video, and groupware technologies using
ISDN.

To attend fill out the form below and send a check for $80 ($50
without lunches) to:

California ISDN Users' Group
P.O. Box 27901-774
San Francisco, CA 94127

Name_____________________________________________________________________

Company__________________________________________________________________

Address__________________________________________________________________

City/State/Zip___________________________________________________________

Telephone/email__________________________________________________________

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

Send any questions to Bob Larribeau at "[e-mail]".

Plenary
Tuesday 8:30 - 10:00

Stan Kluz - Chairman
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Welcome and CIUG activities.

Keynote - Byron Wagner
World-class technology consultant describes his experience using ISDN
to solve problems for global organizations like the Walt Disney
Company, Apple Computer, Ricoh, and 20th Century Fox. Here's your
opportunity to see how media-savvy companies are reinventing
themselves with technology and get a high altitude view of the
implosion of media and communications.

Bob Larribeau - Program Chairman
Conference program.

Data Networking Track
ISDN Data Networking Overview
Tuesday 10:30 - 12:00

Bob Larribeau - Consultant
Overview of using ISDN for backing up and accessing remote networks.

Anita Freeman & Jack Robertson - Pacific Bell
Experiences with ISDN after the Northridge earthquake.

Ruth Winkler - Pacific Bell
Switched 56 service and its relationship to ISDN

Wayne McCallum - GTE
How GTE's ISDN implementation enhances remote network applications.

ISDN Backup for Data Networks
Tuesday 1:30 - 3:00

Heather Vaughn - Racal Data Communications
Gene Litt - Controlware
Two suppliers discuss ISDN as an ideal technology for keeping networks
up during a disaster at minimum cost.

Larry Cynar - Pacific Bell
Pacific Bell customizes private data networks to increase disaster resistance.

Bill Bloom - Dunsnet
How Dunsnet uses ISDN to keep their network in operation.

Data Connectivity
Tuesday 3:00 - 5:00

Leslie Conway - Adtran
ISDN connectivity for a broad range of high speed data communications
applications.

Bruce Dillon - IBM
Board for the PC that not only supports ISDN, but also can be used as
a data or fax modem.

Richard Brennan - AT&T
Using ISDN to support both voice, video and data in the home.


ISDN Remote Network Access
Wednesday 8:30 - 10:30

Tom Williams - Combinet
Gene Chang - Extension Technology
Greg Larson - Digiboard

Three suppliers of ISDN equipment that provide high performance remote
access to LANs

Scott Yeager - MFS Datanet
User of ISDN for dialup access to an ATM network.

Data Networking Solutions
Wednesday 10:30 - 12:00

Pete Moulds - Ascend Communications
Danny Young - Intel
Jim Hietala - Network Express
Jerome Calgo - Transtream
Four suppliers of ISDN equipment that interconnects LANs or provides
remote access to LANs.

Terry Tompkins - Motorola
An ISDN user's experience with hardware and software options for
accessing LANs from home.

Data Networking User Experience
Wednesday 1:30 - 3:00

Bill Brasuell - Tandem
Experiences at the early stages of extending a large modem based work at home
program to ISDN.

Ed Tynan - Motorola
Inexpensive security measures that significantly reduce the security
risks of dialup LAN access.

Natalie Clinton - LLNL
Lawrence Livermore Labs experiences in implementing a large ISDN based
work at home program.

Pat Krause - McDonald's
The first ISDN user in the U.S. will say how and why he are uses ISDN
to support work at home and LAN interconnection.

Voice/Video/Groupware Track
ISDN Centrex Voice Services
Tuesday 10:30 - 12:00

Ella Spradley - Pacific Bell
J. Griffin - GTE
How ISDN Centrex offerings can assure continued communications after a
disaster.

ISDN Centrex Voice Applications
Tuesday 1:30 - 3:00

Joe Saaveda - Telrad
T. Gartman - Lodestar

Two suppliers of ISDN telephones will describe how ISDN supports low
cost, flexible phone services.

J. Pokress - Teloquent
Will describe how ISDN can be used to support distributed, work at
home customer service.

ISDN Groupware
Tuesday 3:30 - 5:00

Gary Gysin - Crosswise
Curtis Albrecht - Eye Tel
Two suppliers of groupware software applications will discuss enhancing
communications after a disaster.


ISDN Video
Wednesday 8:30 - 10:00

Richard Grace - British Telecom

New cost effective video solutions for up new applications at lower
cost and with rapid deployment.

Carl Kikerpill - Compression Labs
ISDN providing flexible video conferencing that supports face to face
communication after a disaster.

Jeffrey Starr - McGaw, Inc.
Experience using video conferencing over ISDN.


ISDN Video
Wednesday 10:30 - 12:00

Intel - name not available at press time
PC based video solutions using ISDN.

Pat Krause - McDonald's
User evaluation of ISDN video systems.

Special Session
Alternative Technologies
Wednesday 1:30 - 3:00

Pushpendra Mohta - CERFNet
The role of the Internet in work at home and disaster recovery.

Keith Nesson - Pacific Bell
Applications using Fast Packet Services (SMDS, Frame Relay, ATM) to provide
distributed, fault-tolerant corporate networks.

Demonstrations

ISDN products and applications will be demonstrated by 17 different
companies on both Tuesday and Wednesday.

Adtran                    Extension Technology
Ascend Communications            IBM
AT&T                    Intel
British Telecom                Lodestar Technologies
Combinet                    Network Express
Compression Labs                Northern Telecom
Controlware                Pacific Bell
Crosswise                Transtream
Digiboard

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A Leo)
Subject: Wanted: X25 Package For SCO UNIX
Date: 11 May 1994 16:51:16 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications


Hi,

  I am looking for an x25 communications package for use with SCO
UNIX.  We are porting our product to the SCO environment from the Sun
environment.  I am most familiar with SunConnect's SunLink X.25
product.

  If anyone knows of a solution, please let me know.


Thank you,

Michael Leo
ADC Telecommunications
[phone] (voice)
[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #209
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16386;
          11 May 94 16:49 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05601; Wed, 11 May 94 13:19:05 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05590; Wed, 11 May 94 13:19:03 CDT
Date: Wed, 11 May 94 13:19:03 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #210

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 May 94 13:19:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 210

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Digital Links Over Analog Carriers? (Taavi Talvik)
    What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point? (Chuck Campbell)
    Wanted: Used Octel Voice Mail Systems (Eric A. Litman)
    Speech Recognition: "Word Spotting" - Help! (Peter B. Flower)
    Anybody Know Communitronics? (Rich Osman)
    'Wireless Cable' Over a Cellular Network? (Barry Raveendran Greene)
    Telecommunication Events (Jose Luis Sanchez)
    Bell Canada Alex Videotex Service Officially Closing (Dave Leibold)
    What is a T-10 Carrier? (Mitch Barrett)
    New Call Centre (Jeff Robertson)
    Press Releases via Fax-on-Demand (Nigel Allen)
    Phone Directory Technology (Stewart Fist)
    Junk Mail From US Sprint (Dave Levenson)
    In-Building Cabling For Different Operators (Warren Kwok)
    Need Modem CID Strings (Maurice Dykes)
    Correct Contact Information For CallerID-> Serial (John Landwehr)
    Help Needed With B-ISDN (Padmakar Jogdankar)
    Contact Representatives NOW to Help Sink Clipper (Monty Solomon)
    HOTT: Issue 940425, Part 1 of 3 on comp.ai (David Scott Lewis)
    Need Information on Complete PC (Al Cohan)
    Need Help: Telecom Interface (Dr. Gerry Higgins)
    Sprint "Combined Billing" Error (Mike Pollock)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Taavi Talvik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digital Links Over Analog Carriers?
Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 20:01:26 EET


Does anybody remember from old times some equipment capable for
transmission of 64kbps or higher G.703 data rates over analog
carriers.

In Estonia we have a situation that there are plenty of analog group
channels available but no country-wide digital links.

Any hints or references to such equipment are welcome.


taavi talvik    [e-mail]
tel. [phone]   fax. [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chuck Campbell)
Subject: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point
Date: 11 May 1994 00:26:30 GMT
Organization: ACCEL Services, Inc.  ph:[phone], fax:[phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I am looking for information on the hardware necessary to set up a
network access point.  I would like to make some resources available
to my clients via the Internet (anon ftp, telnet, s/w services).  I
would like to have about five incoming lines fo dial up as well (slip,
ppp, etc).

I am hoping for a FAQ or a list of all the FAQ's I need to start with.
Any suggestions would be helpful, especially on the following: modems,
phone service, gateways, bridges, whatever it will take, and some
information about pros and cons of various approaches.

I'll be happy with text recommendations as well.

Please respond by email and I'll summarize.


Thanks,

ACCEL Services, Inc.            | Specialists in Gravity, Magnetics
1980 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2050 |   and Integrated Interpretation
Houston, TX, 77056              |
                                |  1(713)993-0671 voice
Chuck Campbell                  |  1(713)960-1157 fax
President & Chief Geoscientist  | email [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric A. Litman)
Subject: Wanted: Used Octel Voice Mail Systems
Date: 10 May 1994 21:43:50 -0500
Organization: Proxima, Inc.


I am in immediate need of used Octel systems, both Branch and Aspen.
Please contact me if you have a system you would like to sell or know
someplace where one can be purchased.

Thanks in advance.


Eric Litman         Proxima, Inc.    vox: [phone]
Director, ProxNet   McLean, VA      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (-s89432566-p.bflower-ele-500-)
Subject: Speech Recognition: "Word Spotting" - Help!
Date: 11 May 1994 06:00:44 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney


I'm presently doing some studies on speech recognition. I'm looking at
developing the HMM so that I can do "word spotting". However I don't
know enough about word spotting. If anyone has any information I would
gladly accept it.

Thanking you in advance,


Peter

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 8:40:39 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Anybody Know Communitronics?


I'm looking for a company called Communitronics.  They made a WWV
receiver that I own a copy of (Model 6010).  Their last known location
was Hauppauge, NY, but mail to that address comes back.  I'm trying to
get in touch with then to get the service manual (mine is broken).


Rich Osman, WB0HUQ   [phone] (h:v/fax/msg)
[e-mail]          [phone] (w)

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Raveendran Greene)
Subject: 'Wireless Cable' Over a Cellular Network?  Any Information?
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 09:52:09 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Barry Raveendran Greene)


Hello All,

I'm trying to track down some information on a new venture between
Bell Alantic and Cellular Vision.  It is a trial service that provides
'wireless cable' services over a cellular network.

If you know anything or have a pointers to a Internet site that has
more information on this trail or the technology, please E-mail
directly to my E- mail account.


Thanks,

Barry Raveendran Greene        Internet: [e-mail]
Network Engineer               [phone]
                               [phone] FAX
Johns Hopkins University / Applied Physics Lab

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telecommunication Events
Organization: Oklahoma State University Computer Center
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 16:08:18 GMT


Hello,

I am looking for special events (one or two weeks) related to:

   - Managament, marketing, strategic planning,
     public-policy analysis, privatization, and consulting in
     Telecommunications.

People background selected for these events are managers in certain
telecommunication areas without technical background. Please, let me
know about institutions, universities, etc., which offers such events.
The dates required for these events are due August and September 1994.

I want to thank you, beforehand, for your prompt response.


Jose Luis Sanchez    [e-mail]
Electrical and Computer Eng.   Oklahoma State University

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 10 May 94 21:54:54 -0500
Subject: Bell Canada Alex Videotex Service Officially Closing
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


Bell Canada received official approval to discontinue the
controversial Alex videotex service.

 From a check of the list of new and deleted services on Alex itself,
it appears no new services have been added since 1991, and services
were being deleted, at least as of last fall. It seemed the home
shopping and commerce offerings were few, and the chat/dating lines
plenty (the latter being done with less cost and more finesse on the
regional BBS scene).  The most useful service left on Alex (IMO) is
the electronic white pages, complete with an automated long distance
call rate calculator.

The following eulogy just arrived in the mail:

[Bell Canada letter to Alex service customers follows ...]

T.E. Graham
T/Director - Business Planning,
Bell Advanced Communications
160 Elgin Street, Floor 12,
Ottawa, Ontario
K1G 3J4

April 29, 1994

Dear Customer,

Some five years ago, Bell Canada launched an innovative service that,
after its initial trial run, logged more than a million calls from
interested people like you. We then decided to go ahead and introduce
this exciting, new concept to enable customers to access home-based
interactive and transactional services. Though it was risky, we heard
your call and answered it. The ALEX service was born.

Our early success in Montreal eventually led us to expand into the
Toronto Market and become a leader in the Canadian videotex industry.
Although our role was primarily one of a carrier providing technical
support, we helped our Service Providers develop applications -- from
home shopping and personal banking to financial news and learning
programs -- in order to keep you on the leading edge of the
information explosion.

However, while the ALEX service continued to grow and attract
interest, the inconsistent rate of development of the videotex
industry coupled with Canada's declining economic fortune has made
the service difficult to justify. We are faced with having to
drastically cut our costs, yet have resisted laying off employees or
raising customer prices. So we have been forced to make a painful
decision and terminate the ALEX service.

This is a difficult decision, and one that must be weighed against
the reality of today's tough economic climate. Quite simply, the ALEX
network is not the right vehicle, nor the appropriate technology, at
this time to deliver the information goods needed in our fast-paced
society.

We filed on December 30th, 1993 for the de-tariffing of the ALEX
service with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications
Commission (CRTC), the federal telecommunications regulator. On April
18th we received their approval, and will discontinue the ALEX
service effective June 3rd, 1994. The ALEXtel terminal will also be
withdrawn from the marketplace and cease to be supported.

Bell has always tried to meet the needs of its business and residential
customers by offering the best and latest in communications technology.
We will keep trying to bring you innovative telecommunications products
and services that best fit your needs. As the pace of technology quickens
and opportunities begin to unfold, we will be there again ... listening.
We will also be ready to serve you, knowing full well that such advances
must be balanced by your wishes.

Thank you for doing business with Bell. If you have any questions
about this matter, please call 1 [phone].

Sincerely,


T.E. Graham

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

From: [e-mail] (Mitch Barrett)
Subject: What is a T-10 Carrier?
Date: 9 May 1994 19:12:25 GMT
Organization: Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), Alexandria, VA


I am evaluating a government contract for my company, part of which is
a telecommunications study. According to the statement of work we are
to evaluate among other things T-1, T-10, ISDN ...  I can't find any
reference to a T-10 anything. Does anyone out there know what this
might be and where I can get documentation on it?


Thanks,

M. Mitch Barrett
CTA INCORPORATED
5670 Greenwood Plaza Bvd., Ste 200
Englewood, CO 80111
E-mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 20:30:42 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: New Call Centre


Well I am hoping some of the telecom genius' can help me.  Our company
is looking at setting up a call centre in the United States.  This
centre will handle travel insurance, home insurance (eg: plumbing goes
at 3am we find you a plumber), other call centre functions.  We have
been doing this for the last ten years in Australia, Canada, and Europe
(the company has; I have been doing it for a year and a half!).

The call centre will have between 50-70 agents.  We have to choose
from the following cities to locate the centre:

1. Austin Texas                    2. Sacramento, C.A.
3. Salt Lake City, Utah            4. Pheonix, Arizona
5. Charlotte, N.C.

I know very little about the U.S.  But looks like I will have to move to one
of the above (not the nicest but the cheapest for the business!).

For argument sake lets say we choose AT&T.  We expect our call
distribution to be 50% from the East Coast, 25% from the West Coast
and 25% from the rest of the States.  In our business we have to
compare inbound 800 costs as well as outgoing.  Typically one inbound
call requires three outbound calls to the originating city.

I have lots of information on the different cities, courtesy of U.S.
Economic Development and Trade.  I don't have much information on rates,
which in our business is the most important.

Any insight or comparisons would be terrific.  If anyone responding
lives in the above cities I would really appreciate any tips (if we
pick your city I will take you out for an imported Canadian beer!).
Rates would also be great!

Please respond via E-Mail to:


[e-mail]   Jeff Robertson, President, CTI Inc. Canada
                    [phone]        [phone] Fax

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

Subject: Press Releases via Fax-on-Demand
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 03:40:00 -0400
Organization: CRS Online  (Toronto, Ontario)


One good application for fax-on-demand services is the distribution of
press releases to people other than journalists, typically investors
who want current information about a company they're interested in.
Some electronic press release distribution services make their press
releases available through fax-on-demand.

Press release distribution services such as PR Newswire use much the
same technology as news agencies such as The Associated Press
(computer networks today, but dedicated teletype circuits 20 years
ago), but their business is the distribution of unedited press
releases paid for by the companies issuing the press releases, rather
than news paid for by the news media.

(At one time, PR Newswire was owned by Western Union. I'm not sure who
owns the company now.)

While you can search the PR Newswire database for a fee through some
online services (I'm not sure which ones), you can also have a list of
currently-available press releases sent to your fax machine by calling
800-578-7888 and entering your fax machine's number using your
telephone keypad. Once you have received the list, you can order up to
three press releases at a time. There is no charge for this service,
and it appears to be available anywhere in Canada and the United
States.

Similarly, Canada Newswire offers a fax-on-demand service for Canadian
corporate press releases. Call 1-800-269-NEWS to request a menu of
available stories.

A third press release distribution service, U.S. Newswire, makes its
press releases available through a BBS in Maryland, PR On-Line at
[phone]. U.S. Newswire's clients include a lot of Washington-
based lobby groups and government agencies, while PR Newswire's
clients appear to be predominantly corporate.

There is a peripheral family connection here. My late grandfather,
Ralph Marven, was vice-president of a now-defunct public relations
company in Montreal, Editorial Associates. I think that when Canada
Newswire was originally established, it was a subsidiary of Editorial
Associates.


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

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

Date: 11 May 94 05:48:42 EDT
From: Stewart Fist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phone Directory Technology


I am looking for a wide range of information about software and
hardware used in the preparation of telephone directories or contacts
who I can talk to who might know this stuff.  Apparently there are a
couple of companies around the world who specialise in this area.  I'd
like to contact them, and beforehand I'd need to get some background.

I'm also interested in the financial side of running directory
services; the yellow page directories seem to be highly profitable.

I'd also like to get some general history of the development of the
Yellow Pages, and the role played by Edward H O'Brien and the famous
"Fingers do the walking" slogan and logo.  Does anyone know anything
about this.

It's a pretty narrow area of interest, so it may be best to contact me
direct, rather than bore the rest of the TELECOM Digest readers.  I'm
a technical journalist trying to put together a general overview,
using some Australian material.  But I need to know more about the
world scene, and the world experience.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Junk Mail From US Sprint
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 16:12:30 GMT


The only thing worse than junk mail, IMHO, is junk mail delivered with
postage due!  Did anybody else receive a recent direct mail advertisement
package from US Sprint with insufficient postage?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Warren Kwok)
Subject: In-Building Cabling For Different Operators
Date: 11 May 1994 02:29:14 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


Hello, all telecom people in the Net,

       This is the first time I post a message on Usenet through my
Fidonet BBS.

       I am writing to seek kind assistance from people on Internet in
soliciting some relevant information about telephone line arrangements
in a commercial building from different local network operators.

       Up to the present moment, telephone service is still a monopoly
in Hong Kong. All telephone cables from an exchange to a government
building connecting to customer premises equipment is the property of
Hongkong Telecom whereas sometimes the Government owns the wiring
behind the customer premises equipment (e.g. keyline telephone systems
and PABX systems).  The present arrangement is that Hongkong Telecom
provides lead-in cables terminated at an interconnection point which
is usually a distribution frame for routing to our private switching
equipment, in most cases, PABX system.

       Hong Kong will have three more telephone operators after June
1995.  As I am working on a government PABX project, I need to devise
a set of guidelines on how line facilities of the three new operators
can be interconnected with Government owned customer premises
equipment.  The aim is to formulate a cabling plan arranged in a way
to foster competition and at the same time to make sure that line
provisioning is manageable on a non-discriminatory basis.

     I will be keen to learn the expereince of other network
operators, governmment administrations regarding in-building cabling
arrangements for different fixed telephone networks in a building.

     Any comments, information on the subject are welcome.


also at [e-mail]
Maximus 2.00   Origin: HKIE BBS (6:700/488)

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

From: [e-mail] (Maurice Dykes)
Subject: Need Modem CID Strings
Organization: Thinkage Ltd. Guest Account
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 02:43:57 GMT


I'm in the process of writing a set of Caller ID utilities running
under Windows. At first I based the software on a proprietary CID
device made by Vive Synergies but now I would like to take advantage
of several modems on the market that provide CID data.

One problem is that some devices output data in different formats with
start/end characters and different date formats, messages etc. I would
really appreciate some help in acquiring sample strings delivered by
the various modems. By this I mean the actual string data a terminal
program would see and not formatted output. This way I can parse the
data from several popular devices properly.

Thanks in advance for any help forthcoming.


[e-mail]    Maurice Dykes
[e-mail]    [e-mail]  !thinkage!mhdykes

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

From: [e-mail] (John Landwehr)
Date: Wed, 11 May 94 09:38:34 -0500
Subject: Correct Contact Information For CallerID-> Serial


The correct contact info for the callerID box to serial is:

Rochelle Communications Inc.

8906 Wall Street Suite 205
Austin, TX 78754
512-339-8188

They have a single line box with a DB25 connector for $100 (qty 1).
They also have multiple line boxes available, too.

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 16:06:37 GMT
From: [e-mail] (PADMAKAR)
Subject: Help Needed With B-ISDN


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is something I received in the
mail a few days ago if anyone would care to respond direct to the
writer. Thanks.   PAT]

Dear Sir,

 I am working in CDOT New-Delhi organisation.
   My group is SYSTEMS & NETWORKS.
       I am interested in Telecommunication.
     So please sir,send me inforamation about B-ISDN .
 My EMAIL address is as below
       [e-mail]
     So I am waiting for above info.
       Thanking you.
  Date : 4 th May 1994
                                         Yours faithfully
                                         PADMAKAR JOGDANKAR

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 10:09:05 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Contact Representatives NOW to Help Sink Clipper


Passed along FYI to the Digest:

Begin forwarded message:

  Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 13:43:25 -0400 (EDT)
  From: Stanton McCandlish <[e-mail]>
  Subject: Contact Representatives NOW to help sink Clipper

At the House hearings on Clipper and Digital Telephony, May 3, 1994,
Chairman Rep. Valentine (D-NC), Rep. Morella (R-MD), and Rep.
Rohrbacher (R-CA) indicated "reservations" about Clipper.  Please
contact these Representantives and encourage them.

However, Rep. Dan Glickman (D-KS) indicated "cautious support" for
Clipper, and espoused a 'more surveillance for law enforcement'
viewpoint.  It is essential that opinons like these be turned.
Contact this Congressman by any means possible, especially if you are
a direct constituent of Glickman.  Show your disapproval of Clipper,
politely but firmly.  Congressfolk live on votes, and are not as hard
to sway as you might think.  There is little support in the Senate for
Clipper.  Let's make it unanimous by turning what little tide there is
in the House.

Don't just talk, ACT NOW.


Stanton McCandlish * [e-mail] * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist

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

From: [e-mail] (David Scott Lewis)
Subject: HOTT: Issue 940425, Part 1 of 3 on comp.ai
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 12:33:17 GMT


The full-text of the HOTT electronic magazine on VR, neural nets,
PDAs, agent software, PCS, interactive media, nanotechnology, MPP, and
other emergent telecomputing technologies is now (or will soon be)
available on the comp.ai Usenet group.


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, 11 May 94 13:01 EST
From: Al Cohan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Need Information on Complete PC


I friend of mine is sending me a couple of voice cards manufactured by
the Complete PC. Can anyone supply info on how to reach this company?


Thanks in advance,

Al Cohan

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

From: [e-mail] (Telemed)
Subject: Need Help: Telecom Interface
Date: 10 May 1994 17:37:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


I have designed a multimedia E-mail software package. Does it make sense
to add either:

A. An Internet interface;
B. A point-to-point (modem) interface?

It's for distributed work (telemedicine, etc.)

Thanks in advance for any advice.


Gerry Higgins (Dr.)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Personally, Doctor, if you have the
wherewithal and ability to add an internet and/or modem interface
I don't see how you could go wrong by doing so. Email and the internet
go almost hand in hand; ditto, a modem interface will make your product
that much more valuable. My advice then is go with it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Pollock)
Subject: Sprint "Combined Billing" Error
Date: 11 May 1994 10:28:08 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Sprint recently changed me over from direct billing to "combined
billing" on my NYNEX local telephone bill.  Simple, right?  Wrong.  My
final direct-from-Sprint invoice was contained activity through
4/10/94.  My first combined bill from NYNEX contained Sprint activity
through 4/13/94.  The proximity of these two billing dates meant I got
a _three_day_ billing period for Sprint long distance service on the
NYNEX bill.  Now, I'm also a Sprint Select customer, which means I
have a $6.85/month minimum.  In a normal 30 day billing cycle, I
easily meet that minimum.  However, Sprint was nice enough to bill me
$6.85 for this three day billing cycle because in those three days, I
only made $1.20 worth of calls.  Since this was less than the monthly
minimum, the service charge was assessed.  It took me several minutes
of explaining before the Sprint representative understood what had
happened, and I eventually got a credit, but I'm concerned that other
Sprint/NYNEX customers might run into a similar problem and not catch
it, and Sprint apparently has no desire to have their billing software
check for this type of thing.

Any suggestions?


Mike

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #210
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17015;
          11 May 94 17:59 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07240; Wed, 11 May 94 14:03:10 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07231; Wed, 11 May 94 14:03:08 CDT
Date: Wed, 11 May 94 14:03:08 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #211

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 May 94 14:03:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 211

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    BT Announces Dialing Code Changes (Ted Dupont)
    What is the Mercury Button? (John Perkins)
    EFF Summary: May 3 1994 Clipper / Digital Telephony Hearings (M. Solomon)
    'NNX' Area Codes?  I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Paul Robinson)
    Pager Schematics and POCSAG/GOLAY Protocols? (Joseph Jesson)
    Nationwide Name and Address Service (George Thurman)
    Information on Seminar Wanted ([e-mail])
    Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (John Gilbert)
    Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (Bob Wilson)
    Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (Steven H. Lichter)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 14:28:04 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Ted Dupont)
Subject: BT Announces Dialing Code Changes


The following announcement was distributed to U.S. and Canadian news
media on Apr. 28, 1994:


                        Contact:        Jim Barron
                                        BT Corporate Communications
                                        100 Park Ave.
                                        New York NY 10017
                                        USA
                                        212-297-2724


                                        Ted DuPont
                                        Burson-Marsteller
                                        230 Park Ave. South
                                        New York NY 10003
                                        USA
                                        212-614-4562

               Starting April, 1995, New Dialing Codes
                   For Calls To The United Kingdom

NEW YORK, Apr. 28 - Starting Apr. 16, 1995, the 100 million-plus phone
calls made annually from North America to the United Kingdom will be
affected by the biggest change in the U.K.'s telephone numbering
system in more than 25 years.  The changes will result in a tenfold
increase in the U.K.'s telephone numbering capacity and will meet
requirements for many years to come.

        U.S. businesses should begin planning now to accommodate these
dialing changes, according to BT (British Telecommunications plc).

Starting Apr. 16, 1995, callers to most numbers in the United Kingdom
(England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales) will need to insert an
additional "1" in the dialing code, directly after "44" (the U.K.
country code).

        For example, a North American caller to London will dial
"011-44-171" in front of the local number, instead of the current
"011-44-71." (In the U.S., 011 is the international access code; 44 is
the U. K. country code, and 71 is the London area code).  All city
codes, not just London, will have the number "1" added.

        In addition, also on Apr. 16, 1995, the following five British
cities facing especially acute number shortages will be given completely
new area codes:

                Current Area Code/Local Number      Apr. 16, 1995
Leeds           532 XXXXXX                          113 2XX-XXXX
Sheffield       742 XXXXXX                          114 2XX-XXXX
Nottingham      602 XXXXXX                          115 9XX-XXXX
Leicester       533 XXXXXX                          116 2XX-XXXX
Bristol         272 XXXXXX                          117 9XX-XXXX

        Starting Aug. 1, callers to the U.K. will have the choice of
using the new dialing codes or the existing codes; that is, calls to
the U.K. will go through whether or not the caller dials 1 after the
U.K. country code (44).  This "permissive" dialing phase will be in
effect until Apr. 16, 1995, when all calls to the U.K. will require
the additional 1.

Callers in the U.S. can call 1-800-634-2485 for more information on
the dialing code changes.

Growing Need for New Numbers

        These dialing changes are needed to deal with a growing
shortage of area codes caused by such new technologies as fax
machines, computer data modems and the fact that there are now 150
licensed telephone operators in the U.K., said officials of BT, the
U.K.'s largest telephone operator.  The dialing changes will not
affect calling rates.

        "It is important that U.S. businesses begin planning for these
dialing code changes now," said James E. Graf, BT's vice president of
regulatory affairs.  "While these dialing changes may seem simple,
they will actually require significant efforts by many companies to
reconfigure automated dialing equipment, fax machines, telecommunica-
tions software systems and PBX's -- in addition to changing signage and
stationery."

        It will be especially critical to change preset numbers stored
in phones or faxes, said Graf, because dialing of the old codes by
automated dialing systems will mean that calls won't be connected
after Apr. 16, 1995.

        Planning for these changes should begin now:

Telecommunications equipment
    * Computer systems containing international phone codes
    * Phone numbers stored in any telephone or fax
    * Personnel records
    * Databases
    * Switchboard and PBX systems
    * Fax ID numbers

Stationery and Signs
    * Business stationery, letterheads, invoices, business cards,
      address labels, etc.
    * Advertisements, sales literature, brochures, direct-mail pieces,
      new product information

Phase-In of New Codes
        To provide ample time to make the transition, BT will be
phasing in the new dialing codes according to this timetable:

    --  Until August, 1994:  Current area code only (do not dial 1
after U.K. country code of 44).
    --  Aug. 1, 1994 through Apr. 15, 1995:  Old or new code (users
can make calls with or without 1 after U.K. country code).
    --  Apr. 16, 1995:  New code only (1 must be dialed after U.K.
country code).  Calls dialed without  the extra 1 will get a
pre-recorded message informing callers of the change.

        The code changes will not affect cellular phone numbers or
toll-free phone numbers; only geographic area codes will change.  BT
officials further noted that, on an international level, all European
countries are moving towards a single international access code.  In
accordance with this change, the international access code from the
U.K. will change from 010 to 00 -- like the other changes, on Apr. 16,
1995.

        BT is one of the leading global providers of telecommunications
services.  BT's main products and services are local and long-distance
telephone services in the U.K., provision of telephone exchange lines
to homes and businesses, international voice and data services to and
from the U.K. and supplying telecommunications equipment to customer
premises.  BT's range of additional services includes private circuits,
mobile communications and network outsourcing.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Perkins)
Subject: What is the Mercury Button?
Organization: Rosemount, Inc.
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 15:47:23 GMT


My parents in London (Chessington, actually) have just recently signed
up with Mercury and have been persuaded (by Mercury, presumably) to
have a Mercury phone set installed.  This phone has a "Mercury button"
on it to access the Mercury network.

Will someone please tell me what the Mercury button is?  I suspect
that it simply sends out a hard-coded sequence of DTMF digits which
accesses the Mercury network, and one could probably do this manually
with any phone that generates DTMF if one knew what the sequence was.

Am I right about this?   And does anyone know what the access sequence
for Mercury is?

They have a perfectly good BT "Tribune" phone set that has some
special attachments for the hearing impaired, but are under the
impression that they can't use it if they want to use Mercury. (I have
a feeling that they don't really need the Mercury phone set at all.)


John Perkins

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 10:09:21 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: EFF Summary: May 3 1994 Clipper / Digital Telephony Hearings


Forwarded FYI to the Digest:

Begin forwarded message:

  From: [e-mail] (Stanton McCandlish)
  Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.news,talk.politics.misc
  Subject: EFF Summary of May 3 1994 Clipper and Digital Telephony Hearings
  Date: 4 May 1994 23:19:49 -0500
  Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway

EFF SUMMARIES
=============

May 4, 1994

Contents:
* Senate Subcommittee on Technology and the Law holds Clipper Hearing
* House Subcommittee on Technology, Environment and Aviation holds

    hearing on Clipper and Digital Telephony proposals; EFF's

      Executive Director Jerry Berman and Board Member David Farber

      testify


SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE HOLDS CLIPPER HEARING

The Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology and the Law held a
hearing on Tuesday (5/3) to examine the Administration's "Clipper
Chip" Key Escrow Encryption proposal.  Witnesses included Asst. Atty.
Gen. Jo Ann Harris (Criminal Justice Division), NIST Deputy Director
Raymond Kammer, Whitfield Diffie (of Sun Microsystems), Stephen Walker
(President, Trusted Information Systems), and NSA director Vice Adm.
J.  M. McConnell.

The discussion touched on a number of key issues, including the
necessity of the Clipper proposal for law enforcement; the privacy
interests of network users; the costs associated with implementing the
Clipper scheme; export controls; and whether those intending to use
communications networks to break the law would actually use Clipper as
opposed to other encryption schemes.  Although a variety of views were
offered, few new developments emerged in this controversial debate.

Assistant Attorney General Harris and NIST's Ray Kammer both stated
that the Clipper Scheme and Key Escrow system would not provide law
enforcement with any new surveillance abilities.  Rather, Harris
argued, Clipper is analogous to a translator.  Harris stated, "All
Clipper does is, after a court has authorized interceptions of
communications, is that we get the ability to understand the content
of legitimately intercepted communications".  The Administration
continues to maintain that the market would accept the Clipper
standard based on the assumption that it is the strongest encryption
scheme, regardless of who holds the keys.  When pressed by Sen. Leahy
on this issue, as well as on the question of whether criminals or
terrorist organizations would be willing to use the Clipper standards,
neither witness offered any assurances, and admitted that this is
still an open question.  Senator Leahy expressed skepticism: "I have
serious questions about whether any sophisticated criminal or
terrorist organization is going to use the one code endorsed by the
U.S. Government and for which U.S. Government agents hold the decoding
keys.  There are a multitude of alternative encryption methods
commercially available.  If Clipper Chip does become the standard
encryption method used by Americans, criminals may be forced to use
Clipper to communicate with legitimate outsiders.  But this is a big
'IF' ".

In what may prove to be a significant development, NIST's Kammer
conceded that additional fiscal authorization may be needed to fund
the implementation of the Clipper proposal.  If this is the case,
Congress would be required to consider legislation to authorize
funding, and at this point passage of such legislation is at best
uncertain.  EFF will continue to closely monitor this development, and
will pass along information as it develops.

Sun Microsystems Diffie urged a slow and careful approach to the
Clipper issue, cautioning that a rush to implement Clipper may create
a bureaucracy that would be difficult to dislodge at a later time.
Diffie stressed the need for international for information security,
and cautioned against attempts to use the power of technology to
increase the power of government.  Diffie added, "Integrity of
political speech is the root of legitimate laws in a democratic
society.  We are in a position where if we do not make it a national
priority to make privacy available", this integrity may be
compromised.

Steve Walker, of Trusted Information Systems, stressed the need for
the removal of export control restrictions.  He also countered the
Administration's contention that very few foreign encryption
alternatives exist; noting that his company had found over 340.
Walker displayed several of these applications, and noted that because
of export controls U.S. manufactures of encryption technology face a
significant disadvantage on the world market.

Although the Senate Hearing did not produce many new developments, it
is significant to note that no members of the Subcommittee expressed
outright support for the Clipper Chip proposal.  Chairman Leahy, the
most vocal panel member at Tuesday's hearing, was also the most
skeptical, and as such the fate Clipper proposal is still very much in
doubt.


HOUSE PANEL CONSIDERS CLIPPER AND DIGITAL TELEPHONY PROPOSALS

Tuesday proved to be a busy day for Clipper on the Hill, as the House
Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Technology, Environment
and Aviation also considered the Clipper and Digital Telephony
proposals.  Witnesses on the panel included James Kallstrom of the
FBI, NSA's Clinton Brooks, NIST Deputy Director Ray Kammer, Dr.
Dorothy Denning, Dr. David Faber, EFF Executive Director Jerry Berman
(on behalf of DPSWG), and Chmn. Willis Ware of the Congress/NIST
System Security and Privacy Advisory Board. The discussion centered
mainly on the Clipper issue.

Unlike the Senate panel, there seemed to be some support for the
Clipper proposal on the House Subcommittee.  Rep. Dan Glickman (D-KS),
Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, declared his "cautious
support", for the proposal, and stressed law enforcement's need for
strong surveillance abilities.  Subcommittee Chairman Valentine
(D-NC), as well as Reps. Morella (R-MD) and Rohrabacher (R-CA) all
expressed reservations.

James Kallstrom urged full support of both the Clipper and Digital
Telephony proposals on behalf of all law enforcement, citing the need
to counter the increasing sophistication of digital communications
technologies.  Kallstrom painted a picture of a network populated by
criminals, terrorists, and drug dealers which would pose a great
danger to public safety, unless law enforcement is given the ability
to intercept illegal communications.  EFF's Jerry Berman countered
this assertion by arguing that Clipper would only solve law
enforcement's problems if criminals use it.  The only way to do this,
Berman added, would be to mandate the Clipper standard, something
which the Administration does not claim to want to do.  The only
solution is for Congress to deny appropriation for Clipper and send
the Administration back to the drawing board, Berman argued.

Dr. Farber, appearing as an expert witness, stated that solutions to
the Clipper issue will not come easily and will not come in one big
step.  Rather, a carefully considered and open approach is required.

While stressing the need for encryption standards on communications
networks, Dr. Farber cautioned against "smoke-filled-room standards"
of encryption which are, in his view, likely to bead mistrust.  Dr.
Farber also argued for the removal of export controls on encryption
technology.

NSA's Clinton Brooks expressed support for Congressional Consideration
of the Clipper issue.  He argued that Clipper is a sound technological
solution to a legitimate law enforcement and National Security
dilemma, and that a public debate on its merits would eventually
remove the misinformation and mistrust of government, and would prove
Clipper to be in the public interest.  Dr. Farber offered a strong
caution to this, expressing the concern that a future administration
may find it necessary to mandate the Clipper standard.  Dr. Farber
suggested that at the very least Congress weld into law a guarantee
that Clipper remain voluntary, that the Judiciary be an escrow holder.
He cautioned, in the words of Benjamin Franklin, "They that can give
up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety"

                      ***************

Written testimony & documents from the hearings are available as:

ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/Clipper/[filename]
gopher.eff.org, 1/EFF/Policy/Crypto/Clipper, [filename]
gopher://gopher.eff.org/11/EFF/Policy/Crypto/Clipper, [filename]
http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/Clipper/[filename]

where [filename] is:

berman_eff_clip-dt.testimony    - House testimony of Jerry Berman (EFF)
brooks_nsa_clip-dt.testimony    - House testimony of Clint Brooks (NSA)
denning_clip-dt.testimony       - House testimony of Dorothy Denning
farber_clip-dt.testimony        - House testimony of David Farber
kallstrom_fbi_clip-dt.testimony - House testimony of James Kallstrom (FBI)
kammer_nist_clip-dt.testimony   - House testimony of Ray Kammer (NIST)
ware_csspab_clip-dt.testimony   - House testimony of Willis Ware (CSSPAB)
clip-dt_hearings.docs           - charter, witness list, diagrams.

* Senate testimony and spoken testimony from both hearings will be
  made available from in the same directory when obtained.

This material will also be available from the EFF BBS within a day or so,
at [phone].


Stanton McCandlish * [e-mail] * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 05:39:19 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: 'NNX' Area Codes?  I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


In some prior articles, the term 'NNX' has been used to refer to the
new format for area codes debuting in International Dialing Zone 1 on
January 15, 1995.

While this is the format that is being added to the current area code
system is technically correct with respect to the additions, I think
that this term is wrong and misleading.

In area codes and prefixes, the term 'N' is used to refer to a digit
space that permits any number from 2 through 9.  'X' is used to refer
to an 'any digit' field which allows 0 and 1.  Area codes currently
permit 0 and 1 (and ONLY 0 AND 1) as the second digit.  As of the
above date, they will allow any digit for the last two digits of the
area code.  The first digit of an area code will remain required to be
2 through 9.

Based on this, references to the new area codes should say 'NXX' area
codes, and not 'NNX' area codes, as it might indicate that the old
area codes with 0 and 1 as the middle digit are being replaced by the
new area codes, which is not the case.

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Jesson)
Subject: Pager Schematics and POCSAG/GOLAY Protocols?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 13:58:27 GMT


  At a Dayton flea market, I picked up several NEC and Motorola pagers
in various non-working condition.  I was impressed when you consider
the sensitivity and selectivity is such a small space (the antenna
loops are approx -20db when compared to a diople antenna). It has
potential for a single channel 152 (approximately) or 932 Mhz
receiver.

Any idea where I can get a schematic for the Motorola Bravo, Sensar,
or NEC pager?  Also, has anyone built a capcode programmer or fully
decoded all pager codes (Pocsag / Golay / Flex - 512/1200/2400/6400
rates)?

Universal Shortwave, in Ohio, sells a M400 which only decodes POCSAG or
GOLAY at 512 bps ...


Joseph Jesson   [e-mail]  Day [phone]  Eve [phone]
21414 W. Honey Lane, Lake Villa, IL, 60046

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

From: [e-mail] (George Thurman)
Subject: Nationwide Name and Address Service
Date: 11 May 1994 00:48:34 -0500
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605


I had a 900 number that if you called it and gave them a telephone
number, they would give you the name and address of the person who had
that telephone number. (In most cases)

The 900 number, 1-900-884-1212 has been disconnected, and I think that
the company that provided the service has gone belly-up.  Does anyone
know of any other 900 numbers that provide this same kind of service?


GEORGE S. THURMAN   [phone]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Information on Seminar Wanted
Date: 11 May 94 10:26:01 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services


Hello out there,

I am an exchange student graduating in December. As a part of my
program I shall be paid to attend a seminar in the continental United
States. I want to attend a seminar on data trasmissions/telephone
networks sometime in the first week of August in New York City. If
anyone out there knows of any such seminars please write to me at
"[e-mail]".

Thanks for your time.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse
Organization: Motorola, LMPS
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:04:06 -0500


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeff Haran)
wrote:

> Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like an obvious solution to
> an obvious problem. The thing that I can't understand is why this
> service abuse wasn't anticipated by the cellular telephone founders.
> Does anybody have any insights as to why it doesn't work this way
> today?

The VHF and UHF IMTS radiotelephones that were widely used prior to
the introduction of cellular were much less secure than what we have
today.  These were programmed by opening the radio up and using wire
jumpers to set the area code and last four digits of the phone number
(only 10,000 phones were allowed per area code -- no exchange code was
in the phone).  These phones didn't have any electronic serial number.
Signaling of phone addressing and calling numbers was by a ten
pulse-per-second tone; so slow you could easily decode it with a tape
recorder, if not by ear.

As far as I know, IMTS wasn't widely abused.  The planners would not
have anticipated that the much more secure AMPS system would not have
had adequate protection to deal with the threat which, at the time,
was probably considered minimal.  It is fairly clear that the
designers of AMPS underestimated the sophistication of their
adversaries, the availability of inexpensive test and programing
equipment, and the advantages to the criminal underground of using
altered phones.


John Gilbert         [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Wilson)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:27:17 GMT


John R Levine ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> Does anybody have any insights as to why it doesn't work this way
>> [with per-phone challenge-response passwords] today?

> The AMPS system in use in the U.S. was designed over a decade ago, and
> has become much more popular than even the most optimistic forecasts
> predicted.  There's a balance between cost and function, and ten years
> ago the cost of adding the security features would have been quite
> high, and the advantage, given the relatively modest popularity they
> expected, low.

Its my understanding that the reason better security measures were not
implemented was because they were deemed "too secure" and instead the
industry decided to wait until it would actually become a problem.
I'm not so sure that the cost/function rational really applied.

> On the other hand, if the next round of cell phones (CDMA or TDMA)
> don't include effective security features, that's just stupid.

Indeed.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse
Date: 11 May 1994 08:51:22 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


Air ouch (PacTel Cellular) has been testing a system that looks at the
telephones finger like prints beside the EIN. That should slow things
down, but also it can cause a problem when you have a loaner phone
with your number since the way it operates will be different from you
regular phone. I have not heard anything about the tests in sometime
so maybe they are finished and being used or not.


Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS
[phone] 12/24/96/14.4 V32/V42bis

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #211
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17484;
          11 May 94 19:03 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10382; Wed, 11 May 94 15:41:03 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10371; Wed, 11 May 94 15:41:01 CDT
Date: Wed, 11 May 94 15:41:01 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #212

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 May 94 15:41:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 212

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    USPS & IRS Mull National ID Cards, Clinton to Sign Orders (Monty Solomon)
    Book Review: Police Call / Beyond Police Call (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Matthew Scott Weisberg)
    Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Kevin Bluml)
    Re: Internet White Pages (Lenny Charnoff)
    Re: Internet White Pages (John R. Levine)
    Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet (Seth Breidbart)
    Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet (Nevin Liber)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 01:41:06 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: USPS & IRS Mull National Identity Cards, Clinton to Sign Orders


Excerpt from EFFector Online 07.08

  From: Mitch Ratcliffe <[e-mail]>
  Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 07:43:22 -0700 (PDT)

Ever Feel Like You're Being Watched? You Will...

Digital Media has learned that the Clinton administration is debating
not if, but how, to create a card that every American will need in
order to interact with any federal government agency. Combined with
two potential executive orders and the Postal Service's designs on
putting its stamp on personal and business electronic transactions,
the card could open a window on every nuance of American personal and
business life.

The wrangling among the administration, the U.S. Postal Service, the
Internal Revenue Service and Department of Defense, emerged into the
public eye at this April's CardTech/SecureTech Conference. The
gathering of security experts was convened to discuss applications for
smart card and PCMCIA memory card technologies in business and
government. The Postal Service, at the conference presented a proposal
for a "general purpose U.S. services smartcard," which individuals and
companies would use to authenticate their identities when sending and
receiving electronic mail, transferring funds and interacting with
government agencies, such as the I.R.S., Veterans Administration and
the Department of Health and Human Services.

President Clinton is also considering signing two executive orders
that would greatly expand the government's access to personal records,
including an order that would allow the I.R.S. to monitor individual
bank accounts and automatically collect taxes based on the results,
said sources close to the White House. The collection service will be
presented as a convenient way to avoid filling out a tax return. The
White House did not respond to requests for comments about this
report.

The Post Office: We deliver for you. The Postal Service's U.S. Card
would be designed to use either smart cards (plastic cards with an
embedded microprocessor carrying a unique number that can be read by a
electromagnetic scanner and linked to computerized records stored on a
network) or PCMCIA cards, which can contain megabytes of personal
information. (You've probably seen this type card in AT&T's "You Will"
ad campaign, which shows a doctor inserting a woman's card in a reader
in order to access a recording of a sonogram). The Postal Service said
it is considering AT&T and other companies' smart card technologies.

In a slide presentation at the conference, Postal representative Chuck
Chamberlain outlined how an individual's U.S. Card would be
automatically connected with the Department of Health and Human
Services, the U.S. Treasury, the I.R.S., the banking system, and a
central database of digital signatures for use in authenticating
electronic mail and transactions. The U.S. Card is only a proposal,
Chamberlain insists.  Yet the Postal Service is prepared to put more
than a hundred million of the cards in citizens' pockets within months
of administration approval, he said.

"We've been trying to convince people [in the different agencies] to
do just one card, otherwise, we're going to end up with two or three
cards," said Chamberlain. He said in addition to the healthcare card
proposed by President Clinton last year, various government agencies
are forwarding plans for a personal records card and a transactions
(or "e-purse") card. Chamberlain said the I.R.S in particular is
pursuing plans for an identity card for taxpayers.

Don't leave home without it. Though he did not name the U.S. Card at
the time, Postmaster General Marvin Runyon suggested that the Postal
Service offer electronic mail certification services during testimony
before the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee in March. The
proposal is clearly intended as a way to sustain the Postal Service's
national role in the information age, since it would give the agency a
role in virtually every legally-binding electronic transaction made by
U.S. citizens.  For instance:

* When sending or receiving electronic mail, U.S. Card users would be
able to check the authenticity of a digital signature to screen out
impostors.

* Banking transactions (notably credit card purchases) that depend on
authentication of the participants identities and an audit trail, would
be registered in Postal Service systems.

* Veterans, or for that matter college students and welfare recipients,
could check their federal benefits using the identification data on their
U.S. Cards.

* Visitors to an emergency room would have instant access to medical
records at other hospitals, as well as their health insurance information.

These examples may seem benign separately, but collectively they paint
a picture of a citizen's or business's existence that could be
meddlesome at best and downright totalitarian at worst. Will buying a
book at a gay bookstore with a credit card that authenticates the
transaction through the Postal Service open a Naval officer up to
court marshall? If you have lunch with a business associate on a
Saturday at a family restaurant, will the IRS rule the expense
non-deductible before you can even claim it?

"There won't be anything you do in business that won't be collected
and analyzed by the government," said William Murray, an information
system security consultant to Deloitte and Touche who saw Chamberlain's
presentation. "This [National Information Infrastructure] is a better
surveillance mechanism than Orwell or the government could have
imagined. This goddamned thing is so pervasive and the propensity to
connect to it is so great that it's unstoppable."

Deep Roots; Deep Pockets; Long History. Chamberlain said the Postal
Service has been working for "a couple years" on the information
system to back up the U.S. Card. He said the project was initiated by
the Department of Defense, which wanted a civilian agency to create a
national electronic communications certification authority that could
be connected to its Defense Messaging System. Chamberlain said the
Postal Service has also consulted with the National Security Agency,
proponents of the Clipper encryption chip which hides the contents of
messages from all but government agencies, like law enforcement. The
National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Ames Research
Laboratories in Mountain View, Calif. carried out the research and
development work for Clipper.

"We're designing a national framework for supporting business-quality
authentication," said John Yin, the engineer heading up the U.S. Card-
related research for NASA Ames' advanced networking applications
group. "This is not specifically with just the Postal Service. We'll
be offering services to other agencies and to third-party commercial
companies that want to build other services on the card." For example,
VISA or American Express could link their credit services to the U.S.
Card.

Yin, who works on Defense Messaging Systems applications, said his
group has collaborated with "elements of Department of Defense" for
the past year, but would not confirm the participation of the National
Security Agency, a Department of Defense agency. The NSA is
specifically prohibited from creating public encryption systems by the
Computer Security Act of 1987. Yin also would not comment on the
budget for the project, which other sources said was quite large and
has spanned more than two years.

A false sense of security? According to Yin, the cards would allow
individuals or businesses to choose any encryption technology. "It's
not our approach to say, 'Here's the standard, take it or leave it,'"
he said.

"We're not trying to create a monopoly, rather it's an infrastructure
for interoperability on which a whole variety of services can be
built." Yet, NASA, which is a participant in the CommerceNet electric
marketplace consortium will "suggest" to its partners that they adopt
the U.S. Card certification infrastructure, he said.

The reality is that government agencies' buying power usually drives
the market to adopt a particular technology -- not unlike the way the
Texas Board of Education, the largest single purchaser of textbooks in
the U.S., sets the standard for the content of American classroom
curricula. Since, the administration has already mandated use of
Clipper and its data-oriented sibling, the Tesserae chip, in federal
systems it's fairly certain that the law enforcement-endorsed chips
will find their way into most, if not all, U.S. Cards. Even in the
unlikely event that one government agency should weather the pressure
and pass on the Clipper chip, it's still possible to trace the source,
destination, duration and time of transactions conducted between
Clippered and non-Clippered devices.

"Most of this shift [in privacy policy] is apparently being done by
executive order at the initiative of bureaucracy, and without any
Congressional oversight or Congressional concurrence, " Murray said.
"They are not likely to fail. You know, Orwell said that bureaucrats,
simply doing what bureaucrats do, without motivation or intent, will
use technology to enslave the people."

EDITOR'S NOTE: Digital Media has filed a Freedom of Information Act
request for Clinton and Bush Administration, Postal Service, NSA,
Department of Defense, NASA, I.R.S. and other documents related to the
creation of the U.S. Card proposal.


Mitch Ratcliffe
Copyright 1994 by Mitch Ratcliffe and Seybold Publications.

Mitch Ratcliffe
Editor in Chief
Digital Media: A Seybold Report
444 De Haro St., Ste. 128
San Francisco, Calif. 94107
415.575.3775 office
[e-mail]

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

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Don'tcha just *luv* our resident president
now in power?  If the above is true -- and honestly, I don't know what
to think about some of the stuff EFF churns out from one day to the next;
they seem to have their own axes to grind -- then I think Clinton has
gained a few more enemies. Given the tremendous amount of heat on him
now in the conservative media -- and even the mainstream liberal press
has been unable to totally avoid Paula Corbin Jones, Whitewater and all
the rest of it -- I strongly believe Clinton will be out of office in
the next six to nine months. I think the scenario will be another Richard
Nixon: when it is at the point that Congress is ready to impeach him
(literally within a day or two in Nixon's case) he'll resign and split
rather than go on the books as being impeached ... same as Nixon. And
don't think for one minute that Hillary does not have him nailed down
firmly in place. She has so much dirt on him yet unrevealed that he
wouldn't dare double-cross her. I think before long they will have a
marital spat and she will spill her guts on several topics including
Vince Foster just to spite her husband. She's very dangerous.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 14:50:50 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: Book Reviews: Police Call / Beyond Police Call


Most readers of the Digest who are scanner enthusiasts are already
familiar with POLICE CALL, a multi-volume set of reference books
giving the frequencies for public safety radio communications
throughout the USA, along with quite a bit of other useful information
relating to the use of scanners.

Broken down into volumes based on geography, each volume of POLICE CALL
serves various parts of the USA. For example Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky
and Wisconsin make up volume 4, which is the portion I get each year.

Published annually since sometime in the early 1960's, the 1994 edition
includes numerous miscellaneous listings including some federal government
entries, railroads, and aircraft. In addition to an alphabetical listing
of license holders by state, a cross reference by frequency makes it
easy to find out who is occupying a given spot when all you have is
the frequency you are listening to without a name or location.

Gene Hughes has been the editor of POLICE CALL since its inception.
Published by Hollins Radio Data of Los Angeles, the book (or rather, the
volume of the book relevant to your geographic location) is a very fine
and comprehensive publication.

In April, the first new publication from Hollins was released, and it
also is proving to be a valuable reference tool for scanner enthusiasts.
Entitled BEYOND POLICE CALL, the first (of what is promised to be
annual editions) covers all sorts of other listings of license holders.
Unlike the original, BEYOND POLICE CALL is a single volume publication
covering the entire United States. Unlike the original, this new book
only has an alphabetical listing of license holders, broken down first
by state, then by type of service, the finally by license holder within
the state and service categories. There is no cross-reference by frequency
in this book, and that is its major drawback in my opinion.

Richard Barnett, known to many people on the east coast for his scanner
reference guides, collaborated with Gene Huges on this new book. Barnett
is shown as the editor with Hughes as the publisher. According to
Barnett and Hughes, nearly two years was spent gathering the information
for the new book, and revisions are planned annually, apparently in the
spring of each year. The original POLICE CALL usually comes out in the
fall.

Because it is a consolidated USA listing, the new book runs about 430
pages, (POLICE CALL tends to run about 200+ pages) and my suggestion
to the authors would be that subsequent revisions need to be broken
down geographically like the original, and most definitly a cross-
reference by frequency needs to be included.

The kinds of listings you will find in BEYOND POLICE CALL include:

  -- frequencies used at sports events
  -- frequencies used by public utilities

  (here to some extent it gets ridiculous; the authors apparently
  just did a dump of FCC records; the listings for 'Ameritech' and
  'Illinois Bell' go on for better than a page of small type as
  do the listings for 'Commonwealth Edison')

  -- amusement parks
  -- resorts and casinos
  -- school districts
  -- newspapers, television and radio news departments
  -- shopping mall security forces

  (naturally, living a block and a half from Skokie's 'Old Orchard
  Mall' I put that one in my scanner right away)

  -- movie crews
  -- colleges and universities (their security departments, etc)
  -- stadiums
  -- hospitals
  -- hotels
  -- taxicab dispatching
  -- towing services for disabled and/or illegally parked cars
  -- ski resorts
  -- race crews
  -- state fairs
  -- conventions
  -- public transportation
  -- farm cooperatives
  -- private investigators
  -- neighborhood watch groups

Some of the above makes for very interesting listening, as any scanner
enthusiast will tell you. The thing with public safety radio is that
it makes up only a small percentage of what is out there.  Many people
buy a scanner only to listen to the police and unwittingly they miss
huge amounts of very good stuff they might miss otherwise.

Where to get your copy:

I got both of mine (RADIO CALL 1994 Edition Volume 4 and BEYOND RADIO
CALL) at the local Radio Shack store here in Skokie. They are $9.99
each and go by RS 'part number' 62-1040 (Beyond) and 62-104x (POLICE
CALL) where 'x' runs from 1 to 8 I think for the various regional
editions.

Our local Radio Shack had a dozen of the BEYOND books two days ago,
now the manager is down to just a couple copies left so it is apparently
going pretty fast and you may want to get your copy ASAP.

I guess you could also order directly from the publisher, but be sure
and specify *which state* you live in (or want listings for) if you
order POLICE CALL so they know which one to send you.

Hollins Radio Data
PO Box 35002
Los Angeles, CA 90035

They don't list a phone number, 800 or otherwise, so my assumption is
they prefer not to deal with phone call orders or inquiries. They do
stress writing to them with suggestions and comments at their address
shown above. I suggest just getting your copies from Radio Shack or
some other book dealer.

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

On the same train of thought, whatever happened to that fellow out of
Indianapolis, IN somewhere who published the NORTH AMERICAN RADIO AND
TV GUIDE?  It came out on a more or less annual basis for many years
listing all the callsigns and frequencies of AM/FM radio and television
stations in the USA, Canada and Mexico. I've not seen a fresh copy of
it for many years now, and the last one I have is Volume 13. Is he
still around?  I think Sams published it.


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew Scott Weisberg)
Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding
Date: 11 May 1994 13:34:40 -0400
Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI


[e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin) writes:

> In a previous article, [e-mail] (Bruce
> Mchollan) wrote:

>> A person I work with has a cellular phone with call forwarding.  When
>> he forwards his calls to another number and then calls his own
>> cellular number he is not charged for the call ($0!).  This works even
>> when he forwards his calls to a number within our LATA that would
>> invoke toll charges if dialed by land line.  He takes advantage to
>> save the toll charges.  Is this legal?

> Legal?  Yes.  Believable?  No.

> I've seen a couple of different ways cell companies handle the
> forwarding charges.  Basically, they don't like to give unlimited
> forwarding for free 'cause of the scenerio you described above.

This is completely believable ... you do this in the Detroit Metro
area.  I have cellular service with Cellular One. I have call
forwarding on my phone ($1.95 per month plus approx. 8 cents per
forwarded call) ... I live in Novi, MI (in the new 810 area code). My
girlfriend lives in Southgate (35 miles away, in 313). I simply
forwarded my cell phone to her number, call my cell phone, and get
untimed calls for 8 cents a call to her. Saved me over $35 on the last
phone bill.

Now, my question is, when the cut over to 810 becomes mandatory in
August, will this no longer work? My cell phone has an 810 number. Is
this a factor?  One of my main motivations for getting the phone was
for the call forwarding purpose (although, now that I have it, I can't
imagine being without..  heh!).


Matt Weisberg, CNE         MILLIWAYS - Computer and Network Consulting
PP-ASEL                                21650 West Eleven Mile Road #202
Amateur Radio: KF8OH                   Southfield, MI 48076
Internet: [e-mail]      [phone] Fax:[phone]

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 06:41:03 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Bluml)
Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding


> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan M.
> Gallatin) writes:

> In a previous article, [e-mail] (Bruce
> Mchollan) wrote:

>> A person I work with has a cellular phone with call forwarding.  When
>> he forwards his calls to another number and then calls his own
>> cellular number he is not charged for the call ($0!).  This works even

> Legal?  Yes.  Believable?  No.

> What company is it that doesn't charge anything on the forwarded call?

Well, I can name two. US West and Cellular One in the Minneapolis/St.
Paul calling area of Minnesota. Neither charge any air time for
forwarded calls of either type, N/A or immediate. My bill will
typically be three or four pages, half of which are forwarded calls
with $0.00 as the cost.

Also, when travelling to Wisconsin, I can still reach the home area
(Non-roaming) for 20 miles in to WI. There is no toll charge for these
calls, even though the last tower is supposedly IN Wisconsin. When I
called 911 once 15 miles into WI for a stalled car, the bill showed a
WI phone number and I reached the county sheriff in WI rather than the
MN state patrol as I would on the MN side. (I was on the home system,
and NOT roaming at the time).


Kevin V. Bluml  - Cray Research Inc. 612-683-3036
USmail -   655 - Lone Oak Drive, Eagan, MN 55121
Internet - [e-mail]  UUCP - uunet!cray!kevin

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

From: [e-mail] (Lenny Charnoff)
Subject: Re: Internet White Pages
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 02:50:24 GMT


Jan Richert ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Could anyone email me the exact title of the Internet White Pages,
> publisher and ISBN number?


Publisher IDG Books
ISBN # 1-56884-300-3


Lenny Charnoff
Information Odyssey-Newsletter and Online Service
BBS- 503-650-2992    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 10 May 94 12:33 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Internet White Pages
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> Could anyone email me the exact title of the Internet White Pages,
> publisher and ISBN number?

Seth Godin and James S. McBride, "The 1994 Internet White Pages", IDG
Books, 1994, US$29.95, C$39.95, UKL26.99.  ISBN 1-56884-300-3.

It's distributed in Europe by Transword Publishers Ltd.  For info on
availability outside the U.S., contact Christina Turner, +1 415 312
0633.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

Claimer: IDG has published several of my books, but I wasn't involved
with this one, even though on the last page of it there's a nice ad
for "The Internet for Dummies".

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 21:10:17 -0400
From: Seth Breidbart <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet
Organization: Society for the Promulgation of Cruelty to the Clueless


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

> [e-mail] (John Anderson) writes:

>> mail [e-mail]

> I have learned that to use the above service, it is preferable to mail
> to:
>     "[e-mail]"

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just my curiosity -- why is it better or
> preferable to write to the one address instead of the other?   PAT]

Because the name pit-manager may go away some time in the future; rtfm
is the new official name.


Seth

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

From: [e-mail] (Nevin Liber)
Subject: Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet
Date: 11 May 1994 02:23:11 -0700
Organization: University of Arizona CS Department, Tucson AZ


In article <[e-mail]>, John Anderson <andrsonj@rtsg.
mot.com> wrote:

>> mail [e-mail]

> I have learned that to use the above service, it is preferable to mail
> to:
>     "[e-mail]"

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just my curiosity -- why is it better or
> preferable to write to the one address instead of the other?   PAT]

My guess would be that this would allow MIT to change the machine the
service is on at will, without having to change the outside email
address.

For instance: my email address is [e-mail], yet I never
send email from that machine (I don't even have an account on the
machine).  I'm planning on changing the machine I get email on later
this month, yet I won't have to tell anybody that I'm doing it, since
I'll still have the same external address (and the internal machines
know to route mail to the right machine).

(Actually, if I wanted to be even more generic, [e-mail]
works; it is set up as an alias to [e-mail].  Now if I
could just figure out how to get nevin@edu to work ... :-))


Nevin ":-)" Liber    [e-mail]    [phone]
                                                +++(520) after 3/95
                                  office:    [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #212
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa18297;
          11 May 94 21:48 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14081; Wed, 11 May 94 17:49:41 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14071; Wed, 11 May 94 17:49:39 CDT
Date: Wed, 11 May 94 17:49:39 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #213

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 May 94 17:49:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 213

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks (Terry Hardie)
    Re: FAX Mailbox Services (Jack Bzoza)
    Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? (John R. Levine)
    Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted (John R. Levine)
    Re: Switch 56 Service (Keith Luca)
    Re: Broadband ISDN (Junaid Islam)
    Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts (John Harris)
    Re: Cellular Privacy (Jason Williams)
    Meeks Defense Fund (Mark Boolootian)
    Books from Telecom Library Inc. (Nigel Allen)
    Replace POST-MAIL by FAX (Fred Hess)
    Searching For a Specific Telephone! (Karim Farrag)
    Calling 1-800-COLLECT from Canada (Hugh Pritchard)
    Call Display From New York (Tony Harminc)
    Looking For FAX *System* Information (Rich Osman)
    Break-Even Point For Orange Card (Carl Moore)
    Looking For List of 800 Providers (Joel Fedorko)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 06:58:13 NZST
From: [e-mail] (Terry Hardie)
Subject: Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book For Digest Readers
Organization: Computer Bytes BBS, Auckland, N.Z. ([phone])


wu/O=JEFFREY_RACE/DD.ELN=[e-mail] writes:

> The manual is free upon request to readers of TELECOM Digest.
> Generous-spirited readers are requested to provide suggestions for
> corrections or improvements to subsequent revisions of the manual.
> Any who make it to the last page and still want more such paper in
> their in-baskets from possible survivors of future design projects are
> respectfully encouraged to submit the form at the rear of the manual
> for future technical mailings (if we survive this one).

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When you write to Dr. Race to request your
> free copy of the manual, please mention reading about it in TELECOM Digest.
> Thanks.  PAT]

Not sure which one of you I need to send this to, but please could you
send me one. Is it on paper or electronic?


Terry


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You would write to Dr. Race to receive
your copy of the book. I am reprinting this as a reminder since several
people have written *me* asking for a copy. I can't help you!  Write
to the author at the address shown for him at the top of this message.  PAT]

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

From: Jack Bzoza <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FAX Mailbox Services
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:18:00 -0400


Clarence Gold wrote:

> Jack Bzoza ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> Delrina (the makers of WinFax and PerForm) has just announced a fax
>> mailbox service exactly as you describe.  It will ship (i.e. be
>> available) in about two weeks time.

>> It is currently the ONLY way to retrieve a fax sent to your fax
>> mailbox directly to your hotel room with your laptop.

> Nice idea, but "the ONLY way"?  Hardly.

Please inform us of any other solution that you are aware of that
permits you to retrieve faxes to your laptop into your hotel room.
Note I did NOT say "have faxes sent to your hotel room".

The PBX in most hotels does not permit you to receive a call directly
from an outside line.  The way the existing fax mailbox services work
is that you have to call in from a voice line, enter your PIN, then
enter a fax phone number for the system to send your faxes.  You then
hang up the phone and the fax mailbox sends your faxes to the number
you entered.  This is the method sold by folks like A T & T, SkyFax,
etc.  There are no other fax mailbox RETRIEVAL solutions available
which can receive the fax on the same call out to the best of my
knowledge.

> Expensive?  yes.

Yes it is but then this a very specialized service for the traveller.
If you need it, then it's worth it.  Don't forget you can also get
voicemail options, pager notification (i.e. beep me whenever a fax
arrives in my Fax MailBox), etc.

Long distance is expensive as well.  Since access to the MailBox
is via your own personal 1-800 number you don't pay any additional
connect charges (i.e. they're built in to the cost).

If you don't need the service too often, simply use WinFax PRO 4.0's
REMOTE RETRIEVAL capability.  Yes, Delrina also gives you the ability
to use WinFax PRO as your fax mailbox.  If you don't mind leaving your
PC on all the time receiving faxes, then WinFax PRO 4.0 can be set up
for REMOTE RETRIEVAL.  In other words, you can dial in to your WinFax
PRO 4.0, (provided it's properly set up) enter a password and initiate
a retrieval to your present location.  This feature was delayed in the
initial product shipment but is now shipping in all commercial
versions of WinFax PRO 4.0.

In fact, WinFax PRO 4.0 becomes the Delrina Fax MailBox principal
competitor.  Delrina believes that the WinFax PRO user should be
empowered individually to control her/his fax communications in
whatever manner suits them.

> Offered by Delrina?  I think not.  Looks that way.  I believe it is
> offered by MCI.

Sorry, but once again, you're mistaken.  MCI has no such service
available.  MCI is the supplier of Delrina's Fax Broadcast service.
Delrina has integrated WinFax PRO 4.0 into MCI's Fax Broadcast
platform to enable WinFax PRO 4.0 users to prepare a fax for broadcast
to multiple users (up to 500 per list) at their desktop with their
standard Windows software and then to send it via WinFax PRO 4.0
(using the phonebooks and groups already in your WinFax) on a single
phone call to a 1-800 telephone number.

Delrina's strategic partner and supplier of the Fax MailBox platform
is Pacific Bell.  Since Delrina is building its own Communications
Services Division and not simply reselling other companies products
Delrina has selected strategic partners to supply the various
components of its business with an eye to providing the very best
technology and service in each segment of this venture.

> WinFax 4.0 _requires_ a class 1 Faxmodem for mailbox retrieval.
> The Class 2 faxmodem that I have cannot be used.

Yes.  you're right.  That is a technical limitation of the hardware as
it elates to the fax protocols. You also need a computer capable of
running Windows.  I guess you won't be able to use it until you spring
for $100 for a new modem.

> If you want a cheaper alternative, that has been in use for some time,
> call 1-800-audiofax, and ask for the name of a "travel mailbox" dealer in
> your area.

I believe you're wrong again. My understanding is that Audiofax has
no product that does direct retrieval on the same call.  Yes, you can
have your fax sent anywhere you want (in North America).  Delrina's
Fax MailBox does all that too but that's not the power of the system.
We didn't want to simply do a "me too" service but rather tried to do
it in a way that leveraged our strengths.

> I must admit that the integration into WinFax is kind of cool.

That is the entire focus of the service and the product!!!  As I said
above, there are dozens of services that will store your fax for you
in a mailbox and send it to a number that you specify.

To the best of my knowledge, only Delrina WinFax PRO 4.0 and the
Delrina Communications Services can deliver this type of functionality
in a Fax MailBox at this time.

> I use WinFax to retrieve faxmail to my machine now, from an Audiofax
system.

Please see my comments above about RETRIEVAL versus having faxes sent
to your location on a second telephone call.  I'd be very interested
to know how you can do that with a class 2 faxmodem !!!

Thanks for your interest.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 10:44 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> As I understand the situation, zmodem is indeed a proprietary
> protocol.  Its use on hosts is only free under certain restricted
> contexts, academic use being one of them. Clients, on the other hand,
> are free to incorporate zmodem protocols, since a host is required to
> use them.

My understanding is that Chuck Forsberg developed ZMODEM under a
contract to Telenet (now Sprintnet) and they released the spec to the
public.  Anyone can implement ZMODEM without legal restriction, which
is why most comm programs now support it.

Forsberg, doing business as Omen Technology, wrote several widely used
implementations of it, including DSZ, Pro-YAM, sz and rz.  DSZ is a
DOS ZMODEM upload and download utility intended to be run from a comm
program that doesn't have built-in ZMODEM support, and is shareware.
Pro-YAM is a commercial Unix comm program, with a junior shareware
version.  Sz and rz are tiny zmodem send and recive programs, are free
for personal use and in connection with other Omen products, and are
shareware for other uses.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 10:50 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: AT&T Divestiture Comments Wanted
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> They considered and later acted on the opportunity to offload the higher
> cost, less efficient local operating groups, and concentrate on LD.

That was certainly the plan, but if you look at how much more money
the RBOCs have made than AT&T in the past decade, the crystal ball was
kind of cloudy.

The breakup has certainly been good news for sophisticated users,
since there are all sorts of swell new services that the old Bell
System would never have gotten around to providing.

The cost shift from long distance to monthly service is a purely
political thing, and really has nothing to do with the breakup.  If
regulators wanted to, they could still mandate a surcharge on LD calls
(independent of IXC) and use that to subsidize local service.  This
could easily be done by cranking up the per-minute rates charged for
FG B and FG D connections.  But they haven't -- they've moved charges
closer to costs, which should be more economically effecient, albeit
at the cost of making POTS service less universally available than
before.  All telcos have some sort of low cost "lifeline" service
available for under $10/mo, but I can believe that people are
embarassed to ask for it.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Keith Luca)
Subject: Re: Switch 56 Service
Date: 11 May 1994 11:27:16 -0400
Organization: The Pipeline


My organization is reviewing switch-56 service which will will be used
to back up a dedicated 56 circuit.  We have received proposals form
NYNEX and Sprint.  The cost difference is not an issue.  We are
leaning towards Sprint because we feel they will be more responsive
then NYNEX.  This is based on our experience with NYNEX and the level
of bureaucracy that at times makes NYNEX ineffective.  MCI has
provided this service to us in the past and has demonstrated that they
are unreliable.  If you have any pro or con comments about NYNEX or
Sprint please let me know.


Thanks,

Keith M. Luca

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

From: JUNAID ISLAM <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Broadband ISDN
Date: Wed, 11 May 94 03:14:14 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


Try reading "ISDN in Perspective" by Fred Goldstein (Addison Wesley,
1992).  It is both readible and highly informative.


Best regards,

Junaid@Delphi


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As a matter of fact, Fred is a regular
participant in this Digest although I haven't heard much from him
lately.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 02:04 WET
From: [e-mail] (John Harris)
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts


Quoting [e-mail]:

> I was trying out new modem software yesterday, and under the option
> where one can specify the number of redial attempts before giving up,
> somthing like the following reads: "Governement regulations may limit
> you to 10 redials maximum."

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That has been the case in Canada for
> quite a few years and I think it is true here in the USA also now.

My understanding is that the Canadian requirement (CS-03) is 10 redial
attempts, the American (FCC Part 68) requirement is 15 redial
attempts; and the harmonized requirement coming out of the Free Trade
Agreement will be two redial attempts.

There have been complaints about fax machines that call in the middle
of the night, i.e. during cheap rate times, and won't stop.

The rules apply to any telephone device, fax or modem.  The TIA should
be petitioning the FCC for adoption of the new Part 68/CS-03 any time
now.


John Harris, Mississauga, ON, Canada  [phone] <[e-mail]>
Blue Wave/QWK v2.12

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

From: [e-mail] (Streak)
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy?
Date: 11 May 1994 11:31:54 -0500
Organization: The University of Texas - Austin


In article <[e-mail]>,

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However the court ruling to which you
> refer is a very grey area. The FCC thinks otherwise, as do the federal
> courts in some jurisdictions. Best not listen to cellular calls.  PAT]

Speaking of which, has anyone actually been caught, tried, and convicted
of listening to cellular phone calls?

(You have to be pretty stupid to turn on your scanner to the cellular
band when a cop pulls you over ... and even then, the chances are
unlikely that they will do anything.)

Another thing ... suppose I heard some illegal activity on cellular or
even cordless? Do I have any legal rights to report it? (didn't the
Nancy Kerrigan case get blown up because someone listened to the phone
lines?)


email: [e-mail]    * Jason Williams -- Austin, Tx.
main-> [e-mail] * University of Texas at Austin
       [e-mail]     * Electrical and Computer Engineering


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Forget about cordless. Listen to whatever
you want there; just don't repeat it or benefit from what you heard since
that rule has existed independently for years. There is no law against
listening to cordless phones. A police officer who pulls you over with
spare time on his hands *could* make a referral to the appropriate federal
agency if he wanted to do so; he probably would not. For your information
however, at least one major retailer of scanners (Tandy/Radio Shack) has
instructed its employees that they may no longer sell scanners to any
customer who indicates the scanner will be used illegally to receive
cellular signals. If you ask a Radio Shack employee something to the
effect of 'which of your scanners can be modified to pick up cellular
calls?', he is supposed to refuse any further conversation with you and
*** refuse to sell you any scanners at all ***.  Tandy has recently
instructed its employees that in the event a scanner purchased from Radio
Shack is used in the commission of a crime and it is discovered that the
selling employee ** knew or should have known ** that the purchaser
intended to make illegal modifications to the radio that the selling
employee can be charged with 'aiding and abetting in the commission of
a crime'.  That may be all just theory, and it may never happen, but
at least in this neck of the woods, many RS employees will not talk to
you about 'cellular' and 'scanner' in the same sentence. All that
despite the fact that the pocket tone dialer Tandy sells can be easily
converted -- with a crystal sold at Radio Shack! -- to make the tone
caused by a 25 cent coin put in pay phones. But that is also a verbotin
topic at 'the shack' ... PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: Meeks Defense Fund
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 13:38:30 -0400


Forwarded FYI to the Digest:

 From: Meeks Defense Fund <[e-mail]>


Dear Net Citizen:

How do you put a price on free and open dialogue on the Net?

How much are you willing to spend to preserve the concept of roboust
and open debate that have become a part of the Internet's culture?
$100? $50?  $20?

What if the cost of helping to preserve an open and robust Net was no
more than $1.29?  That's right, less than the cost of a fast food
hamburger.  Freedom on the Internet for only $1.29 ... cheap at twice
the price.

A joke?  Hardly.  The free and open speech, indeed the First Amendment
rights of the Internet -- rights we've all enjoyed for decades -- are now
being challenged in court.

CyberWire Dispatch, the well-respected online newswire written and
developed for the Internet community by journalist Brock Meeks, is the
subject of a libel suit.  CyberWire Dispatch has been at the forefront
of bringing the Net community timely and insightful articles.

This suit was highlighted in a {Wall St. Journal} article (April 22,
page B1).  The subject of a Dispatch investigation is suing Meeks for
simply doing what journalists in the traditional print medium have
done since the founding of newspapers: Print the facts and let the
public decide the outcome.

Brock and the Cyperwire Dispatch are examples of the "bottom up"
journalism that charachterizes the Net, where anyone with a modem can
compete with the traditional press.  Of course, most of us don't come
to the Net with a lawyer in tow, or the resources to defend a legal
action taken against us in courts located hundreds of miles from our
homes.

This libel action is one of the earliest cases of libel involving
alleged defamatory statements published over a computer network.  It
raises the extremely important legal and policy issues.  It's impact
may well determine how and to what extent anyone feels free to express
strong opinions on the Net, wihtout being put at risk of legal action.

It is crucial that Brock have a strong defense and that the principles
that  come out of this case provide the maximum protection to the
exercise of free and open speech as possible.

CyberWire Dispatch is unique because it's distributed solely in
electronic form.  A service for the Net community at large.  And all
CyberWire Dispatch articles are free.  Meeks neither charges anyone
for receiving them; he gets paid nothing to write them.

For all these efforts, he's being sued.  And being sued by a company
with a large financial backing.  Meeks, on the other hand, has no such
resources.  His attorney, Bruce Sanford of Baker & Hostetler is
arguably the finest First Amendment lawyer in the U.S.

And although he has agreed to represent Meeks at a reduced rate, the
cost of defending against this unmerited suit will not be cheap.

We have formed this committee to lend our support in helping him raise
money for his legal defense.  And all we're asking you to send is
$1.29.  That's it.  Why that price?  The math is easy: $1 in an
envelope with a 29 cent stamp applied.

Who can't afford $1.29 to help save the great freedoms we all enjoy
here today?

Can you send more?  Of course.  Any contributions will be welcomed and
accepted.  Tax deductible donations also are possible by following the
instructions below.

All money sent for Meeks' legal defense fund will be go to that
purpose.  All the administrative services for administering the fund
are being donated; 100% of your money goes to defer the legal costs of
this case.

You are encouraged to repost this message.  But please, we urge you to
keep proper Net protocol in mind when reposting or cross posting this
message.

Thanks for your time.  On behalf of Brock and for future generations
of electronic journalists, we appreciate your contributions and
support.


Sincerely,

Samuel A. Simon
President, Issue Dynmics, Inc.*
[e-mail]

Mitch Kapor
Chair, Electronic Frontier Foundation*
[e-mail]

David Farber
The Alfred Fitler Moore Professor of Telecommunications Systems
University of Pennsylvania*
[e-mail]

Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Senior Writer
TIME Magazine*
[e-mail]

Marc Rotenberg
Electronic Infomation Privacy Center*
[e-mail]

Nicholas Johnson
Former FCC Commissoner*
[e-mail]

Jerry Berman
Electronic Frontier Foundation*
[e-mail]

Mike Godwin
Electronic Frontier Foundation*
[e-mail]

*AFFILIATION IS FOR INDENTIFICATION PURPOSE ONLY

For Tax Deductible Donations:

Make Checks out to "Point Foundation" and clearly annotate on the check:
"For Legal Defense Fund."

Send those checks to:

Meeks Defense Fund
c/o Point Foundation
27 Gate Five Road
Sausalito, CA 94965

For those who don't care about the tax deductible status, send
contributions to:

Meeks Defense Fund

c/o IDI
901 15th St. NW
Suite 230
Washington, DC 20005


Meeks Defense Fund       Internet:   [e-mail]
c/o  IDI                 c/o Point Foundation
901 15th St. NW          27 Gate Five Road
Suite 230                Sausalito, CA  9465
Washington, DC  20005


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

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think based on the signatories to
the letter shown above, we are safe in waiving the usual comments about
making sure something is bonafide before sending money through the mail.
I believe all the gentlemen listed above are honest; there are no scams
being pulled. By all means, if you wish, send what you can. But first,
as they say, a word from the sponsor:   <grin>

Nowhere in the above report is any mention given of whether or not
libel did occur. Note that the article seems to skirt that (to me) very
basic premise ... instead, the writers complain of how the accused has
very little money, is doing all this for free out of sense of volunteer-
ism, and how the plaintiff is a big company with lots of money -- as
though those facts alone meant anything. Big corporations have rights
also; even AT&T is entitled to the protection of the law, the same as
you or I. (Note: I use AT&T as an example only, I do not know who is
suing him.)  Ditto, the fact that you are a poor, underpaid (if paid at
all) moderator, working out of the goodness of your heart (or as some
people on Usenet like to say about me, to feed my ego-trip) gives one
no franchise to violate the law. The law says no libeling, period. Big
corporation, little company, single individual, no matter. Newspapers
have a little more freedom in this respect and all of us have a bit more
freedom where politicians and 'public figures' are concerned, but no one
can deliberatly libel another without paying the consequences.

Now, that's *if* Cyberwire Dispatch and or its publisher Meeks did in
fact publish libelous commentary. I do not know if he did or did not;
I do not evaluate the work of other moderators or e-journals. A judge
will detirmine the facts. But my point is their argument of 'we are
the net, we are something different, the regular rules should not apply
to us on account of how we are just volunteers and un-(or under)paid
workers; the plaintiff is a big bully with lots of money to hire
lawyers,' etc is not applicable. On the one hand, some of these guys
want legitimacy for the net. They want, and I agree with them, to have
our e-journals treated like any other media. Most of us are damn sick
and tired of having our efforts treated like they mean nothing merely
because we have no paper editions. Most of us are sick and tired of
having the government thumb its nose in our face where our free speech
rights are concerned -- getting away with things they would never dare
try to pull on the {Washington Post}'s of the world -- merely because
they are print media and we are not.

So you want legitimacy for e-journals?  Fine, then live the life! If
the {Washington Post} libeled you, then you would have every right in
the world to go after them for it. But you can't have it both ways.
If you want to claim the rights afforded you by the constitution and
claim the rights given to the media -- I claim all those rights!! -- then
can the crap about how 'we are just little private individuals who
should not have to be hassled in this way' or words to that effect.
Note the article on the one hand calls Cyberwire Dispatch 'the well
respected online newswire' then almost immediatly reverses itself. Well
hey, the {New York Times} is a well-respected publication also, and
there are no doubt times in its long-ago history *it* had cash flow
problems and poorly paid help. Its been sued a few times also; that's
the price for not watching your tongue in print. So please guys, fight
the battle on the merits of the alleged libel, not on the basis of
'I am little and you are big so therefore I am right and you are wrong.'
Inform the net of your situation and plead for funds, but do not give
us the bit about how the net is so different and special.

Now I repeat: it seems a worthy cause otherwise. Lots of netters have
come to my rescue in the past and I am glad to bring this latest need
to the attention of our generous readers.   PAT]

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

Subject: Books from Telecom Library Inc.
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 12:17:00 -0400
Organization: CRS Online  (Toronto, Ontario)


If you would like to receive a catalog of Telecom Library's
publications, or would like to receive a sample copy of any of the
company's magazines (Teleconnect, Call Center or Imaging), contact:

 Telecom Library Inc.
 12 West 21 Street
 New York NY 10010
 U.S.A.
 telephone [phone] or 1-800-LIBRARY
 fax [phone]

Harry Newton is president of Telecom Library, I think.

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 17:23:47 +0200
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Replace POST-MAIL by FAX
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne



I am currently studying the possibility to replace our POST-MAIL
(Internal, National and International) by FAX'ing documents. By "our
POST-MAIL" I mean all the traditional mail (NOT confidential) like
letters, convocations, informations, ... It's just a question of
cost/send.

I'll be very happy if you could answer (EMAIL) to any questions below :

1) Have you heard about any experience like that in a school,
organisation, or enterprise ? Could you send me any report ? Someone
to contact ?

2) FAX sending time: where could I find a report talking about the
time I need to send a FAX? What are the speeds used? Quantity of
information to be sent (average)?

3) Future of FAXs: What about the sending speed of the next FAX
generation?  And with the high-speed numerical services?

4) Progression of FAX in enterprises (ten last years)? (In the world).

5) Any suggestions about this experience?

6) Where could I post this message to get more information? Other
Newsgroup?  You could forward this message anywhere!

This experience is a simple research, not a real project, for the EPFL (Ecole
Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology).


Thanks in advance,

Fred    Email: [e-mail]   Sorry for my poor English !

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

From: [e-mail] (Karim.Farrag)
Subject: Searching For a Specific Telephone
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 15:25:08 GMT
Organization: Universitaetsrechenzentrum, Heinrich-Heine-Universitaet Duesseldorf


Hi Everybody,

For quite a while now I'am searching for a specific telephone probably
manufactured by AT&T.Specific features: narrow receiver, the speech
unit of the receiver is bent almost 90 degrees; the receiver is shaped
like an L , wire phone, mostly seen in black colour.I suppose it most
be a very common model in the US , because I saw in many different
movies (ex. In the Line of Fire ,Last Action Hero, etc.). Unfortunaly
AT&T here in Europe wasn't as cooperative as I thought. Now I am
hoping that someone knows which phone I am talking about (telephone
manufactor, model number) or maybe the main address of AT&T in the
US.  Many thanks in advance.


E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 13:29 EST
From: Hugh Pritchard <[e-mail]>
Subject: Calling 1-800-COLLECT From Canada


[This is from the BRIEFLY column in the May 9, 1994 {MCI This Week}.
I'm no MCI employee; I benefit not one whit whether you use 1-800-COLLECT
or not. -- HP]

CALLING 1-800-COLLECT FROM CANADA

Beginning May 10, 1-800-COLLECT (sm), America's favorite way to call
collect, will be available in Canada.  Canada becomes the first
country from which 1-800-COLLECT calls can be made back to the United
States.  The connection between Canada and the U.S. is made possible
through a joint effort between MCI and Canada's Stentor, part of an
alliance between the nine major telephone companies of Canada.  The
1-800-COLLECT from Canada marks the first joint offering the companies
have launched in the consumer marketplace.

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 14:09:36 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call Display From New York


A colleague left a message on my machine here in Toronto while he was
waiting for a plane at JFK airport in New York.  To my surprise, the
Call Display data was not 'out of area' as it usually is for calls
from the USA, but the rather unlikely number 212 210-0000.  I don't
know exactly where he placed the call from (other than that he had
cleared security at the time) or how he paid for it.  I haven't tried
calling the number, but it seems very unlikely to be the actual number
on the payphone.  I don't know which US carrier he used either -
perhaps they are just early in implementing the new FCC requirements
;-) Assuming that the 0000 is fake, who would be setting the number
that way?  The LEC (implying that the IXC doesn't get the real data)?
The IXC making some privacy assumptions of its own?  The payphone
owner (COCOT)?


Tony Harminc

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 11:55:53 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Looking For FAX *System* Information


I'm looking for information on fax systems.  My brother's business has
grown to the point where their single fax is a problem.  He also needs
to add fax-back capability.  Ideally the system would meet the
following criteria:

            PC based
            Use a range of fax boards
            Support 3rd number and pickup faxback calls
            support printing incoming faxes to a laser printer
            interface cleanly with a network (probably Novell, but TBD)
            support off peak queuing (for outgoing)
            support multiple lines (at least three)
            be easily expandable (add cards, drive space, etc.)


[e-mail]       (Rich Osman)         SwRI didn't say it, I did.
[phone] (w)                   [phone] (h;v/msg/fax)

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 17:03:39 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Break-Even Point For Orange Card


I have a phone bill with a 15-minute AT&T calling card call from
Aberdeen (Md.) to Philadelphia, and it cost $4.70 before Federal tax
rate of 3% was applied.  This ran a little better than 30 cents a
minute, which despite the fifteen minutes still was more expensive
than the Orange Card, which would have billed 25 cents per minute plus
tax.  (PAT's earlier estimate was about ten minutes for break-even
point; the longer the call, the more time for spreading out the
relatively-high initial charge of other calling cards.)

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

From: [e-mail] (Joel Fedorko)
Subject: Looking For List of 800 Providers
Date: 11 May 1994 20:50:33 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


The subject pretty much says it.  I'm looking for info on 800
providers and rates.


Thanks,

Joel   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #213
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21196;
          12 May 94 12:46 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23615; Thu, 12 May 94 08:39:06 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23606; Thu, 12 May 94 08:39:03 CDT
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 08:39:03 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #214

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 May 94 08:39:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 214

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    NPA Readiness For 1995 (Gregory P. Monti)
    Emerging Cellular Systems (U. Ezechuk)
    ID Card Stories -- Reality Check (Lauren Weinstein)
    Cell One/NY Rates For DC and Boston (Doug Reuben)
    Help Needed With Speech Recognition..."Word Processing" (Peter Flower)
    3270 Emulation (Windows) (Michael Anderson)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 07:13:53 EDT
From: Gregory P. Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: NPA Readiness for 1995


North America's Countdown to NPA Interchangeability in 1995

Interchangeable Codes Day is January 15, 1995, which is a Sunday!
(Does Hallmark have a line of cards out for it yet?)

For purposes of this table, "toll calls" are calls that are
*individually itemized* on your local or long distance company phone
bill.  "Message unit" or "Zone Unit Measurement" or "Extended Area"
calls are not individually itemized on bills and I don't consider them
"toll" even though they cost something over and above local service.
If the local telco doesn't force you to dial them differently, and
doesn't bill them individually, then they are treating them like local
calls and so will I.

Premium calls like 976 are mentioned if I know about them.  Otherwise,
consider this table to be unreliable as to 976, etc., calls.

The "Ready for 1/95" column states whether the NPA has eliminated a
dialing plan that won't work once NPAs 281, 334, 360, 520, 563 and 630
come on line.

There could be multiple interpretations of what "yes" and "no" could
mean, so I took these shortcuts: no 1995 plan announced = no new plan
announced, don't know if implemented = yes new plan announced,
definitely not implemented = no new plan now implemented, but not
mandatory; old one still permitted = yes new plan now implemented and
is mandatory = yes

I have removed the interchangeable NPAs that will begin 1/95.  They
will always be "ready for 1/95".

NPA     Stat    Toll    Ready   Notes
        Prov    calls     for
                within  1/95?
                NPA
                dialed
                as

201     NJ      7       yes
202     DC      not applicable  yes     there are no toll calls within 202
203     CT      1+7     no
204     MB      1+10    yes     1+10D to be mandatory 9/94
205     AL      1+10    yes     1+10D mandatory 1990
206     WA      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1991, mandatory 1992
207     ME      7       yes     7D announced 1992
208     ID      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1993 all US West states
209     CA      7       yes
210     TX      1+10    yes     has always been 1+10D toll
212     NY      not applicable  yes     there are no toll calls within 212,
                                540 & 976 premium services are 7D
213     CA      7       yes     has always been 7D for toll
214     TX      1+10    yes
215     PA      7       yes     "no 1" campaign ran in 1992, when 1+7D
                                eliminated
216     OH      1+10D   yes     1+10D mandatory 1/1/95
217     IL      7       yes     Urbana book mentions "10D" without "1",
                                which won't work unless local calls within
                                217 are also 10D; later Bellcore source
                                says 7D, which I consider more reliable
218     MN      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 12/93, mandatory late 1994
219     IN      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 8/93
301     MD      1+10    yes
302     DE      1+10    yes     1+10D permitted 4/1/94, mandatory 1/7/95
303     CO      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1993, mandatory 2/27/94
304     WV      7       yes
305     FL      1+10    yes     1+10D announced early 93
306     SK      1+10    yes     1+10D to be mandatory 9/94
307     WY      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1993 all US West states
308     NE      1+10    yes     1+10D announced for all US West states 12/93
309     IL      7       yes     per Bellcore source from [e-mail]
310     CA      7       yes
312     IL      not applicable  yes     there are no toll calls within 312
313     MI      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1993 (was to be 7D)
314     MO      1+7     no
315     NY      7       yes     per Bellcore source from [e-mail]
316     KS      1+7     no
317     IN      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 8/93, mandatory 12/1/93
318     LA      1+7     no
319     IA      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 12/93 all US West states
401     RI      1+10    yes     7D announced 1992, but
                                1+10D announced 1/94 to become mandatory
402     NE      1+10    yes     1+10D announced for all US West states 12/93;
                                Lincoln Tel portion 1+10D mandatory late 94
403     AB,NT,YT        1+10    yes     1+10D to be mandatory 9/94
404     GA      1+10    yes     1+10D implemented 1989
405     OK      1+7     no
406     MT      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1993 all US West states
407     FL      1+10    yes     1+10D announced early 93
408     CA      7       no      inter-NPA calls are 10D, must change to 1+10D
409     TX      1+7     no
410     MD      1+10    yes
412     PA      7       yes     not sure if 7D announced 9/93
                                later Bellcore source from
                                [e-mail]
                                says 7D
413     MA      1+10    yes     originally to be 7D; Mass DPU was thought to
                                have ordered 1+10D in 10/93, but J. Covert
                                reports  no such order exists; bill stuffer
                                reported here confirms 1+10 is correct;
                                becomes mandatory 6/1/94
414     WI      1+10    yes
415     CA      7       yes     has always been 7D toll
416     ON      1+10    yes     there are no toll calls within 416 except 976,
                                which are dialed 1 416 976-XXXX
417     MO      1+7     no
418     QC      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 10/93
419     OH      1+10D   yes     1+10D mandatory 1/1/95
501     AR      1+7     no
502     KY      1+7     no
503     OR      1+10    yes     1+10D announced mid 1992
504     LA      1+7     no
505     NM      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1993 all US West states
506     NB      1+10    yes     1+10D to be mandatory 9/94
507     MN      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 12/93, mandatory late 1994
508     MA      1+10    yes     see note under 413
509     WA      1+10    yes     1+10D permitted 5/15/94, mandatory 9/17/94
510     CA      7       yes     has always been 7D for toll
512     TX      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1991
513     OH      1+10D   yes     1+10D mandatory 1/1/95
514     QC      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 10/93
515     IA      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1993 all US West states
516     NY      7       yes     inter-NPA calls to be forced to 1+10D;
                                540 & 976 premium services are 7D
517     MI      1+7     no
518     NY      7       yes     per Bellcore source from [e-mail]
519     ON      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 10/93
601     MS      1+10    yes     1+10D mandatory 12/93
602     AZ      1+10    yes     1+10D mandatory 1990
603     NH      7       yes     7D announced 1992; but per-line blocking
                                to be available to subs who don't want 7D
                                toll;
                                they will be forced to dial 1+10D
604     BC,NT,AK        1+10    yes     1+10D intra-NPA toll to be
                                        mandatory 9/94;
                                Hyder, AK, is in 604 per previous postings
                                here
605     SD      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 12/93
606     KY      1+7     no
607     NY      7       yes     per Bellcore source from [e-mail]
608     WI      1+10    yes
609     NJ      7       yes     1+7 disallowed beginning 9/93 per bill stuffer
610     PA      1+10    yes     1+10D mandatory 12/93 (was to inherit 7D
                                from 215)
612     MN      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 12/93, mandatory late 1994
613     ON      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 10/93
614     OH      1+10D   yes     1+10D mandatory 1/1/95
615     TN      1+10    yes     1+10D posted on pay phones 9/93
616     MI      1+7     no
617     MA      1+10    yes     see note under 413
618     IL      7       yes     per Bellcore source from [e-mail]
619     CA      7       yes     7D toll announced 9/93
701     ND      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 12/93
702     NV      1+7     no
703     VA      1+10    yes     1+10D mandatory 1987
704     NC      1+10    yes     1+10D mandatory 1990
705     ON      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 10/93
706     GA      1+10    yes     inherited 1+10D from 404
707     CA      7       yes     7D announced 10/93
708     IL      not applicable  yes     there are no toll calls within 708
709     NF,NT   1+10    yes     1+10D to be mandatory 9/94
712     IA      1+10    yes     1+10D announced for all US West states 12/93
713     TX      1+10    yes     1+10D mandatory 12/7/91
714     CA      7       yes     7D toll began in early 1980s
715     WI      1+10    yes
716     NY      7       yes     Rochester LATA, per Telecom Digest 787;
                                matches Bellcore source from
                                [e-mail]
717     PA      7       yes     7D announced 11/93
718     NY      not applicable  yes     there are no toll calls within 718,
                                540 & 976 premium services are 7D
719     CO      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1993, mandatory 2/27/94
801     UT      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 1993 all US West states
802     VT      1+10    yes     7D announced 1992; but
                                1+10D announced 2/94 to become mandatory
803     SC      1+10    yes     1+10D posted on pay phones 9/93
804     VA      1+7     no
805     CA      7       yes     1+7D still allowed in Pac Bell portion,
                                for now
806     TX      1+7     no
807     ON      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 10/93
808     HI      1+7     no
809     Caribbean       1+7     no
810     MI      1+10    yes
812     IN      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 8/93
813     FL      1+10    yes     1+10D announced early 93
814     PA      7       yes     not sure if 7D announced 9/93;
                                later Bellcore source from
                                [e-mail]
                                says 7D
815     IL      7       yes     per Bellcore source from [e-mail]
816     MO      1+7     no
817     TX      1+10    yes     1+10D currently mandatory
818     CA      7       yes     has always been 7D toll
819     QC      1+10    yes     1+10D announced 10/93
901     TN      1+10    yes     1+10D posted on pay phones 9/93
902     NS,PE   1+10    yes     1+10D to be mandatory 9/94
903     TX      1+10    yes     has always been 1+10D toll
904     FL      1+10    yes     1+10D announced early 93
905     ON      1+10    yes     has always been 1+10D toll
906     MI      1+7     no
907     AK      1+7     no
908     NJ      7       yes     has always been 7D toll
909     CA      7       yes
910     NC      1+10    yes
912     GA      1+10    yes     1+10D mandatory 8/92
913     KS      1+7     no
914     NY      7       no      inter-NPA calls are 10D, must change to 1+10D;
                                540 & 976 premium services are 7D
915     TX      1+7     no
916     CA      7       yes     7D announced 9/93
917     NY      not applicable  yes     there are no toll calls within 917;
                                however, since
                                all outbound calls from 917 are cellular,
                                there
                                is a premium airtime charge on all of them
918     OK      1+7     no
919     NC      1+10    yes     1+10D mandatory 1990

                        143     Total NANP NPAs

                        117     NPAs ready for 1995
                        26      NPAs not ready for 1995

                        31      ready NPAs using 7D solution so far
                        80      ready NPAs using 1+10D solution so far
                        6       ready NPAs not requiring a solution (no
                                intra-NPA tolls)

                        2       non-ready NPAs using 7D but still 10D for
                                inter-NPA
                        24      non-ready NPAs still using 1+7D

Corrections are welcomed.  Mail to me, I'll re-post summary.  Thanks
to Bob Goudreau for suggesting the more detailed breakout.


Greg Monti          Arlington, Virginia, USA        [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 12 May 94 10:29:00 GMT
Subject: Emerging Cellular Systems


Hi,

I am compiling material on new generation cellular systems, and would
appreciate any help. I will post the summary of responses if there is
enough interest.  My questions are:

1) What is PCS, PCN, with relevance to cellular systems?

2) What advantages do digital cellular systems have over analog?

3) For a cellular operator, what are the ideal frequencies to operate in
and why?

4) What impact does the frequency in #3 above have on operational costs,
equipment costs, etc?

5) What are the impacts of operating in the higher reaches of the
spectrum, e.g. at GHz levels? What are the impacts of low power systems
and their advantages?

5) What are the advantages of CDMA over TDMA radio access technologies?
What are the relative costs of these technologies?

6) Any ideas on how to obtain the QUALCOMM CDMA specs?

7) What impact will emerging cellular systems like Steinbrechers Minicell
systems have on the cellular operator in terms of cost, operation and
equipment?

Note: The minicell is based on technology whereby a base station can handle
different radio access methods (CDMA, TDMA) as opposed to the traditional
approach of hard wired access methods.

8) Does anyone have any ideas of names and addresses (email?) of manufac-
turers of Cellular base stations, switching equipment etc? What are the
technological merits and demerits of these equipment?


Thanks,

U Ezechukwu   Network Sys UK.

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 20:31 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: ID Card Stories -- Reality Check


Greetings.  As moderator of the Internet PRIVACY Forum Digest, I'm of
course interested in the privacy issues surrounding ID cards,
information access and related issues.  However, the current round of
stories regarding supposed plans for national "smart" ID cards,
database tie-ins, etc. seem to have taken on a life of their own,
escalating with (as far as I can tell) little real new information to
drive them.  In other words, there are signs that at least part of
these stories are tied to rumors that may have been expanded in the
telling.

For example, PRIVACY Forum received a message a few days ago that was
a first hand report of some comments made by a career government
official at a conference, where they were apparently sort of "blue-skying"
about the possibilities for increasingly simplified tax collection
through various sorts of data tie-ins.  There was no sign that these
ideas had been incorporated into any sort of formal plan.

In a similar vein, a story from the recent past had the U.S. Postal
Service talking about the ability to issue millions of smart cards on
short order for universal identification purposes.  Once again, the
impression I got from that piece was of talking about the possibilities
for use of such technology -- not that such a plan was about to be
implemented in some sort of surprise move!

Next I saw items where the messages' authors seemed to be combining
the two prior stories into some sort of integrated plan, and were now
claiming that "President Clinton is considering signing executive
orders to implement parts of these plans."  Then the message
escalation got even more pronounced -- a message in TELECOM claiming
that President Clinton was about to sign such orders.

It seems that the entire sequence of messages escalated with little if
any real new information being added.  One can't help but wonder if we
might be looking at a classic case of rumors gone wild.

Obviously, these are important issues worthy of widespread discussion
and debate.  I have no special knowledge of any possible underlying
realities to these stories, one way or another.  But it did appear
that the items seemed to be spreading around the net feeding upon
themselves, becoming more dramatic with each iteration.  I thought it
was worth raising a warning that it might be prudent to not rush to
judgment about the validity or veracity of these stories until more
specific information, drawn from sources other than the same items
that have been circulating the net, become available.


Lauren


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Lauren, the story which appeared
here was from that fellow via the EFF. The main reason I ran it was
because I tend to use EFF stuff when it is sent to me even though I
personally have to wonder about their motives from time to time. The
story I had here was in the EFFector recently. Maybe I will start being
more careful about printing some of their news releases.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Cid Technologies)
Subject: Cell One/NY rates for DC and Boston
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 14:12:51 PDT


I noted about a month ago that Cell One/NY implemented new roaming rates
for a large area surrounding the CO/NY system.

Specifically, these systems were Metro Mobile (Bell Atlantic)/CT (00119)
and Litchfield Cellular (now McCaw), Dutchess County-Poughkeepsie
NY/(00479?), ComCast/NJ-DE-PA (00173, 00575, 01487, 00123, 00029), the
small Newton, NJ-based Ericsson system (forgot the SID), and the
Atlantic City (ComCast?)  and Ocean County, NJ systems. In each of
these systems (most of which also have automatic call delivery), CO/NY
customers pay their home airtime rates, and no daily roam charges.
Additionally, in Northern and Central NJ and Fairfield County, CT, you
pay only *local* rates (6 cents per minute) to reach anyone from
Fairfield County, CT, all the way down to Central NJ, and the airtime
charges for these calls are applied to whatever pre-paid airtime
allotment you may have, if any.

However, I believe I incorrectly mentioned that the Baltimore-Washington
(00013) system was $.99 per minute, whereas in actuality it is ALSO
included in CO/NY's plan! Thus, you pay your home peak/off-peak rates
when roaming in Baltimore/DC.

Additionally, the SW Bell/Boston system (00007), Metro Mobile/RI (00119),
and the insidious Franklin County, Mass "Let's sit on out fat roam
charges and do nothing" system are also included in CO/NY's plan.

(The Franklin County system is also SID 119, and is owned by a company
called Boston Communications, [phone]. They have been very
intransigent in dealing with other Cell Co's which have tried to set
up low-cost roaming there, especially Cell One/Boston, which is trying to
set up "New England Network" rates  (.44 peak/.29 off-peak) there. The
insidious thing about these guys is that they are operated by Metro
Mobile [no, that's not that worst part! :) ], and have the same 00119 SID.
So roamers, especially those with New England Network rates, have no
idea when they place and receive calls that rather than $.44 peak or $.29
off-peak they will instead pay $3 day/$.99 per minute!.This makes me very
cautious when using my phone anywhere near their system, since in their
vicinity, you simply CAN'T TELL what you will be paying! :( I hope that
McCaw's market power convinced Boston Comm to modify rates for NY
customers, and not that McCaw is just eating the roam charge and handing
them over to those greedy little dweebs and Boston Comm. I tried
calling Paul Tobin at Boston Comm about this a number of times, needless
to say he never returned my calls.)

Thus, CO/NY customers pay home peak and off-peak rates in ALL of Mass,
ALL of RI, ALL of CT, ALL of New Jersey, the Metrophone 00029 system in
PA, all of Delaware, the Baltimore-DC SW Bell system, and Dutchess County,
NY. Moreover, auto call delivery will soon be available (next month?) to
Boston and Rhode Island.

Note that CO/NY, unlike SW Bell/Boston, does not charge any "home
airtime" for calls delivered to you while roaming. SW Bell/Boston has
this (IMHO) really cheap policy of charging their OWN customers
home airtime rates in addition to roaming rates [and let us not forget
the $2 Roam-Department-Christmas-Party Fund ... err ... I mean of
course "roamer administrative fee"]. For a company with generally
enlightened roaming policies, these charges are a throwback to
"soak-the-roamer" practices, except that this time the roamers are
also their own customers. Convenient for SW Bell, eh? Pretty cheap and
petty, really ...

As a result of the above, an account with Cell One/NY suddenly emerges
as the preferred roaming method for frequent Northeast Corridor
travelers.  With no daily charges from Mass to northern Virginia,
airtime-free call delivery throughout most of the area, and the use of
the (overpriced yet better than the B side) NACN in areas outside of
the Northeast, CO/NY stands clearly above its sister "A" carriers in
the region, and positions itself substantially ahead of NYNEX (the B
side carrier).

NYNEX/NY offers, at best, 75-cent per minute roaming in CT, 99-cent
per minute roaming in BAMS (Philly and DC), 75 or 99 cent in Boston/RI
and Maine, and may still be billing $3 daily charges (incorrectly) for
incoming calls to Baltimore/DC. Additionally, I am *still* not sure
what their policy is for outgoing calls in "Mobilreach" call delivery
areas, as I think some (most?) areas will bill you a $3 daily fee for
outgoing calls.  And of course, these is still that problem where
roamers in DC can not turn call delivery off, so calls can't go back
to voicemail -- I only mentioned it to them six months ago, so let's
give them another year to finish their squabble with Bell Atlantic --
who cares if the customers can't use it in the meanwhile..:( NYNEX
does offer auto-call delivery to both Orange and Dutchess Counties,
lower Delaware, Litchfield, CT, and Ocean County, NJ (CO/NY doesn't
deliver to these areas, and no Nationlink either), so they do come out
ahead of CO/NY in some roaming areas. The also have somewhat better
and cheaper rate plans, and don't seem to need to do as much switch
work so their system is up more often at night. However, if you intend
to do any degree of roaming in the Northeast Corridor, CO/NY is the
way to go now, without question.

BTW, CO/NY also has voicemail calls bounce back from ComCast/NJ now.
Thus, if you receive a call in SIDs 00173/00575/01487, and don't
answer it, it WILL go back to voicemail. Previously, outside of the NY
system, only Philly and Delaware featured this, using IS-41 RevA. I
think this was also placed in service now for ComCast/NJ, as cell
delivery in NJ behaves similarly to the IS-41 RevA regime inn Philly
and DE. (And no, Call-Waiting will STILL not work in ANY of the
Motorola EMX-based switches connected to NY or the NACN, so if you are
on the phone, calls will go to voicemail without you being aware of
it. Why is it so hard for ComCast and Metro Mobile -- not to mention
Pac*Tel in CA -- to get the appropriate software upgrade from Motorola
or do whatever is necessary to get this fixed? It seems like other
customers may care about this deficiency, not to mention the fact that
they can use this to get out of their annual service contracts!)

Overall, though, a very impressive roaming package from CO/NY, which
is miles ahead of what anyone else -- especially NYNEX -- is offering.
And none of thos silly "Please hold on, your party is being located"
messages which NYNEX and SNET use for auto-call delivery. I can see
why I get so many hangup calls when roaming -- no one wants to wait! :)


Doug    CID Tech    [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Doug, you have written to the Digest on
many occassions over the past few years on cellular systems and their
various shortcomings. Do any of the cell companies *ever* respond to
your articles here, or your inquiries of them and make the desired
changes? Have any of them ever corrected their problems after you gave
them notice?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (-s89432566-p.bflower-ele-500-)
Subject: Help Needed With Speech Recognition ..."Word Processing"
Date: 11 May 1994 23:56:40 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney


I'm looking for info on "Word Spotting". I'm doing a report on it and
need some of the latest available information. I'm hoping to advance a
HMM model program to do this. I'd most appreciate any information on
Word Spotting or even speech recognition.


Thanking you in advance,

Peter

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

From: [e-mail] (Stillwater Systems)
Subject: 3270 Emulation (Windows)
Date: 12 May 1994 00:17:58 GMT
Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc


I'm looking for a good Shareware 3270 Emulator for Windows. I do a
great deal of work in the VAX/VMS environment and use WRQ's Reflection
2 for Windows, however, this is not suited for the IBM mainframe
environment. If you know of any 3270 Emulators for Windows, could you
please provide me with the information I need to obtain them.


Thank You,

Michael E. Anderson   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #214
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21828;
          12 May 94 13:23 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25736; Thu, 12 May 94 09:45:08 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25727; Thu, 12 May 94 09:45:06 CDT
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 09:45:06 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #215

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 May 94 09:45:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 215

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Cable Management (Michael G. Kochanek)
    Getting Phone Number From Address Only (Derrick Sharpe)
    Calling Card Comparisons (Jakob Kellenberger)
    Need Call Screener (Narayan Bhagavatula)
    Local Competition -- Outside Plant vs Dialtone (Randall Gellens)
    Automated Response Systems (Clive D.W. Feather)
    How Much of AT&T's Network is Fiber? (Brandon Whichard)
    Pre-Paid Long-Distance Calling Cards (Larry Gonzales)
    Email Address Wanted For NTIA Asst. Secy Larry Irving (Robert Jacobson)
    Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Mark W. Earle)
    Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (Carl Jones)
    Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (John Musselman)
    Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Gregory P. Monti)
    Digital Technology Conference in Paradise (J. D. Wilson)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael G. Kochanek)
Subject: Cable Management
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 13:40:42 GMT


I am interested in getting info on cable management software either
shareware or commercialy available. We are in the starting stages of
rewiring one of our buildings for both data and voice circuits. We are
going to follow the TIA-606 standards and it would be much more
manageable to have all info in sometype of database. We have around
500 voice circuits and 750 data circuits. The software should be able
document all circuits, cables, X connects, and closets. Any help with
this would be greatly appreciated.


Thanks in advance,

Mike Kochanek   SUNY College of ESF   Syracuse N.Y.

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

From: [e-mail] (Broadcast Partners)
Subject: Getting Phone Number From Address Only
Date: 11 May 1994 22:01:06 GMT
Organization: INS Info Services


I am trying to find a way to get someone's telephone number if I
already have their address.  This is for tele-marketing purposes.  We
often get references to people, but don't get telephone numbers along
with them.  Is there a way to get this information?  It would be
preferable to be able to do it in some type of batch mode also.  Any
help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.


Derrick Sharpe   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I assume you are saying that a routine
check of the telephone directory under that name and address has not
produced a number, nor has a call to directory assistance. You might try
one of the various cross-reference directories which (in one section of
the book) list names and addresses in numerical order by telephone number
and (in the other section) in order by street address. Looking up the
street address in that section, then finding the person's name within
that address will give you a number. You can get these reference books
both in printed form as well as online from various sources.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (KELLENBERGER,JAKOB)
Subject: Calling Card Comparisons
Date: 11 May 1994 12:59:58 GMT
Organization: ETH ZUERICH


Hi there !

I'm looking forward to order an calling card, from AT&T, MCI, Sprint
or any other US-phone company, my problem is, that I can't get any
good information about the prices for the services, about the services
and so on. I ordered some information but the companies didn't react,
so it's quite difficult for me ( living in switzerland ) to evaluate
which calling card has the best conditions, which company has the
cheapest prices for their services and on and on ...

So please, if you have any information about prices (calling country
to country and reaching the US from Europe), the quality of the
services, the reliability of the services and other information, write
me in email at the following address:

[e-mail]

Thanks very much for your help!


Jakob

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

From: [e-mail] (Narayan Bhagavatula)
Subject: Need Call Screener
Date: 11 May 1994 23:41:24 -0700
Organization: SRW


Hi Everybody:

I am interested in purchasing a low cost ($30-$60) Call screener which
connects to my phone.  Typically I expect it to block the ringing of
the incoming call on my phone unless the caller presses in a security
code using his/her DTMF phones.  I know somebody makes them. I will
appreciate any information on it.


Thanks in advance,

Narayan Bhagavatula  ([e-mail])


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Whatever happened to the little Privcode
device from several years ago? Is it still being manufactured?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 12 MAY 94 00:17:00 GMT
Subject: Local Competition -- Outside Plant vs Dialtone


With the recent discussion about local (dialtone) competition, and the
problems associated with possible duplication of local loop
facilities, portability of local numbers (and associated problems with
database size and access times, etc.), etc., it occurs to me that it
might perhaps be interesting to consider splitting the LEC functions
into an outside plant company, and (any number of) dial tone
providers.

Any dial tone provider would have to co-locate their switches at the
local loop termination point, or have a POP there.  The outside plant
company would maintain the local loops, and have a static switch that
associated each local loop with one dial tone provider's switch.

There would be no need for a global database of local number
assignments, since each local number prefix would continue to map to
one CO.  At the CO, the mapping between local loops and dial tone
switches would be done.

The outside plant company could be owned by the dial tone providers
jointly, or could bill separately.

This would allow for the continuance of the natural monopoly on local
loops and other outside plant, while allowing different companies to
compete in providing dial tone and features.

Comments?


Randall Gellens      [e-mail]
Net**2 656-6350      (Please forward bounces to
Mail Stop MV 237     [e-mail])

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

Subject: Automated Response Systems
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:13:51 GMT
From: Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]>


The following appeared in a newsletter I receive. Names deleted to
protect the guilty:

  We call technical support. XXXXXX has one of those automated phone
support services where you navigate through cascading menus by pressing
numbers on the phone.

  You know the kind. For software support press 1, for hardware support
press 2. Press 1 if your machine is a XXXXXX, press 2 if it is a XXXXXX. If
you are a non-smoker who likes long walks on the beach and quiet evenings in
front of a fire, press 1; if your name is Phil, hang up. You get the basic
idea.

  The problem is, none of the cascading choices seem to apply to our case.
So we press the numbers that play "Mary Had a Little Lamb" and hope to wind
up with someone who can fix our problem.


Clive D.W. Feather      Santa Cruz Operation
[e-mail]           Croxley Centre
Phone: [phone]  Hatters Lane, Watford
Fax:   [phone]  WD1 8YN, United Kingdom

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

From: [e-mail] (Brandon Whichard)
Subject: How Much of AT&T's Network is Fiber?
Organization: SMU - School of Engineering and Applied Science
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:01:09 GMT


I have heard that AT&T's network consists mostly of Digital Radio
Equipment.  Does anyone know how much of AT&T's network is Fiber?
Some of AT&T's major competitors seem to imply that AT&T is slow in
updating it's network to more advanced equipment.  I am just curious
about what the truth really is.  Can anyone shed some light on this
subject?


Brandon   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Strategic)
Subject: Pre-Paid Long-Distance Calling Cards
Date: 12 May 1994 08:16:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


I am doing a comparative study on the packaging of pre-paid long
distance calling card services for both business and residential
subscribers.  I am interested in price points and unique selling
benefits, package naming, hidden disadvantages. If anyone else is
interested I will be happy to e-mail compiled information or post it
here if applicable.  Please respond via e-mail to [e-mail].

Thanks for any assistance.


Larry Gonzales   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Jacobson)
Subject: Email Address Wanted For NTIA Asst. Secy Larry Irving
Date: 12 May 1994 06:57:17 GMT
Organization: WORLDESIGN, Seattle


If there is an NTIA host or one in Commerce Department, and Larry has
an address at one or the other, I would appreciate learning of it.
He's an old friend from congressional days.  Thanks.  Please use email
to me.


Bob Jacobson

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 09:00:41 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Mark W. Earle)
Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding


I'm in the process of closing out my cellular account with
Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems of Corpus Christi, TX.  In the last
bill was an insert sheet (yellow) indicating that starting with the
July bill, calls forwarded would incur full airtime for the duration
of each forwarded call. Presumably, the set up "star" code call to
activate and deactivate forwarding will now cost a minute also.

This is a significant change -- previously, there was no call to set
up the forwarding (or turn it off) and no charge for the forwarded
calls. Many folks used this as a super local area extender ... forward
your phone, dial your cell phone number, and talk free for a long time
to an area that was a LD/Toll call from the regular phone.

Combined with the .02/min "access charge" implemented last year, it
seems the cellular providers are slowly charging for more and more
things.

It should be noted that some roaming costs, though, have dropped in
the last five months. The per minute charge is lower, and the daily
fee is not charged. But this is not "universal" you still have to
check where you intend to roam with the carrier and find out the up to
the minute info. Of course the roam rate and daily fees (or lack
thereof) influence greately how and how much the phone is used while
out of town.


Mark Earle [e-mail]

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

From: uswnvg!uswnvg.com![e-mail] (Carl Jones)
Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding
Date: 12 May 94 01:06:07 GMT


In response to the question of which cellular company doesn't charge
for forwarded calls, I can answer that US West Cellular does not
charge for airtime on any calls forwarded from a cell phone or for the
actual call to forward the phone itself.

I speak for everyone in a twenty mile radius around me.
Any questions?  E-Mail [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Musselman)
Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding
Date: 12 May 1994 00:56:19 -0700
Organization: North County Communications, San Diego, California


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin)
writes:

> What company is it that doesn't charge anything on the forwarded call?

U.S. West Cellular (in Both San Diego and Phoenix)


[e-mail]   John C. Musselman
Software Developer/System Analyst

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works!
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 07:51:08 GMT


[e-mail] (Bill Hofmann) writes:

> This has been the case in 510 since October.

I wish I had known that then. I tried it when I saw the initial
posting on this thread, and it worked like a charm. I'm CONSTANTLY
screwing up, as I travel between 415 and 510 several times a week, and
I always forget when calling my girlfriend from my house that I don't
have to dial 1-510.  Now I can, and it makes no difference. Cool!


Andrew Laurence              Oakland, California USA
[e-mail]     Pacific Daylight Time (GMT-7)

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 06:59:56 EDT
From: Gregory P. Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works!


On Thu, 5 May 1994 14:59:35, [e-mail]  wrote:

>> "NPA 703 in Virginia will allow 7D Inter-NPA local calls, except
>> when calling INTO the Washington metro area.  Both 10D and 1+10D
>> will work for ALL local calls from NPA 703."

> The distinction I gather from Bellcore's table is that 7D local calls
> to other NPAs will work from 703, so long as the destination is not
> the Metro area -- for example, into NPA 804.  The actual term they use
> for the 7D-not-permitted is Foreign NPA Local calls to the "WMEA".  So
> what is WMEA?

I'll bet it's the Washington Metropolitan E_____ Area," whatever "E__"
stands for.  I've hard it referred to as, "Washington Metropolitan
Calling Area," "Wash Met," or just "The Met."  It's a land area roughly
15 to 18 miles in radius from the White House within which all calls are
charged at the local rate regardless of state or area code.

Nobody has *just* this smallish area as their local calling area.  The
local calling area from any phone with a 202 area code consists of the
Wash Met, *plus* seven additional rate areas in Virginia, *plus* three
additional rate areas in Maryland.

The additional rate areas in Virginia are Engleside (Bell Atlantic
Virginia), Lorton (GTE Virginia), Lorton Metro (GTE), Braddock (BA),
Herndon (BA), Dulles (GTE) and Dulles Metro (GTE).  The additional rate
areas in Maryland are Gaithersburg, Ashton and Laurel.  Rate areas may
contain more than one central office and more than one prefix and may
serve towns not named in their names.

> Is all of NPA 301 in WMEA from 703's perspective?

No.  From area 703's perspective, only the Wash Met portion of 301 can
ever be a local call -- and that only occurs if the originating 703
phone is *also* a Wash Met phone.  Don't let LATAs confuse this.  The
Washington LATA is larger than the 202 local calling area which is, in
turn, larger than the Wash Met.

> What about 410?

 From anywhere in 703, all calls to 410 are inter-LATA, inter-state,
toll calls.  None of 410 is local to 703.  Actually, from DC (202),
all of 410 is also an inter-LATA, inter-state, toll call.  Curiously,
the local calling area from DC does not extend any further east into
Maryland than it does from a Wash Met 703 number.

Obviously, all these little rules apply only to *landline* phones, not
cellular, whose local calling areas span multiple states and LATAs.
Also, these rules apply to the rate area associated with the area code
and prefix.  Due to the heavy use of foreign exchange service, many
peoples' phones are served by a distant prefix that would not serve
their land area unless they ordered and paid extra for it.


Greg Monti    Arlington, Virginia, USA    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 21:16:53 HST
From: NetSurfer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: NetSurfer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digital Technology Conference in Paradise - E Komo Mai (Come Join Us)


           " PNC - People, Networks & Communication '94 "
                   " Turning 21 - A Journey to Maturity "
                     __________________________________

        Topic:  The Emergence of Application, Information Technology &
                        Policy for the 21st Century.

                  Venue:  Mid-Pacific Conference Center,
              Hilton Hawaiian Village Resort.

                       Dates:  October 11 - 14, 1994.

            Sponsored by The Pacific Network Consortium Limited.

The Pacific Network Consortium Ltd., an EMERGING Not-for-Profit
Regional Network Services Provider, invites you to enjoy our
hospitality and join us in Hawaii for PNC - People, Networks and
Communication '94.

PNC '94 will facilitate a close exploration to the Building of the
Information Super-Highway and examine the essential ingredients to one
being a members among a larger; responsible and informed participant
citizenry in a Global Informatic Society.  This Conference will lay
focus to the various concerns as it relates to participation,
management, policy, operations, security and factors of collaboration
within and through the NII-National Information Infrastructure; here
in the United States, and the similar structures in forming - elsewhere
in the World.

A TASTE of subject areas that will be featured ...

  O-     What will NII mean to me?

  O-     When will it really be here?

  O-     Who will fund the NII?

  O-     Who will be the large stakeholders?

  O-     What role will & must the Government have in developing the NII?

  O-     What does NII mean in terms of Global Citizenry, Fueling
         Competitiveness in Industry and Education?

  O-     How must the Educational culture evolve to practically react
         with existing and emerging informatic technology?

  O-     What are some of the problems associated with the youthfulness
         in the deployment of Networked Information Systems and their use?

  O-     What is the driving force behind the large scale proliferation
         of information systems?

  O-     What are the benefits of Networking and Inter-Networking?

  O-     How can companies benefit from connectivity to Global Networks?

  O-     What is the promise of an Electronic Government?

  O-     What is Community Computing;  is it an EQUALIZING force for
         citizenry within the NII?  ( MYTH & REALITY )

  O-     How will information services be structured in the 21st Century?

  O-     How will public libraries of the 21st Century service their
         patrons?

  O-     What is the need for Law & Order on the Information
     Super-Highway?

  O-     Who & What, will govern the authenticity of information?


Confirmed Speakers who have agreed to present as of 04/12/1994.

Ms. Gale Warshawsky       -  Coordinator;  Computer Security Awareness
                 Education & the Lawrence Livermore National
                 Laboratory (LLNL) Computer Security Outreach
                 Program.

Mr. Charlie Atterbury     -  Ret., Dir.: Information, Computer & Network
                 Security;  The Eastman Kodak Company.

Dr. Vinton G. Cerf        -  Senior Vice-President;  Data Architecture, MCI.

Dr. William Washburn      -  Executive Director;  CIX - The Commercial
                 Internet EXchange.

Mr. Thomas Kappock        -  Vice-Chairman;  Bancorp Hawaii, Inc.
                             Bancorp Hawaii, Inc., is the largest Financial
                             Institution in the PACIFIC Region with Assets
                             exceeding U.S $12.5 Billion.

Ms. Linda Delzeit         -  Administrator;  Academy One Educational Network,
                             NPTN - National Public Telecomputing Network.

Mr. H. Leonard Fisher     -  Ret. Manager;  Specialized Libraries of LLNL
                 and Senior Adjunct Professor of
                 Telecomunications Management;  School of
                 Technology & Industry, Golden Gate University.

Mr. Scott Charney, Esq.   -  United States Attorney-in-Charge;  Computer
                 Crime Unit, United States Department of Justice.

Dr. Thomas Saka           -  Information Specialist;  State of Hawaii -
                 Department of Education: IRM - Information
                 Resource Management Division.

Dr. Hank Becker           -  College of Education, University of California
                 at Irvine.

Mr. Christopher Baker     -  Consultant;  IAEA - International Atomic Energy
                 Agency, Network & Systems Administration:
                             DEP - Department of Educational Programs,
                 Argonne National Laboratory.

Mr. Michael Higgins       -  Chief;  Office of Counter Measures, DISA -
                 Defense Information Systems Agency.

Ms. Gail Thackeray, Esq.  -  Special Prosecutor;  Maricopa County - Phoenix,
                 Arizona Prosecutor's Office & The Organized
                 Crime Division.

Mr. James Lewis             -  Liaison Officer;  NIIT - The National
                 Information Infrastructure Testbed Consortia.

Mr. Bruce Nelson          -  Novell Inc.

Mr. Kenneth Van Wyk       -  Administrator;  Computer Security, Incident
                 Handling & Interdiction, DISA - Defense
                 Information Systems Agency.

Dr. Richard Smith         -  Director of Instructional Technology, Huston
                             Independent School District;  Huston, Texas.

Mr. Walter Pioli          -  Director;  National Network Services, GTE.


Mr. William Cook Esq.     -  Villian, Brinks, Olds, Hofer, Gilson & Lione.
                             (Mr. Cook is a former United States Attorney;
                 now practicing in the area of Information
                 technology and evolving policies within, and
                 associated with, the NII - National Information
                 Infrastructure.

Ms. Bonnie Bracey         -  Member: Presidential Advisory Council for the
                             development of the United States - National
                             Information Infrastructure.


Invitations Forward:

Mr. Stanley Young         -  Officer;  Office of Counter Intelligence, DIA -
                             Defense Intelligence Agency.


               CONFERENCE REGISTRATION TEMPLATE:
            ___________________________________

Mr./Mrs./Ms./Miss: ______________________________________________________

Preferred Name on Name Tag: _____________________________________________

Organization Name: ______________________________________________________

Postal Address (Line 1): ________________________________________________

Postal Address (Line 2): ________________________________________________

Province/State: _________________________________________________________

Country & Postal/Zip Code: ______________________________________________

Title: __________________________________________________________________

Telephone & Telecopier Numbers: _________________________________________

Electronic Mail Address: ________________________________________________

Form of Payment:  [ ]  CHEQUE    [ ]  BANK DRAFT    [ ]  MONEY ORDER.


All Financial Instruments MUST be made Payable, and can be sent to:

          The Pacific Network Consortium Ltd.
        ___________________________________

          Suite 814
          415 Nahua Street
          Honolulu, Hawaii  96815.
              United States of America.
          -------------------------

                ADVANCE REGISTRATION FEES:
    (Registration MUST be received;  on, or before AUGUST 5, 1994)
             _______________________________

             FULL -  3 1/2 Day Conference.


GENERAL ADMISSION.                      : U.S.$ 690.00 (*)
Members of Non-Profit & Educational Organizations.    : U.S.$ 490.00 (*,%)
Students. (U.S.$ 20.00 / Day)                : U.S.$  70.00 (%)
( Fees reflect the cost of conference sessions ONLY.  Food & Beverage
  Services within Conference Sessions, and External Tours and Functions are
  NOT included )

Members of the K-12 Community - for K-12 Sessions ONLY.    : U.S.$ 150.00 (*,%)

    -- SEE below, for conditions regarding (*) and (%) --

                LATE REGISTRATION FEES:
                (after AUGUST 5, 1994)
             _____________________________

             FULL - 3 1/2 Day Conference.

GENERAL ADMISSION.                    : U.S.$ 890.00 (*)
Members of Non-Profit & Educational Organizations.    : U.S.$ 790.00 (*,%)
Students. (U.S.$ 20.00 / Day)                : U.S.$  70.00 (%)
( Fees reflect the cost of conference sessions ONLY.  Food & Beverage
  Services within Conference Sessions, and External Tours and Functions are
  NOT included )

Members of the K-12 Community - for K-12 Sessions ONLY.    : U.S.$ 250.00 (*,%)

            Please NOTE Conditions:
            _______________________
  *

   1) Food & Beverage Services within Conference Sessions are included.
   2) External Tours and Functions are NOT included.

  %

   1) Proof of Affiliation is Required - for rate determination.

            Accomodations:
            ______________

For your convenience - The Pacific Network Consortium Ltd., have
made available, through special arrangements with HILTON HOTELS,
quality and spacious accomodations.

The Hilton Hawaiian Village sports fine accomodations within our
Island Paradise, at a GREAT value.  To receive the Special Rate
Extension, Please call 1-800-445-8667 & REFER to: "PNC - People,
Networks & Communications '94 ".

The rates are as follows:

            PNC '94:            Current Rates:

Garden View        U.S.$ 140.00 + Tax        U.S.$ 225.00
Partial Ocean View    U.S.$ 155.00 + Tax        U.S.$ 250.00
Ocean View        U.S.$ 170.00 + Tax        U.S.$ 275.00

            Travel.
            _______

United Airlines has been chosen as the OFFICIAL CARRIER for " PNC -
People, Networks & Communication '94.

United Airlines, is pleased to offer a 5% discount off the LOWEST
applicable fare, including 1st (FIRST) class, or 10% Discount off the
UNRESTRICTED BUA COACH fare; through a special arrangement with The
Pacific Network Consortium Ltd.,

Help support PNC - People, Networks & Communications '94.  Secure your
reservations with United Airlines; offering you the MOST in
convenience & flexibility with the LARGEST number of seats (5100) PER
DAY to HONOLULU.  To obtain the best fares or schedule Inform- ation,
please call UNITED AIRLINES Specialized Meeting Reservation Center at
1-800-521-4041.  Reservation Specialists are on duty 7 days a week,
from 7:00 A.m. to 10:00 P.m., Eastern Time (U.S.)

Please be sure to REFERRENCE I.D. number " 548NY ".  As a UNITED
Meeting Attendee, You WILL qualify for special discounts on HERTZ
Rental Cars.  Mileage Plus members will receive FULL credit for all
miles flown to HONOLULU.  For your convenience, United will mail your
tickets or you can pick up your tickets at your travel agent's desk or
an United Airlines ticket office.

            Contact Information:
            ____________________


    Conference Chairman:  Dr. Ernest Kho, Jr.
    Steering Committee Chairman: Mr. Robert Mathews.
    Telephone: [phone]
    E.mail: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #215
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24078;
          12 May 94 15:42 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29031; Thu, 12 May 94 11:52:06 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29022; Thu, 12 May 94 11:52:04 CDT
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 11:52:04 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #216

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 May 94 11:52:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 216

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: What is the Mercury Button? (Stefek Zaba)
    Re: What is the Mercury Button? (Keith McNeill)
    Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone (Fran Menzel)
    Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone (K.M. Peterson)
    Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Phone Line (Bennett Kobb)
    Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Phone Line (Mike Sullivan)
    Re: Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers (Paul Robinson)
    Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (C. McGuinness)
    Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Rich Osman)
    Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Bob Wilson)
    Re: GSM and Airbags (Ben Burch)
    Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? (Jon Sreekanth)
    Re: NANP and Switches (James Slupsky)
    Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop? ([e-mail])
    Re: Ricky Finds Old Phone (Dave Thompsoni)
    Re: Ricky Finds Old Phone (David Breneman)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Stefek Zaba)
Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button?
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:28:25 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, England


John Perkins ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Will someone please tell me what the Mercury button is?  I suspect
> that it simply sends out a hard-coded sequence of DTMF digits which
> accesses the Mercury network, and one could probably do this manually
> with any phone that generates DTMF if one knew what the sequence was.

You're exactly right, with the tweak of needing a "pause" in there.

The access string goes:

  131 <pause> Your-individual-ten-digit-Mercury-Access-number

followed by the full ten (soon to be 11) digit phone number (no
"local", i.e.  codeless, dialing supported).

Hence, a "Mercury-compatible" phone is one which can be programmed
with a 13-digit-plus-embedded-pause string on a button, and with a
deep enough memory so that pressing the button and going straight on
to dial a phone number (possibly with an international access code),
and possibly stored on another memory button, won't overflow the
internal dialstring memory.

The BT Relate (?) phone/speakerphone/answerphone combo we have meets
these criteria.  Mercury themselves gave me more or less the above
description when I called on their helpline.  All a "Mercury button"
gives you is a nice blue-labelled memory button, and it MIGHT be
sensible enough to do a wait-for-new-dialtone after the initial 131
instead of using a fixed-length pause.  (I find on my local exchange
that a single 0.75s(?) pause works reliably.  Your mileage may
differ).

> Am I right about this?   And does anyone know what the access sequence
> for Mercury is?

Yes, and yes. :-)

> They have a perfectly good BT "Tribune" phone set that has some
> special attachments for the hearing impaired, but are under the
> impression that they can't use it if they want to use Mercury. (I have
> a feeling that they don't really need the Mercury phone set at all.)

Strictly speaking, ANY DTMF phone is Mercury-compatible, since you can
always do the 131, pause, personal-code thing manually; however a
memory-buttoned, dial-pausable, deep-enuff-memory phone is needed to
be "Mercury-friendly".


Stefek

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 10:36:44 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Keith McNeill)
Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button?


> My parents in London (Chessington, actually) have just recently signed
> up with Mercury and have been persuaded (by Mercury, presumably) to
> have a Mercury phone set installed.  This phone has a "Mercury button"
> on it to access the Mercury network.

To Access Mercury what you need to do is dial (ALL in DMTF)

    131<PAUSE>0123456789

where 131 is the mercury access number, kinda like the US 10XXX Long
distance access numbers.

where 0123456789 ... is your mercury access code.

What you need is a phone that you can store the above sequence with
the pause.  The trick is the pause as not all phones with memory allow
you to store a pause.  I used my US phone over there with Mercury as I
could store a pause in the memory.

So, to make a long story short ... a Mercury Button Phone is little
more than a phone that you can store a pause in it's memory.


Keith D. McNeill          SunGard Capital Markets
[phone]           560 Lexington Ave, 10th Floor
[e-mail]   New York, NY, 10022 USA

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

From: f.s.menzel <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 09:45:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone


The phones you're looking for were sold to AT&T business customers for
use with its PBX and Key telephone systems.  The distinctive handset,
called the "R" handset, was used on several models, including both
digital and analog.  With their futuristic look, these phones became
very popular with movie makers, but did not find universal acceptance
with everyday users.  As they are no longer in our product line, I
suggest you contact a reseller (other postings here have provided
information as to where the resellers advertize).

Unless you're planning to put the phone behind an AT&T system, you
probably want to be sure that you stick with the low power analog
version (model 7102), as the digital version speaks a proprietary
protocol.


Fran Menzel 908-957-5615
AT&T Global Communications Systems

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

From: [e-mail] (K. M. Peterson)
Subject: Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone
Date: 12 May 1994 14:48:40 GMT
Organization: KMPeterson/Boston


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]-duesseldorf.
de (Karim.Farrag) writes:

> Specific features: narrow receiver, the speech unit of the receiver
> is bent almost 90 degrees; the receiver is shaped like an L , wire
> phone, mostly seen in black colour.

Sounds like the AT&T 7101 set.  No longer manufactured by AT&T; I
posted a query here about three months ago asking if anyone had any
idea who still carried them, but no responses.

Note that the 7101 is a "standard" set.  Very similar, sharing many of
the same characteristics is the AT&T Merlin phone system.


K. M. Peterson
email: [e-mail]
phone: [phone] voice
       [phone] fax

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

From: [e-mail] (Bennett Z. Kobb)
Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential
Organization: New Signals Research
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 13:59:20 GMT


The FCC has been very clear on its position about telephone interference.

The agency says that "filters cannot be relied upon to eliminate tele-
phone interference."

They recommend only two products: phones from TCE Laboratories of
Canyon Lake, TX (210 899 4575) and Pro Distributors of Lubbock TX (800
658 2027).

These are what the FCC informally calls the "bullet-proof"
phones.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael D. Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line
Date: 12 May 1994 01:50:54 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


[e-mail] (Paul N. Bates) writes:

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

>> My home is wired for two residential telephone lines.  Because of my
>> proximity to an am radio transmitter (am 1550khz), many of my audio
>> and telephone devices suffer from "radio noise", from that one station
>> only though.  Some days it is worse than others, some days there is no
>> interference at all.

This is apparently an increasingly common occurrence, prompting the
FCC to issue an information sheet that lists two phones that have
tested as being highly resistant to RF interference.  I don't have the
info at hand, but it might be available on ftp.fcc.gov.


Michael D. Sullivan  INTERNET E-MAIL TO:  also: [e-mail]
Washington, D.C.     [e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 15:43:12 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


> I have been given the 1-800-xxx-xxxx numbers of four companies in the
> US that I need to contact -- unfortunately I do not have any other
> number for them, and was hoping that someone in the US could tell me
> either the normal number or a fax number for them.

I called the numbers and asked them, explaining that "a customer of
mine in the U.K. wanted a dialable number for them."  All of them gave
out their local voice number right away:

                      Your number     Number I got by calling them
> Smart Micro :      1-800-ROM-BIOS   NO ANSWER
> Bios Upgrades:     1-800-800-2467   [phone]
> Cmos Solutions:    1-800-266-7462   [phone]
> Rom Bios Upgrades: 1-800-541-1943   [phone]

> (All I do know is that they are supposed to be in the CA phone books!!
> -- not a lot of help in the UK ! )

Note that the second entry is a Massacusetts number, not California
and might not be locatable in California.  Also, 818 is in Los
Angeles, while 805 is about 100 miles away towards Santa Barbara.

Also "being in the CA phone books" is a tall order; there are probably
50 or 60 volumes if all the phone books in California are included.

I hope this helps you.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: marks![e-mail] (Charles McGuinness)
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 10:11:00 EDT
Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program


> In an effort to thwart would-be counterfeit phone users, Cellular One
> just started up an anti-fraud program.

My wife's cellphone was cloned recently. She was more or less required
to join the PIN before you call program when getting her phone
reactivated (after they detected the fraud and deactivated).

> Apparently, many (though not all) roaming areas work with this fraud
> protection program.

When she was roaming in CT, she could call away without activating her PIN.
So, when 50 miles from home, the fraud protection program was useless.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are we to assume then ...
> that when one starts out each morning it is necessary to use the
> *560 unlock thing as part of making the first call of the day?   PAT]

That is correct.  In fact, every time you wait more than the time out
between making calls, you have to unlock.

Given that my wife was strong armed into signing up, I would expect
all customers to be forced to PIN before they dial before too long.
The users of the system are getting to share the inconvenince of the
cell system's inherent design flaws :-(.

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 00:38:53 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program


Somebody (I forget who) wrote:

> Yes ... according to Cell One, once you turn on the phone, you need to
> dial the unlock code -- *560 + PIN (SND) -- before making your first
> call.  In that this only needs to be done before the first call and
> since this can be simplified greatly via most phones' speed dialing,
> Cellular One tries to convince us that this isn't really an inconvenience.
> I'm apt to agree.

I see two problems with this scheme.

1) If a significant number of people store the access code in their phone,
stolen phones are a valuable commodity.

2) If I time out every twenty minutes, the required occurance of pin
transmissions is quite high.  All I need to do is snatch a PIN
transmission and I get everything I need to defraud (esn/pin/min).
Yeah I know, not *every* transmission contains the ESN, but how much
you want to lay on the fact that the ESN will be transmitted in this
initial call.  Many systems set their customer phones to transmit it
by default.

On the whole, it seems to introduce substantial customer inconvenience
without adding a lot of security.  I *do* think it's a good idea for
compromise MIN/ESN pairs, though.


[e-mail]       (Rich Osman)         SwRI didn't say it, I did.
[phone] (w)                   [phone] (h;v/msg/fax)

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Wilson)
Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 13:24:53 GMT


Alan M. Gallatin ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Here's a new one ... saw a brochure for this at a Cellular One center
> on Long Island yesterday.

> In an effort to thwart would-be counterfeit phone users, Cellular One
> just started up an anti-fraud program.  A customer participating will
> simply pick a four digit PIN.  Usage is something like this:

> If you dial *56 + PIN (SND) the fraud protection is turned on.
> Cellular One will refuse to complete any calls from that phone EXCEPT
> 611 and 911.  Incoming calls, however, still work.  Dialing *560 + PIN
> (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls.  This is, of
> course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself.

I fail to see how this is going to stop fraudulent use of cellular
phones.  Everything that the phone does to communicate to its carrier
is done over the air.  It would be safe to assume that the steps
needed to be taken to 'clone' a phone would require only one more
step.  Instead of grabbing just the ESN/NAM pairs, it seems possible
to grab the 'fraud protection' sequence as well.  Unless there is some
method of encryption, this seems no more helpful than adding another
lock on your door that can be picked anyway.

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

From: Ben Burch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GSM and Airbags
Organization: Motorola, Inc.
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 10:01:59 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Bill Tighe, [e-mail]
writes:

> ...  Some Audis in the early 80s would respond to RF by having the
> cruise control go to full throttle while the ABS disabled the brakes!

Ah, Bill, do you have any pointers to documentation on this?  I
believe that the causes of the (fatal) Audi "unintended acceleration"
events have always been in considerable doubt.  Audi claims that it is
"driver error", since one can always override the throttle with the
brakes, but since I have seen other cars have a simultaneous brake and
throttle failure, I have always wondered.


Ben Burch              Motorola Wireless Data Group:
[e-mail]  Makers of the Envoy(R) Personal
                       Wireless Communicator

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth)
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts?
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 10:26:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That has been the case in Canada for quite
 ...
> speaker turned off all the time and as a result don't even realize they
> are connecting to a live person in errror instead of another modem. I
> would rather have seen a rule saying that if voice was detected instead
> of carrier, the speaker would automatically turn on regardless of its
> setting and play the intercept message (or bewildered human saying 'hello'

Or the modem should detect voice and put out a AT-command like
response ("VOICE") which would cause the comm software to cease, just
like a "NO ANSWER" timeout. Shouldn't be hard for the DSP to detect
voice.  Do common modems provide any such voice indication?

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

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 00:48:36 +0700
From: [e-mail] (James Slupsky)
Subject: Re: NANP and Switches


Paul A. Lee wrote in his article:

> Different software routines, larger tables, more memory, and more
> processor power are going to be needed in many PBXs to handle the
> complexity left by the destruction of those assumptions. _Exactly_ how
> that complexity affects a particular model of PBX at a particular
> location is the crucial question. The answers will vary widely, and
> will be accurately determined only with careful, individual analysis.

My comments were directed specifically for Northern Telecom Meridian
PBX's, and are based on information directly from the folks at
Northern Telecom.  The Meridian switch does no further processing of
digits when "9" is dialed (unless you have specified this as your
NARS access code), except to determine if the call should be toll
restricted, or if it should output the call record to the CDR port.
That determination is made based the presence of a "1" or "0" as the
first OR second digit.

Mr. Lee also writes:

> CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially
> in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc..

I don't believe this.  The whole purpose of the new NANP was to change
from NNX to NXX, and to allow NXX type NPA's.  All switch routing
software was designed to recognize that an NPA was N0X or N1X, and the
CO code was NNX.

In the original post, it was specified that the system had DOD and DID
trunks, but did not have a tie-trunk network, or any other low-cost
trunking.  Thus, why would they have LCR?


Regards,

James Slupsky, P.Eng.    ([e-mail])   [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh yes, indeed, there have been exchanges
like N0X around here in Chicago for several years now. For example, 312-508
and 312-407 are both exchanges I call on a fairly regular basis. I don't
know about smaller, less populated areas, but Chicago and Los Angeles have
had these for a long time.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 09:02:12 GMT


Jay Hennigan ([e-mail]) wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Dick O'Connor) writes:

>> Strange thing happened recently on my second of two residential lines.
>> Suddenly one day the voice mail card stopped answering on that line,
>> but when I switched lines it worked fine. Handsets that ring just fine
>> on our first line stopped ringing on our second line in tests.  Yet,
>> if I called the second line from the first, I hear the "ring", and if
>> my kid picks up a phone attached to the second line, it answers and we
>> can talk.

>> Is voltage somehow involved in "ringing" so that a decrease would
>> cause to small a *something* for devices like modem cards and handsets
>> to respond to?  Where does this happen, and what's the fix?

> Ringing is a low-frequency AC signal applied to the line (Typically 90
> volts at 20 Hertz).  Tell the repair desk that "ringing voltage is not
> being applied".  They will likely find the problem to be the line
> equipment (printed circuit card in modern exchanges) feeding your
> line.

If the above call to the local TELCO doesn't work please submit
private e-mail and I will give you the answer you can then decide if
you want to make it public after it is tried ... BTW if it is what I
suspect it is be prepared for the other line to have the same problem
shortly ....


Butch alias [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do tell us more!  PAT]

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

From: Thompson, Dave <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ricky Finds Old Phone
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 02:02:00 PDT


> (Reminds you of the recent incident of someone not knowing how
> to use a rotary phone.)

Probably the Mar 31 post by Bob Frankston about his 11-year-old son
encountering a rotary dial for the first time, described as an example
of cultural dependence in user interface design.  In TELECOM Digest
14.158 and RISKS Digest 15.72.

I have another problem and wonder if it's common: I've "learned" some
frequently-used #s by the pattern of my fingers on a DTMF pad, like
touch-typing.  Once when stuck at a rotary-dial payphone, I had to
imagine a 3x4 grid and "dial" on it to redetermine the number!

I've also had co-workers be unable to give me a number they call
daily, because they put it in their PBX speed-dial lists and then
forgot, and we can't find any "display speed-dial" feature (ATT Sys75
g1).  Presumably users of telco abbreviated dialing features or
(some?)  cell or convenience phones etc. could have the same
"problem".

> ... When did the suggestion about 555-xxxx come in? ...

As I recall, all-digit exchange codes came in around 1970 and I
remember hearing non-555 numbers in movies/TV for several years after
that; I would guess 1975.

Somewhat related to which, in TELECOM Digest 14.185 (Apr 27), PAT
described Enterprise service as largely obsoleted by INWATS/800.  I
recall some Enterprise numbers being heavily advertised about 1980 in
the St Louis metropolitan or "bi-state" MO/IL area; possibly because
this spans a state, LATA, and RBOC boundary, it was more difficult to
get 800 coverage of *only* the nearby parts of these two states?
Although the pre-breakup RBOCs were *supposed* to cooperate closely <g>.


Dave Thompson, [e-mail]
Logica North America, [phone]

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

From: daveb@jaws (David Breneman)
Subject: Re: Ricky Finds Old Phone
Date: 12 May 94 10:12:18 GMT
Organization: Digital Systems International, Redmond WA|Yq


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This episode is another one available
> in the series from Columbia Video. Lucille Ball once noted that even
> had her child been a girl (in those days, pre-birth sex detirmination
> had not been developed as a medical technique) they had decided to go
> ahead with a boy on the show. The airing of that show was timed in
> such a way that Ms. Ball gave birth an hour or so before the pre-recorded
> show (usually "Lucy" was done live, before an audience, but not that
> night) was aired. Red Skelton's comedy show came on CBS right after
> "Lucy" each week, and that night as the show started, Skelton announced
> that Ms. Ball had successfully given birth about two hours earlier.

Not quite true, Pat.  Actually, although I Love Lucy was *filmed* in
front of a live studio audience, the show itself was never actually
broadcast live.  This was in fact Desi Arnaz' major contribution to
the Television Art (not as oxymoronic a phrase in the 50s as it is
today :-)  ).  Three synchronized 35mm cameras recorded each scene,
covering different shots just like in a television production.  Then,
the film was cut to produce the finished show.  This offered several
advantages.

First, it allowed the director and editor to pick their shots in the
relatively relaxed atmosphere of the cutting room not the control
room.  It allowed retakes for blown lines.  It allowed tighter timing.
And, it allowed a much improved picture and sound quality over the
only other means of recording for television, kinescopes (the VTR
wasn't introduced until 1956).  Just compare the quality of an I Love
Lucy show with one of it's kinescoped live contemporaries, such as
Your Show of Shows or Milton Burle.  When Paramount bought out Desilu
in the late 60s, they adopted Arnaz' live-to-film concept for many of
their own shows, such as The Odd Couple, Happy Days, and much later,
Cheers.  (Mary Tyler Moore also made use of Anraz' technique in many
of the programs her production company produced.)  He may have been
Cuban Pete, King of the Rhumba Beat to most viewers, but Desi Arnaz
also knew a lot about televison, and was one of its unsung pioneers.


David Breneman                        Email: [e-mail]
System Administrator,                 Voice: 206 881-7544  Fax: [phone]
Product Development Platforms
Digital Systems International, Inc.        Redmond, Washington,  U. S. o' A.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, but she did give birth at almost
the same time the show was being aired on which she was in the hospital
giving birth. And not knowing for sure what to say about the new baby
in the show that aired that night, they elected to make it a boy. After
debating whether or not in subsequent shows (had it actually been a
girl) to just ignore that inconsistency and change the newborn to a
girl in future episodes of "Lucy" their decision finally was to keep
a boy in future shows regardless of the real outcome.  Yes, television
was entirely different in the 1950-60 era than it is now. So many of
the old, very good radio shows were converted to television productions
in those days, sometimes keeping the radio version going as well.

One remark by Eve Arden sticks in my mind: She did 'Our Miss Brooks' on
radio for quite a few years before it went to television. For the
younger readers, Miss Brooks was a high school English teacher at
a place called Madison High School. She was secretly in love with the
Biology teacher, Mr. Boynton. The school principal was Mr. Osgood Conklin.
The show was a weekly comedy and very much a period piece from the
high schools of America in the 1940's era. Anyhow, Ms. Arden commented
that when they would do the radio show each week they would just do
one run-through of the lines from their scripts, usually an hour or so
before the broadcast, or maybe a second one if they needed it. Then when
it was time to do the show, they went in the studio, sat down and read
the scripts out loud over the air.

You must remember that in the days when radio carried all those programs
since the participants were *heard but not seen* (you, the audience
listening  on the radio had to make your own mental images) all they
did was sit around a table with microphones and read their scripts.
No costumes needed, no background scenery, no memorizing of lines, etc.
Everyone would just sit around the table, reading as it was their turn
to do so with the 'sound man' dropping in the appropriate noises from
time to time (doorbell or phone ringing, automobile starting, etc).
When the shows began getting cut over to television about 1948-50, all
of a sudden everyone had to clean up their act in more ways than one.
Now they had to actually memorize their lines, dress appropriately for
the scene, walk back and forth across a stage, etc. Eve Arden pointed
out that some of the old timers did not like television for the extra
work that it caused them in preparing their shows each week; plus the
fact that many of them thought television was never going to take off
anyway.

Miss Arden said that when 'Miss Brooks' was moved from radio to television
she got fan letters from people who had listened to the show for years
and actually saw her (and the other cast members) for the first time
who said stuff like, " ... I never knew that is what you looked like! .."
Radio, you see, required some imagination on the part of the listener.
Everyone 'knew' in their own mind what the stars of the show looked like,
and 'knew' in their own mind what Madison High School looked like. The
conversion of the old shows from radio to television changed all that.
'I Love Lucy' never was a radio show however, as best I can recall. It
had its beginning on television. Are there *any* of the old radio shows
which moved to television in 1948-50 still around actively being shown?
I know Lucy re-runs are still on, what about 'Father Knows Best' or
Stu Erwin or any of those?  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #216
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24988;
          12 May 94 16:34 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA01079; Thu, 12 May 94 12:51:20 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA01070; Thu, 12 May 94 12:51:18 CDT
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 12:51:18 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #217

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 May 94 12:51:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 217

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    New Members Appointed to Network Reliability Council (Bob Keller)
    FCC Releases Semiannual Study on Telephone Trends (Bob Keller)
    Sprint Frame Relay Information Wanted ([e-mail])
    Re: Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: I Have Some Basic Telecom Questions: HELP! (William H. Sohl)
    Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Ras Tafar)
    Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Drew Dean)
    Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? (Willard Dawson)
    Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? (John Harris)
    Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? (Don Davis)
    Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Attempts? (Mark Brader)
    Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Attempts? (allen0@delphi)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:01:31 EDT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Memebers Appointed to Network Reliability Council


                                             May 12, 1994

    NEW MEMBERS APPOINTED TO THE NETWORK RELIABILITY COUNCIL

     FCC Chairman Reed E. Hundt today announced revisions in the
membership of the Commission's Federal Advisory Committee, the Network
Reliability Council and named Richard C. Notebaert, Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer of Ameritech Corporation, as the new Chairman of the
Council. He thanked retiring Chairman, Paul Henson, for his service
and said "Dick Notebaert will provide continued excellence in leading
the Council to consensus solutions to the issues we face."

     The Council was established in 1992 in response to a number of
large scale outages of the public switched telephone network.  In
letters to existing and new members, Chairman Hundt explained he,
Commissioner Quello and Commissioner Barrett found it necessary to
continue the Council, but to modify its charter and its membership.

     Hundt congratulated the Council on its accomplishments to date,
particularly the publication of its study, "Network Reliability: A
Report to the Nation," and the establishment of an ongoing reliability
monitoring group within the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry
Solutions. He found that continued expert advice was needed to assess
industry efforts to improve network reliability. He also stressed the
need for advice as to whether changes in the industry could threaten
reliability.

     The revised charter calls on the Council to evaluate the
reliability of network services in the United States on a local and
regional basis; to evaluate potential new risks from new
interconnection arrangements and changing technologies; to evaluate
access to emergency services during network outages; and to collect
data on whether network outages have disproportionate impact on
certain geographic areas or certain demographic groups. The Council is
asked to assemble data and information, perform analysis and provide
advice to the industry and to the Commission on these topics.

     Reflecting the Council's broader mission and its accomplishments
to date, several changes were made in the Council's membership. In
particular, representatives were added from the cable television
industry, the satellite industry, and the emerging personal
communications industry.  Chairman Hundt thanked those members who no
longer would be serving and asked for their continued support.

For further information, contact Jim Keegan at 202/634-1867

1994-1996 NETWORK RELIABILITY COUNCIL (NRC)
===========================================

Richard C. Notebaert, Ameritech, NRC Chairman

Members

Robert E. Allen, AT&T
Decker Anstrom, National Cable Television Association
Morton Bahr, Communications Workers of America
Alex B. Best, Cable Labs
Ron Binz, National Assoc. of State Utilities Consumer Advocates
Ronald L. Bittner, Rochester Telephone
John L. Clendenin, BellSouth
Steven Dorfman, Hughes Space and Communications
Stephen Effros, Cable Telecommunications Association
William T. Esrey, Sprint
William Ferguson, NYNEX
Mathew Flanigan, Telecommunications Industry Association
Heather Gold, Association for Local Telecommunications Services
George H. Heilmeier, Bellcore
Stephen O. Hewlett, NARUC
Gerald F. James, International Communications Association
Charles R. Lee, GTE
Daniel J. Miglio, United States Telephone Association
Richard D. McCormick, US West
Barbara O'Connor, Alliance for Public Technology
C. Alan Peyser, Competitive Telecommunications Association
Philip J. Quigley, Pacific Telesis
Bert C. Roberts, Jr., MCI
John Rose, Organization for the Advancement and Protection
    of Small Telephone Companies
Selby A. Shaver, Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users Group
LTG Alonzo E. Short, Jr., National Communications System,
    U.S. Dept. of Defense
Casimir S. Skrzypczak, Alliance for Telecommunications
    Industry Solutions
Raymond W. Smith, Bell Atlantic
Mark Golden, Personal Communications Industry Association
Thomas Wheeler, Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association
Edward Whitacre, Southwestern Bell

Observers

Larry Irving, National Telecommunications and Information
    Administration, U.S. Dept. of Commerce
Dr. John H. Gibbons, Office of Science and Technology
    Policy, White House

                -FCC-


Bob Keller              Robert J. Keller, P.C.         Tel [phone]
A.R.S. KY3R         Federal Telecommunications Law     Fax [phone]
[e-mail]   finger me for FCC Daily Digest   CompuServe 76100,3333

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:04:06 EDT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: FCC Releases Semiannual Study on Telephone Trends


      FCC RELEASES SEMIANNUAL STUDY ON TELEPHONE TRENDS

     The FCC has released a semiannual report on Trends in Telephone
Service.  The report is a summary of information collected by the
Commission in much more detailed reports.

     This report is available for reference in the Industry Analysis
Division Reference Room, Common Carrier Bureau, 1250 23rd Street,
N.W., Plaza Level.  Copies may be purchased by calling International
Transcription Services, Inc. (ITS) at [phone].  The report can
also be downloaded from the FCC-State Link computer bulletin board at
[phone].

     For further information, contact the Industry Analysis Division,
Common Carrier Bureau, at [phone].

                -FCC-


Bob Keller              Robert J. Keller, P.C.         Tel [phone]
A.R.S. KY3R         Federal Telecommunications Law     Fax [phone]
[e-mail]   finger me for FCC Daily Digest   CompuServe 76100,3333

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

Date: Wed, 11 May 94 12:07 EST
From: Hardwire <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sprint Frame Relay Information Wanted


Our company is looking at Sprint Frame Relay.  Does anyone have any
information on it.  I know of a gopher at Indiana where I pull vendor
information for equipment, but does anyone know of any for long
distance carrier information on frame relay?


Thanks!

[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 12:51:27 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media?
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


The short answer is yes.  The long answer is you need equipment,
primarily equivalent to a voice-mail card on a PC.

Tai Duong <[e-mail]>, writes:

> [My employer wants] to organize "projects" which can contain documents,
> faxes, and stored phone conversations all on hard disk media.  I know
> voice recordings take up lots of disk space but they are willing to buy
> many gigabytes of disk space if necessary.  Money to implement this
> is not really an issue.

Faxes are not too bad, taking probably about 40K per page.

Whether voice takes up "lots" of space is another question.  Carl
Malamud's Internet Talk Radio does 30-minute transmissions that take
about 15 meg, or about 1/2 megabyte per minute of speech.  This is
about right, as the estimates I have are 4-16K per second, depending
on how much fidelity you want and whether the background is important.
At 8K per second, which I believe is virtually local telephone call
quality speech, one minute would take 480K.  I have personally just
purchased a Maxtor 540MB (actual capacity 505MB, or 527,000,000
characters) hard disk for $399, which, for example, could easily hold
six hours of speech data.  It might be possible to use this to index
material, then store it long-term on tape with indexes being kept
around locally, which might be more cost-effective if huge volumes of
sound information are going to be stored long-term.

> Taking it one step further ... they want to be able to play back the
> recorded messages for any particular project to update others on the
> progress of deals.  An advance feature would be to be able to search
> the many recordings from hard disk for words or patterns (eg. for all
> recordings that contain a particular name)

If you will be going into huge volumes and/or long-term holding of
speech, you would be better off to consider something akin to indexing
of information and then storing speech information on 8MM tape with
indexes.  An 8MM tape can hold 2.5 GB of uncompressed data, and costs
about $8.  The drive is about $1500. If the information on the tape
was indexed, then finding the data is not that difficult.  A jukebox
holding 1,000 8MM tapes can be purchased for about $80,000.  The
average access time for a file on a tape in a jukebox (including time
for robot search) is about three minutes, allowing fairly quick
access.  One $8 tape would then hold perhaps 90 hours of voice
information with indexes.

However, if you need instantaneous access to lots of voice data, then
they will have to go with more expensive hard disks.  But a combined
disk-tape system may be possible if near-line access is acceptable as
opposed to immediate access.  And it will hold several thousand times
as much information at a fraction of the cost.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: I Have Some Basic Telecom Questions: HELP!
Date: 12 May 1994 11:19:22 -0400
Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore)


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

> I recently posted a message requesting help with Telecom ACRONYMS.
> The response to my message was huge and I thank everyone who responded
> with suggestions.

> I am still researching the area of Telecom and have learned a lot in
> the past few weeks.  I obtained Newton's Telecom Dictionary which is a
> BIG help.  I still am having trouble with a few topics.  I am aware of
> what many are but do not know enough about Telecomm to understand many
> of the technical descriptions.

> 1.) Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) concept and the basic (2B+D)
>    service.

For this and other questions on ISDN, contact the Bellcore NISDN
Hotline:  [phone]-ISDN.

We have a free info package we'll send you and we can answer questions
personally.  Live coverage is between 8:00am and 5pm EDST, weekdays.

Also consider subscribing to the comp.dcom.isdn newsgroup. That
newsgroup has a very detailed FAQ that is posted bi-weekly.

Lastly, try FTP to info.bellcore.com and browse some of the material
available in the subdirectory: /pub/isdn


> 6.) Instead of using a bridge to connect two identical networks, why don't
> system developers just create one larger network?

Often because the two networks are owned by different entities,
different companies, etc.

> In return, I am going to create a FAQ of all basic questions that I
> answer or get answers to.  It will hopefully lessen the amount of
> questions asked.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may want to check out the FAQ for
> this group. The telecom Frequently Asked Questions file is sent out
> automatically to each new subscriber to the mailing list and is also
> posted on comp.dcom.telecom from time to time. In addition you can
> get a copy from the Telecom Archives at lcs.mit.edu by anonymous ftp
> or email server.  PAT]

Ditto Pat's comments, plus my earlier comment about the FAQ in
comp.dcom.isdn


Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Don't forget also the glossaries on file
in the Telecom Archives. These are obtainable using anonymous ftp like
the other files there, but they are also searchable on an interactive
basis using email. Ask me for a copy of the Telecom Archives Email In-
formation Service help file to learn how. Essentially, you use the
command GLOSSARY within your letter to the archives, followed by the
term you want explained. The results are returned by email.   PAT]

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

From: Ras Tafar I <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone?
Organization: Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 13:50:33 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it is illegal, and yes people listen
> illegally to cellular calls. However there is very little risk of fraud
> by passing credit card numbers in this way. One, there has to be someone
> listening to a scanner which is in the proximity of the tower from which
> the message is being transmitted. Two, they have to have their scanner
> land on the channel (out of 832 such channels) during the five seconds
> or so that the card number is being read. Third, credit card verification
> involves reading the number, the expiration date and the amount of the
> sale -- not the name and address of the card holder. Fourth, without having
> physical possession of the card they cannot make purchases in stores.
> Fifth, with only the number but no name or address to go with it they
> cannot very easily engage in mail order fraud. Sixth, without having actual
> possession of the card they cannot see who the issuer of it was -- unless
> they have the list of four digit (starting with three for AMEX, four
> for VISA, five for MC or six for DISCOVER) codes telling which bank
> (or credit grantor) issued the card -- thus no calls can be made to
> customer service putting in bogus inquiries or name/address changes.
> In short, a non-issue here.

> If I were going to rip off credit card numbers, PINS and related data, I
> would find it far easier to tap the phone line used by an ATM machine
> and put some kind of data capture device on that instead ... yet people
> use ATMs quite willingly. So what's the beef about cellular phones and
> credit card numbers?  On the one in a million chance someone *might*
> happen to hear your credit card number read, what is it gonna get them?

All you need to commit credit card fraud is the number and the
expiration.  That's all it takes to order merchandise by phone. I
wouldn't risk giving my number over cellular. People can make up a
name and vendors won't check to make sure the card number and name
match. As for physical cards, a card reader/encoder could put my
number on a library card and someone could go to town at those
automated cashiers like they have at gas stations. Since I've had my
Discover card number used fraudulently at gas stations for two
separate accounts, I know a number is all they need.  I admit, though,
the odds are slim any one would happen to be listening in my area at
the exact time I give out my number.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Plus which, without the name and address
or something to document the transaction via mail order, that sale will
be charged back to the dealer. You the person whose number was used are
not out anything.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Drew Dean)
Subject: Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone?
Date: 12 May 1994 12:32:55 -0700
Organization: ROLM - A Siemens Company


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it is illegal, and yes people listen
> illegally  to cellular calls. However there is very little risk of fraud
> by passing credit card numbers in this way. [deleted]
> Third, credit card verification
> involves reading the number, the expiration date and the amount of the
> sale -- not the name and address of the card holder. Fourth, without having
> physical possession of the card they cannot make purchases in stores.

Not true -- someone, with only a name, card number, and expiration
date managed to charge over $4000 of tires, purchased at a retail
store, to my father's Citibank-issued card.  (I forget whether it was
a Visa or MasterCard).  You could see the card number hand written
into the charge slip, along with a signature that looked nothing like
the authorized one.

Getting the charge removed took a fair bit of correspondence with
Citibank.  I never heard if they found the crook, or whether the
merchant was in on the scam.  (Would you accept a $4000 charge from
someone who "forgot" his card ?)


Drew Dean               [phone]
[e-mail]      ROLM, a Siemens company


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But the point is, the charge was removed.
I'm sorry to hear Citibank's customer service is slow at things. The
credit card agreement merchants have to sign with the card issuers says
in effect, yes, we will accept handwritten charge tickets and attempt to
bill them, and yes, we will accept cards that have expired and attempt
to bill them. The emphasis is also on good service to merchants and the
card issuer will always attempt to bill/collect from the card holder even
in irregular circumstances. But as a worst case scenario if the number
is not *imprinted* on the card, if the expiration date has passed, or if
the charge ticket is not signed with the signature of the legitimate
card holder then the merchant eats it. Those collectors at the credit
card processing office don't care who pays; they are not proud. They
want it off their case load -- off the credit card office's ledgers.
If the card holder won't pay, you bet they examine that charge ticket
for any irregularities in the hopes of charging it back to the merchant
as a violation of his contract. The trouble people have is not so much
getting 'stuck' with fraud charges as it is working through the paper
mill at the credit card office.   PAT]

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

From: gatech!willard.atl.ga.us![e-mail] (Willard Dawson)
Subject: Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where?
Organization: Willard's House
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 01:02:55 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the electronics department at Venture
> they had one from BellSouth I believe. I don't think buying a modem
> for 'such a purpose' would necessarily be a waste. If the modem had
> Caller-ID built into it and all you needed was to get that data over
> to your computer for whatever reason, then such a modem would be a
> fine investment. Who else sells CID boxes with serial ports?   PAT]

You might not want the BellSouth product.  I had the opportunity to
view one out of the box; the serial port is of the RJ-11 variety.
Unless you happen to already have an RJ-11 ==> RS-232 cable...

I made the mistake of buying a couple of BellSouth phones through our
employee discount program (did I mention that I am a BellSouth
employee?).  The BellSouth phones are poor.  One of mine was very
noisy.  The other, a two-line speaker phone, exhibits bleed-over from
one line to another, and the speaker drops out (seeming just as the
remote party says something interesting).  Altogether, a lousy deal to
foist on loyal employees.

Of course, BellSouth does not actually manufacture anything, given the
current MFJ restrictions.  "Made in Malaysia" says it all, IMHO.

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 19:16 WET
From: [e-mail] (John Harris)
Subject: Re: Caller ID with Serial Port - Where?


Quoting [e-mail]:

> Although several TELECOM Digest articles have mentioned caller ID
> boxes with serial ports, I have never seen a reference to a model
> number, manufacturer or distributor.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the electronics department at
> Venture they had one from BellSouth I believe.

Try contacting  Vive Synergies Inc.,
                30 West Beaver Creek Road, Unit 2,
                Richmond Hill, Ontario  L4B 3K1
                [phone]   Fax [phone]

This manufacturer advertises in the local paper as having a "CALL
EDITOR II" for $199.00 and a "CALL EDITOR RSA" for $119.00 which will
integrate Caller ID with any DOS or Windows application, particularly
ACT! for Windows.

 From the pictures, the "II" is a typical caller ID unit with a
display, the "RSA" looks like a 25 pin D-shell connector with a
telephone jack on the back.


John Harris, BEL-Tronics Ltd, Mississauga, ON L5L 1J9
               [phone]   Fax [phone]

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

From: dgdhome![e-mail] (Don Davis)
Subject: Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where?
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 08:15:12 EDT
Organization: The Dayton Home for the Chronically Strange


>> So the question remains: Where can I purchase a caller ID box with
>> serial port?

> I have a (rather expensive) Caller ID communications device from
> Rochelle Communications, but I believe they have cheaper (single line)
> units, too.

Or you could try:

   Zeus Phonestuff  404-263-7111
   Atlanta, GA      800-240-4637

Their product costs $99 (they discounted it by 20% for me when I
ordered up four of 'em).  Has 2 RJ-11 phone jacks, and several neat
features:

1. the unit does *not* pass the first ring through to any telephone plugged
   into the phone jack -- first, it delivers the Caller*ID info out the
   serial port, then you have the option (under software control) to let
   the phone number determine whether you want subsequent rings passed
   through or not.

2. the unit can provide the Caller*ID data in several formats.  A checksum
   feature indicates whether the data received is valid.

3. the unit can store up to about 30 sets of call info in case your system
   goes offline for a while.

4. software for PC-compatibles is included -- caller database and key macro
   TSR that'll lurk in the background and hit whatever keys you please
   depending upon the Caller*ID info.

5. straightforward hardware interface with good documentation -- I wrote my
   own little application in a couple of hours (I wanted to do some things
   that went beyond their software).


Best wishes,

Don Davis   Internet: dgdhome![e-mail] | Tel: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts?
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 18:11:06 GMT


> ... Some people, you see, leave the speaker turned off all the time
> and as a result don't even realize they are connecting to a live
> person in errror instead of another modem. I would rather have seen a
> rule saying that if voice was detected instead of carrier, the speaker
> would automatically turn on ...

One might bear in mind that even when a modem is being controlled
directly by a person, it may not be within earshot.  For instance, I
can initiate a modem call from my desk at work, but the modem I'd be
using is in the computer room -- about 100 feet away and behind a
locked door.


Mark Brader, [e-mail], SoftQuad Inc., Toronto

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

From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Attempts?
Date: 12 May 1994 01:33:32 -0000
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


[e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr) writes:

>> That has been the case in Canada for quite
>> a few years and I think it is true here in the USA also now. The reason is
>> a modem has no way of knowing it is dialing a wrong number and being
>> offensive to the human victim at the other end ... and some owners of
>> modems could care less :

> Text deleted for brevity.

>> But the way they have it now with limits on the redial attempts is
>> the next best solution.  PAT]

> With my modem, which has a ten memory location, I could easily
> misoprogram the unit and not know it unless I caught it during a
> dialing sequence.  Looking away or being otherwise occupied during the
> dialing, I would not be aware of a misdail and just call up the
> number's location.

> Granted, there are problems with these types of calls.  I sure
> wouldn't want to be the recipient of them and hopefully won't in the
> future.

In my city, they just offered a new feature that allows you to enter a
number that is busy, and have it redial that number for up to 30
minutes. When it finally gets thru, your phone rings. This is great
for making calls but I can see this as a problem for modem users
because they have to initiate the call to be connected. Also, I have
redialed many times consecutively and have never had any problems.


Regards,

Allen


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That feature is called Busy Number Redial
in most places where it is offered. For a laugh sometime, try dialing
your own number and getting a busy signal, then asking BNR to deal with
it. A few seconds after you hang up, BNR will find the number to be free
and call you back to so inform you and make the connection. You'll answer
the phone, have a moment or two of silence from the other end and then
be informed that, 'the number you were trying to reach *was* available,
but it has become busy again! ...'  :)  It was misprogrammed here in
Chicago for awhile and this would go on for the full thirty minutes of
attempts. Hang up, get called back, be told 'it has become busy again'.
Repeat above every minute or so for the full period. It has since been
fixed here.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #217
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26187;
          12 May 94 17:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA02691; Thu, 12 May 94 13:48:07 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA02682; Thu, 12 May 94 13:48:05 CDT
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 13:48:05 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #218

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 May 94 13:48:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 218

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Toby Nixon)
    Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Alan Gallatin)
    Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF? (Michael Moore)
    Re: Fax Cited in Numbers Bust (Alan T. Furman)
    Re: IXC Timing Problem (Alan Leon Varney)
    Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? (Kelley Boan)
    Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP? (John R. Levine)
    Re: Worldwide Telecom Information (Robert Shaw)
    Re: Toll-Free Prank Calls (Carl Jones)
    Re: CO's and Disasters (Kevin W. Williams)
    Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Information Wanted (Rob Lockhart)
    Re: Bell Atlantic Gets Maryland Competition (John R. Levine)
    Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (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 including Compuserve and GEnie.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Toby Nixon)
Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program
Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 17:38:21 GMT


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

> If you dial *56 + PIN (SND) the fraud protection is turned on.
> Cellular One will refuse to complete any calls from that phone EXCEPT
> 611 and 911.  Incoming calls, however, still work.  Dialing *560 + PIN
> (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls.  This is, of
> course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself.

Something sounds fishy about this to me.  Criminals today can capture
mobile numbers and ESNs off the air.  What's to stop them from also
capturing the PINs?  All they have to do is set their scanners to look
for the "*560####" messages that thousands of people will be sending
all the time to unlock their phones, and then generate their own
"*560####" message to "unlock" the number.  Pretty bogus security, if
you ask me.  Certainly gives customers the _feeling_ that something is
being done about the problem, but all it really seems to do is make
everyone enter a few more digits every time they want to make a call.

This problem is not going to be solved until there are secure encryption
keys and a challenge-based system that never sends the keys over the air.


Toby

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin)
Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program
Date: 12 May 1994 13:22:36 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In a previous article, [e-mail] wrote:

> Somebody (I forget who) wrote:

(That would be me...)

>> Yes ... according to Cell One, once you turn on the phone, you need to
>> dial the unlock code -- *560 + PIN (SND) -- before making your first
>> call.

> 1) If a significant number of people store the access code in their phone,
> stolen phones are a valuable commodity.

Well, stolen phones are a valuable commodity to begin with.  However,
this program is to counter cloning.  Physical theft of phones is a
wholly separate problem.  Look at it this way: If I'm walking on the
streets of NY and someone scans my phone, when will I (or Cell One)
ever find out about it?  After tons of calls have been made on my bill
and I go to Cellular One to get a new NAM and convince them to take
thousands off of my bill.  Inconvenience for me, major $$$ loss for
them.

If someone rips off my actual phone, when will I know about it?
Presumably immediately.  After calling Cellular One and reporting the
theft, the phone will be rendered inoperable.  The phone will no
longer be useable on its ESN and, therefore, having the unlock code
that goes with that ESN and NAM is completely useless.

> 2) If I time out every twenty minutes, the required occurance of pin
> transmissions is quite high.

That's 20 minutes of your phone being off, not 20 minutes of non-usage.
If your phone is powered on (in the service area) for a week non-stop,
then you only need to unlock it ONCE during that whole week -- that
unlock would come before the first call.

> All I need to do is snatch a PIN
> transmission and I get everything I need to defraud (esn/pin/min).

> Yeah I know, not *every* transmission contains the ESN, but how much
> you want to lay on the fact that the ESN will be transmitted in this
> initial call.

There's nothing special about this call, 'cept that you need to make
it before any billable call.  If the ESN doesn't go out on every call,
there's no reason to assume it will necessarily go out on the *560
call either.

> On the whole, it seems to introduce substantial customer inconvenience
> without adding a lot of security.

For the moment, there is a convenient alternative; just don't use it.


Alan M. Gallatin   [e-mail]
[e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (michael moore)
Subject: Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF?
Date: 12 May 1994 12:05:17 -0400
Organization: International Internet Association.


William C. Fenner ([e-mail]) wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>, mark boylan <boylanm@iia.
> org> wrote:

>> Is there a modem that can accept and decode DTMF tones after it's
>> answered an incoming call?  And also, how can I send the output of a
>> SoundBlaster card over the same phone line?

> You can solve both problems at once with a ZyXEL modem.  Not only will
> it decode DTMF tones, but it will also play audio directly to the
> phone line.  If you convert your WAV files to, say, 3-bit ZyXEL ADPCM,
> you can probably use one of the many shareware packages out there and
> get up and running very quickly.

Could you elaborate on the "many shareware packages out there".  I am
looking for information on how to set up a voice response system for
employee dial in of information.  Also, are there any comercial
packages available for PC's.


Thanks,

Email to [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Fax Cited in Numbers Bust
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 04:55:08 PDT


The {New York Times}, as quoted by Dave Thompson:

>    For 30 years, Raymond Marquez was a thorn to law-enforcement
> agencies and a legend to countless gamblers in Harlem and East Harlem...

>    But the authorities said yesterday that they had arrested Mr.
> Marquez, 64, and his wife, Alice, 63, on felony gambling charges and
> had raided and closed 56 gambling parlors and backroom offices ....

>    The Manhattan District Attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, said a
> large part of the case against Mr. Marquez stemmed from one mistake:
> his use of a fax to get daily reports on his illegal gambling profits
> from Manhattan to his vacation retreat in Fort Lauderdale.

>    Mr. Morgenthau, who announced the arrests ..., said the faxes,
> which were intercepted under a court order, included the names of
> gambling sites, accounts over the last month of profits at each site
> and the payrolls for more than 100 people employed by Mr. Marquez in
> one of the city's largest illegal gambling rings...

Those whose business it is to mind everyone else's business will
insist that the struggle against "numbers" cannot be won unless
Raymond Marquez's successor is prevented from using effective
encryption (that is, something other than Clipper).  They are right.

Raymond Marquez's interactions with his customers and employees were
essentially voluntary.  There was no "victim" to complain.  The
busybodies of the "Public Morals" squad had to invade his affairs to
gather evidence.

This is -- and always will be -- true of every attempt to criminalize
consensual behavior among adults such as gambling, prostitution,
pornography, and politically incorrect drugs and sexual positions.

But even if all right-wingers were to disappear, one victimless crime
would remain -- one whose staggering volume of fines depends on how
thoroughly its enforcement bureaucracy does its job.  And that, in
turn, depends on the tools they have: immense databases, warrantless
access to personal banking records, warrantless eavesdropping on
cordless phones, etc.

I refer to the crime of making a living.  If you don't believe me,
read the income tax code.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 15:32:32 +0600
Subject: Re: IXC Timing Problem
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steven
L. Spak) writes:

> I'm fairly certain that Bellcore does work on IXC/LEC interconnect
> standards.  They probably have some TR's or TA's on signalling and
> timing for IXC/LEC handoffs.

   Bellcore documents LEC requirements; for "Calling Card Service -
Prompt Tone", they document 60 ms of 941+1477 HZ at -10dBm0, then 940
ms of 440+350 Hz decayed exponentially from -10 dBm0.

   Unfortunately, documenting a requirement and having it actually be
implemented everywhere are two different things.  Admitting this,
Bellcore states in various issues of "Notes on the Network":

      "There is no specific requirement for any tone."

   That's it; an admission that tones are not required to be offered
at specific events, with specific volume or frequencies or duration.
In other words, the POTS line is a human interface, not a machine
interface.

   On top of that, Bellcore cannot require IXCs to use specific tones
WITHIN their network.  Believe me, we've had lots of arguements in
industry groups.  But the upshot is that an IXC can intercept calls in
any way it wants (assuming customers are happy with the result).  They
are even permitted to have a LIVE OPERATOR answer your Calling Card
calls!!

   But there is one alternative: the industry group responsible for
achieving "consensus" in IXC/LEC interactions is the ICCF (Industry
Carriers Compatibility Forum).  This is an open forum -- you can
attend meetings or send letters.  Dawne Drake on 201 740-4657 is the
sectetary, last I knew.  Remember that compliance is voluntary, and
your request should be phrased in a way that indicates why a "bong
standard" for all IXCs would be of benefit to the IXCs (and the
country).

In article <[e-mail]> Linda Slovick <slovick@guest.
apple.com> writes:

> I've been testing a product that must redial inter-LATA calls using
> the same IXC as the original call. ....

> So far, testing this product has been a nightmare. ....

> At this point, I had to call a halt to testing and go back to basics.

> From reading the Bellcore literature on the subject, I'm getting the
> strong impression that we're going about this all wrong.  Bellcore
> specifically mentions that timing is NOT guaranteed after the call is
> handed off to the IXC.  Arrgh!

   As I mentioned above, the telephone system is not designed to
interact with machines, except for a few well-specified interfaces.
Calling Card entry is not one of them.

> Much as I might like to just exclude the oddballs, this is NOT
> an option for this project (sigh...).

> Questions:

> 1.) This whole thing is sounding a bit like the old problems folks used
>    to have trying to thread FGB calls.  The solution to that was to
>    hook in to SS7ness and dump all this inband listening for
>    signalling stuff.  Is there something tariffed in SS7land that I
>    could hook my machine through to get signalling that all the IXCs
>    would have to respect?

   Nope -- SS7 does not indicate when the IXC is ready for Calling
Card digits (however, it should let you know when the IXC has
indicated cut-through in the forward direction is required).  On top
of that, SS7 isn't quite ready for generic handling of all operator
calls, so the timing/handling can vary (coin phones are probably
non-SS7, PBX calls may get special treatment, prison calls even more
special treatment, etc.).

   Worst of all, an IXC could have live operators handling Calling
Card calls -- no bong, no DTMF input.

>3.) Anybody have any other ideas on how to approach solving this
>    problem?

   Two ideas:

 1) Make the calls without calling cards -- use an AOS to validate the
card numbers and bill for the calls.  In effect, you will be acting like
some COCOTs.  If you can't handle the Calling Card #, "splash" the call
via the real IXC and have a human enter the number....

 2) Deal with the IXCs -- offer to provide the system at an interface
they define, and provide them the Card Numbers correlated with the
call times on some machine-readable media.  Given that some IXCs already
provide this service themselves, the smaller ones may be willing to
negotiate.


Al Varney - just my opinion

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

From: [e-mail] (kboan on BIX)
Subject: Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP?
Date: 12 May 94 16:35:45 GMT
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


[e-mail] writes:

> Does anyone know if the FCC maintains a public ftp site?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why yes, in fact recently the FCC can
> be reached via FTP. We've touched on it here recently and perhaps one
> of our readers will be so kind as to send you the help file showing
> how it is done.   PAT]

I'd like a copy of that help file as well, thanks.


Kelley Boan, [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Will someone help Kelley please?   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 17:36 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Can the FCC be Reached by FTP?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> Does anyone know if the FCC maintains a public ftp site?

That's the easy part.  FTP to fcc.gov and look around.  You can also
get there via Gopher, although they don't update the Gopher menus
anywhere near as often as the FCC files.

> I would like to research more information on "Tariff 12" pricing for
> long distance services.

Tariff 12 is a regulatory hack through which AT&T can offer special
deals to large customers.  Basically, they custom craft a special
package for a customer at a special price, and publish that as part of
tariff 12.  If someone else happened to want exactly the same
combination of features, AT&T would provide it at the same price.  I
didn't see any tariffs at all on the FTP server, 12 or otherwise.

I'd think that if your business were large enough to be worth a tariff
12 filing, your AT&T account reps would be able to figure that out.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: 12 May 1994 12:14:25 CET
From: SHAW [phone] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Worldwide Telecom Information


> I am looking for information about the current telephony
> infrastructure in each country around the world. Is there such a
> source anywhere?

You might want to get a copy of the recently published (March 1994)
World Telecommunication Development Report.  This has lots of
information on the current world telephony structure including the
world telecom indicators (there's an electronic version of the
indicators available too).  The report is around 200 pages long.
Ordering information is available from:

International Telecommunication Union
General Secretariat - Sales Section
Place des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 20 (Switzerland)

Tf:     + 41 22 730 5285        Tlx:    421 000 uit ch
Fax:    + 41 22 730 5194        Tg:     Burinterna Geneva


Robert Shaw   Information Services Department
International Telecommunication Union
Place des Nations  1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland
TEL: [phone]  FAX: [phone]
X.400:G=robert;S=shaw;A=arcom;P=itu;C=ch
Internet: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I want to make just a brief mention of the
role the ITU has accepted with TELECOM Digest. This Digest is partially
funded by a very generous monthly grant from the International Telecomm-
unication Union, as part of their information exchange. In order to
insure the continued publication of this Digest -- now in its 13th year
on the net -- addtional support is needed from corporate sponsors and
individuals. ITU has set the pace, please follow if you can.  Thanks.  PAT]

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

From: uswnvg!uswnvg.com![e-mail] (Carl Jones)
Subject: Re: Toll-Free Prank Calls
Date: 12 May 94 00:32:36 GMT


Out of curiousity,

 What statues were used to charge this guy for calling a 1-800 repeatedly?


I speak for everyone in a twenty mile radius around me.
Any questions?  E-Mail [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are various laws depending on the
state, but a very common one has to do with 'causing a telephone to
ring for the purpose of harrassment'. Another reader noted in a private
comment to me that he thought the CO handling the call would create an
exception report listing numbers which make excessive 800 calls. They
probably do, but the place receiving the calls would still have to know
where to look to find *which* CO was shoving all that garbage at them.
I think in Falwell's case once they identified the problem as coming
at them from outside their own phone system then they started backtracking
to the CO in question.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin W. Williams)
Subject: Re: CO's and Disasters
Date: 12 May 1994 10:21:11 -0700


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Tom
Watson) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, Thomas Tengdin <[e-mail]>
> wrote:

>> The telephone company computers will connect some customers
>> at a higher priority that others.

>> Is there something in CO Class of Service? or other programming that
>> gives "priority" service to a select class of lines?

> Yes, they DO exist.  Will the local operating company tell you if you are
> one of the selected few, NO!

> The reason for this is that they want some traffic to get through.  In
> addition, they will usually pick out one house in a block and give it
> the "good" treatment.  The object here is to at least let some people
> get out.  This load-leveling (there is a snazzy term for it, but I

[ remainder deleted ]

I would be very surprised if anyone was using a "one house on the
block" type of assignment scheme. On the GTD-5, line can be marked as
class A or class B (the default). Class A lines are scanned regardless
of overload conditions, while class B lines are scanned only under non
overload conditions. Class A is usually assigned only to police,
hospitals, etc. This is a simplification: some queuing techniques are
applied to keep the switch from oscillating between overload and zero
traffic due to the overload condition.

All modern switches have some variation on this scheme, although
different designs have different details and terminology. Abuse of the
feature by overassigning priority lines results in a switch that
cannot optimally handle an overload situation. I would be surprised if
any operating company used any kind of random assignment technique for
the priorities.


Kevin Wayne Williams   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (RLockhart)
Subject: Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Information Wanted
Date: 12 May 1994 08:40:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


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

> Does anyone have technical info on the Motorola "Advisor" alphanumeric
> pager?  Specifically, any sort of configuration or status report
> modes,

All depends on what you want to do, Pat.  Some of the programming
information is given in the 'tic' book you received when you bought
your Advisor and the rest is only accessable from your carrier's
Advisor programming fixture.

> and/or what one can do with the serial port that seems to be on
> the bottom of the unit.

These three pins are used to both program the device for cap code, OOR
indicator, alert on bad data, and a host of others and to allow
dumping of messages to a host mobile computer (through a program
called PrintPal) or just to a printer.  SkyTel and some others have
used this ability to link up paging to laptops et al to send email via
paging.  However, in almost *all* cases, they've had to develop a
cable that would handle holding the Advisor to the spring loaded
connection pins and provide the level shifting needed to link to the
laptop's RS232 port.  The preferable solution for linking a pager-like
device to a portable computer is through another family of products of
ours called wireless data receivers (e.g., NewsStream and NewsCard ..
serial interface and PCMCIA device, respectively).

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Thomas Baird) writes:

> Also has Motorola published the interface information for accessing
> the "advisor" from an IBM PC? I talked to a salesman and his only
> knowledge was it could be accesed from a PC and the maximum message
> size was 2000 characters per message.

Tom, we've not published the Advisor interface.  We *have* published,
though, the software interface for both our NewsStream and NewsCard
Wireless Data Receivers (serial and PCMCIA devices, respectively) that
will work on the same services as the Advisor.  In fact, they may be
found on line on some of the commercial services (e.g., CIS, AOL,
AppleLink) in Stuffed MacWord 5.1 format.  If these interest you, but
you don't have access to the commercial services, give me a shout and
I'll see what I can do for you.


Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems
Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc.
Desktop I'net:  [e-mail]
Wireless I'net (<32K characters):  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 02:40 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Gets Maryland Competition
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


Carl Moore wrote:

> How would local telephone directories' lists of prefixes, calling
> areas, etc. be affected?

and Greg Monti responded:

> This is one of many issues that were not mentioned in the story I
> summarized.

Didn't the state mandate number portability?  Portability means that
any number can be assigned to any carrier, as is currently the case
with 800 numbers.  Portability is clearly in the works, but as I noted
in an earlier message it'll be an enormous project involving billions
of dollars of retrofit to the network to look up every single call in
a carrier database to know who to route it to.  I'd be very surprised
to see portability working before the year 2000.

In the meantime, I expect that competitive access providers will
either do what cellular carriers do, which is to hook up like a PBX
and get blocks of numbers which may or may not be full prefixes, or
more likely hook up like an independent telco with its own set of
prefixes.  Their prices will certainly not be the same as the RBOCs,
so deaveraged pricing (i.e. calling A->B doesn't cost the same as
B->A) which is now relatively uncommon will become the rule.

One thing I can definitely promise is massive confusion before it's
all sorted out.  Expect a lot of really stupid proposals, e.g.
assigning each CAP a couple of area codes, or adding yet more digits
to be dialed as a prefix to the subscriber's number.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 13:33:45 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works!


Since I update history.of.area.splits from time to time, I have some
questions for Al Varney:

If, in your message, "Home NPA Toll calls ... require 1+ for Toll",
do you mean:

1. 1+NPA+7D must be used?  (I know this applies to Maryland and area
   703 in Virginia; no information yet for 804 in Va.)

2. 1+7D can still be used?  (I have not received information about
   Nevada, Wisconsin, or area 804 in Va. requiring 1+NPA+7D for long
   distance within area code.)

And where do you arrive at 7D being allowed for intra-NPA toll calls
in West Virginia?  That would be new information for me.

> NPA 703 in Virginia will
> permit 7D or 10D or 1+10D local calls, except into the Washington
> metro area, where 10D or 1+10D is required.

NPA 703 in Virginia does allow 7D for local calls into the Washington
metro area WITHIN AN AREA CODE, with the "10D or 1+10D is required"
kicking in if calling different area code.

> Illinois is the ONE state that REQUIRES 7D dialing for all Home NPA
> calls, even Toll calls (i.e., does not PERMIT 1 + 10D for such calls).

Old area 312 never had 1+ for long distance until it needed N0X/N1X
prefixes, and at that time it got 1+ for long distance to other area
codes.  Are you saying the rest of Illinois is dropping the leading 1
for intra-NPA if it was still publishing 1+7D for such?

WMEA means Washington Metropolitan Exchange Area, and would include
all of 202 plus parts of 301 and 703.  301 extends beyond the WMEA to
include southern and western Maryland.  In Maryland, you are in 301
(not 410) if you are local to Washington; the 301/410 split was along
LATA lines.

What do you gather from Bellcore's table regarding local calls from
Maryland?  Here is what I know from other sources regarding Maryland:

local calls to other area codes are just 7D EXCEPT for:

1. local calls to DC and Va. suburbs;

2. across the 301/410 border; some exchanges, such as Silver Spring,
are local to all or part of 4 area codes (202,301,410,703).

(By the way, 804 in Virginia is too far from the DC area to have local
service into it from the DC area.)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #218
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26714;
          12 May 94 18:20 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04288; Thu, 12 May 94 14:49:04 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04279; Thu, 12 May 94 14:49:01 CDT
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 14:49:01 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #219

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 May 94 14:49:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 219

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (Butch Croan)
    Re: Cellular Phone Abuse (Jon Steel)
    Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature" (Brian Bebeau)
    Re: Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media? (Paul Lee)
    Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Ross Oliver)
    Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Hugh Pritchard)
    Re: PEP Pager Protocol Software Information Wanted (Rob Lockhart)
    Re: Getting Phone Bills Over the Internet (Robert J. Woodhead)
    Re: Using Call Forwarding to Avoid Tolls (Randy Gellens)
    Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device (Kevin W. Reed)
    Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device (Paul Robinson)
    Re: FAX Mailbox Services (Clarence Dold)
    Re: Bulk Call Display (Vance Shipley)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Butch lcroan/.nameBalcroan Lilli)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 09:02:02 GMT


Aamer Soomro ([e-mail]) wrote:

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

>> ... but why don't the cellular providers use a more robust
>> authentication service. Your cellular phone would contain an
>> encription key that would also be known to the cellular provider. When
>> your phone went off hook, it would send its telephone number. The
>> provider would look up your number to get your key and send you some
>> random sequence of digits which would vary from call to call. Your
>> phone would take the sequence of digits, use its key to encode them
>> and return them to the provider. Since the provider has your key, it
>> can perform the same encription. If the encoded data that was returned
>> doesn't match what the provider's copy of the key encripts, then its
>> because the calling phone doesn't have the right key and the call is
>> dropped.  The key is never transmitted so the crook would have to
>> steal the physical phone to steal the service.

> To me this seems hitting pretty close to the Clipper Chip controversy.
> All the service providers and cell phone manufactures would have to
> conform to a standard encryption, so that the cell phones could be
> used with any carrier service.

> The encryption keys analogous to the phone numbers would be another
> database to be maintained by the service providers.

> Would it be feasable to complicate the registeration process by
> introducing two encryption steps and a comparison step along with two
> steps for digit transmission?

I am not sure if you have access to the QUALCOMM CDMA spec's or the
GSM TDMA , but I suggest you try and attain a copy and read about the
encryption process and the authectication processes as they are
already in the spec and are probably more secure than you would
imagine. In addition to that CDMA is also spread spectrum using a PN
sequence.

The system I worked on in the military are slightly different in all
important way to make them quite secure, but even the PN or
PuesdoRandom Noice syetm used in commerical spread spectrum will make
any demodulating device not inpossesion of the current PN sequence
number of which there are several that change from phone to phone and
call to call so even if you got one part you might miss the next until
that PN key is used again ... Oh YA ... I think you might of guessed
that timing is very important a GPS is at every tower and broadcasting
a GPS derived " system time " in the overhead.

I WOULD BE SURPRISED IF IT WORKS AT ALL given that they will be
attempting it will low-end consumer units bounced around in cars ...
HArdly the MIL-SPEC stuff we used in the NAVY!


Butch Croan email [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (jon steel)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Abuse
Date: 12 May 1994 11:35:43 GMT
Organization: Motorola Ltd., European Cellular Infrastructure Division


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

> ... but why don't the cellular providers use a more robust
> authentication service. Your cellular phone would contain an
> encription key that would also be known to the cellular provider. When
> your phone went off hook, it would send its telephone number. The
> provider would look up your number to get your key and send you some
> random sequence of digits which would vary from call to call. Your
> phone would take the sequence of digits, use its key to encode them
> and return them to the provider. Since the provider has your key, it
> can perform the same encription. If the encoded data that was returned
> doesn't match what the provider's copy of the key encripts, then its
> because the calling phone doesn't have the right key and the call is
> dropped.  The key is never transmitted so the crook would have to
> steal the physical phone to steal the service.

In the UK there is a similar system to the one you have described
above. This feature is known as `TACS Authentication'. It is
implemented using a 16-digit PIN code, known only to the subscriber
and the service provider. When the subscriber goes `off-hook' his
16-digit PIN code is sent in encrypted form, this is then received at
the MSC and decrypted. It is then compared with the subscriber record
in the database, and if it does not match, you ain't talking to
nobody! Although the PIN is transmitted, it is in encrypted form, so
to get round this you will have to know the encryption algorithm. Oh,
one more point. The PIN is never encrytped the same way twice (at
least not for a long time). I've probably got some functional specs
somewhere if anybody is really interested ...


Jon Steel.  Motorola ECID Ltd, Swindon, UK
Tel: [phone]  Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Bebeau)
Subject: Re: Unwelcome AT&T "Feature"
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 14:13:02 GMT


In regard to the AT&T feature of cutting people off after a few rings:

Someone in an AT&T internal newsletter complained about the same thing
recently (his mother is hard of hearing and takes a while to answer
the phone). Since a public relations person replied, I don't think
I'll be divulging company secrets to repeat the reply.

What was said, was that, when the message is being played about
leaving a message, the phone is still ringing, and it still rings
after the message is finished playing. If you want to let it keep
ringing, just hang on (don't leave a message and don't hang up), it'll
keep on ringing.

Whether it actually works if you just hang on I don't know, but that's
what they said.


Brian Bebeau          Interactive Systems (a Systemhouse company)
[e-mail]   at AT&T Network Systems

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

From: Paul A. Lee  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
ORGANIZATION: Woolworth Corporation
Date: Thu 12 May 1994  15:00:00 GMT
Subject: Re: Can You Record Phone Conversations on Hard Disk Media?


In a recent {TELECOM Digest}, Tai Duong wrote:

> Can anyone give me ... a way to record phone conversations on hard
> disk...?

Current voice mail technology is based on the process of digitizing
(recording) phone signals (conversations), storing them on disk, and
retrieving them from the stored database for decoding and playback.
The technology has also been adapted to phone logging and retrieval
systems.

Several manufacturers provide the basic hardware components for such
systems to hundreds of system integrators, VARs, and developers. Those
manufacturers might be a good starting point for tracking down a
source that can provide a logging system, as well as a means of
integrating it with a document image storage and retrieval system.

Some voice, FAX, and switching board manufacturers are:

     Amtelco                800-356-9148
     Bicom                  800-766-3573        203 268-4484
     Brooktrout Technology  617 449-4100
     Dialogic               800-755-4444        201 334-8450
     Dianatel               408 428-1000
     Exacom                 603 228-0706
     Excel, Inc.            508 833-1144
     Intervoice             214 497-8862        214 669-3988
     Natural Microsystems   800-533-6120        508 650-1300
     New Voice              703 448-0570
     PCBX Systems Inc.      800-755-7229        714 668-1180
     Pika Technologies      613 591-1555
     Rhetorex, Inc.         408 370-0881
     Teleliaison            514 333-5333
     Voice Technologies     716 689-6700

For telephone-quality voice, there are digitization/compression
techniques that can greatly reduce the storage required, compared to
high fidelity formats like WAV. If you need long-term archival storage
with the ability to retrieve at random, you'll want to explore WORM or
magneto-optical storage.  This type of storage would also work well
with image storage.

There are bound to be developers out there who have already created
something like the application you need. Finding the right developer
 -- one that knows the technology, understands your application, and
works cooperatively -- canbe the toughest part of the project. Doing
that part well, though, helps to ensure the success of the overall
project.

Please contact me with more specifics about the application and
processing volume if you need more information or assistance.


Paul A. Lee                           Voice  414 357-1409
Telecommunications Analyst              FAX  [phone]
Woolworth Corporation            CompuServe  70353,566
   INTERNET  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>

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

From: [e-mail] (Ross Oliver)
Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number
Date: 12 May 1994 19:09:33 GMT
Organization: Network Computing Devices


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Barry S. Rein) writes:

> We're moving soon and we'll have to get a new phone number.  For
> $10.00 Pacific Bell will let me choose any phone number with the right
> prefix as long as it's not already taken.

> I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to
> remember.  Restaurants are supposedly willing to kill for a memorable
> phone number, so I wonder if there is any research or recommendations
> on how to select one, ie what combinations are remembered; what
> combinations are most often mis-dialled, etc.

> Incidentally, our exchange prefixes are 398, 791, 794, 797, and 798 -- 818
> area code.

I chose xxx-ROSS for my home phone number, on the assumption that it
would be easier for freinds and relatives to remember than xxx-7677.
It does help, but I'm not sure whether it is because the letters are
easier to remember than the numbers, or because not many people have
their name embedded in their phone number.

I personally dislike lettered phone numbers.  I don't like having to
translate on the telephone keypad, and it makes modem dialing VERY
difficult (1-800-CHK-DUAT for example).  I seem to have a more
visually-oriented memory, and I remember many phone numbers by
picturing the connect-the-dots pattern the numbers form on the keypad.

I worked in Silicon Graphics tech support for a while.  The incoming
tech support number is 1-800-800-4SGI.  The double 800 confused a lot
of people when I would leave the number in a phone message. I settled
on speaking it as "eight hundred, eight zero zero..."  This helped
some, but I still had to repeat it two or three times on occassion.

I recently moved also, but in the same area, so I was able to keep my
phone number.  Pac Bell charged me the $10.00 AGAIN to keep my
"personalized" number.  Nothing like a monopoly, eh?


Ross Oliver  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 09:54 EST
From: Hugh Pritchard <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number


[e-mail] (Barry S. Rein) writes:

> ....  I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to
> remember.  ....

I can't speak to the mnemonicity of phone numbers.  However, since you
can specify your new phone number, be warned that repeating digits
increase the chances of people dialing your number by accident.  Some
people tend to double a digit by mistake when they're dialing.  The
doubled digit may make the dialed number into YOUR number.  I have a
phone number of the form -xxyz.  People trying to dial -xyzt
sometimes, "mysteriously," find they've dialed me instead.


Hugh Pritchard, Smoke N' Mirrors, Inc.
[e-mail] -or- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (RLockhart)
Subject: Re: PEP Pager Protocol Software Information Wanted
Date: 12 May 1994 14:53:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Mathias Koerber) writes:

> Where can I get info/src about the pep protocol for pagers?  I
> couldn't find a FAQ.

To my knowledge, there's no PEP protocol, but there is an alpha paging
protocol that's sounds similar.  It's called PET (Page Entry Terminal)
protocol and is the predecessor of TAP (Telocator Alpha Paging .. PET
and IXO are different names for the same alpha paging) protocol.  The
only formal source for TAP is PCIA (Personal Communications Industry
Association ... formerly Telocator) in Washington, DC, in the US at
1.202.467.4770.  If you'd like to take a look at the more commonly
implemented portions of TAP, I've a thread culled from our now-out-of-
print Programmer's Guide to PET (used by Telocator as the basis for TAP)
that covers these.

Your tag indicates a Singapore origin.  Telecoms' multitude of paging
systems (some of which were mine [buffing nails] <g>) include a number
of alpha entry mechanisms not found in other systems (in addition to
TAP).  These have included, at times, a DTMF entry method and a Telex
one.  If you are interested in these, as well (assuming you're really
looking for alpha entry at *all* <g>), I'd be happy to help you get in
contact with our paging people in Shaw Towers.


Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems
Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc.
Desktop I'net:  [e-mail]
Wireless I'net (<32K characters):  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: Getting Phone Bills Over the Internet
Date: 12 May 1994 01:06:48 GMT
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.


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

> That wouldn't be that big of a deal; the telco could encrypt using the
> calling card (main one I guess) number.  Let's hope no one else as
> that!

Practically anybody can get calling card numbers.  Even if they don't
get the final four digits that's only 10K combinations to check,
trivial.  Such a suggestion is hopelessly insecure.  Rather, you would
publish a public key and they would first use their private key to
encrypt the message, then your public key.  You decrypt with your
private key then their public key.  Such a message is both secure and
authenticated.

> Pacific Bell already offers electronic billing; unfortunately, it is
> on disk, and costs between 8-15 dollars per month (I can't remember
> the exact amount, but it was something that sounded outrageous
> considering that floppies cost anywhere from .50 to $1.00).

When you consider the potential benefit to large customers of getting
the bill on disc, it is quite reasonable.  And what about the support
costs?

They probably priced it so that only the people who would really
benefit from it buy it, thus reducing their support costs because they
won't be getting phone calls from people like us asking "How come I
can't load your file into FileMaker version 1.0.0.3b (years obsolete)?" ;^)


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]
ALL GENERAL ANIMEIGO QUERIES SHOULD GO TO [e-mail]. PLEASE

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 12 MAY 94 00:05:00 GMT
Subject: Re: Using Call Forwarding to Avoid Tolls


[e-mail] (Tom Holderby) writes:

> I've recently become aware of the fact the many BBS's and Internet
> service providers use the call-forwarding trick where they go buy a
> phone number (without a phone) in outlying exchanges which are
> permanently call-forwarded to their main lines, thereby increasing
> their local call area.  Apparently some of them carry this to the
> point of multiple forwarding, which may get them 50 or 75 miles
> without a toll.

To which our Editor noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Generally, using the *regular, residential
> variety* of call forwarding will NOT save money where toll charges are
> concerned unless you are able to link two or three large toll free calling
> areas together. Generally, two or more short calls linked together cost
> more than a single long-haul call covering the same points. ...

Out here in Southern California, I know of some BBSes that offer free
memberships to anyone willing to let them use a phone in their house
for such purposes.  The member orders an ordinary residential
flat-rate line with call-forwarding.  The BBS pays the monthly fee in
addition to the free membership, and instructs the member to forward
the line on.  The member of course can use the line for outgoing calls
all he or she wants.

By stringing such *flat-rate, residential* lines together, the board
can offer a free call area that is quite large, covering several
communities.

The trick here, of course, is that the lines are residential class and
flat-rate.  I have no idea of the legality of such practices, but
there can be problems with call setup times and maximum numbers of
simultaneous forwarded (supervised) calls.


Randall Gellens              [e-mail]
Net**2 656-6350          (Please forward bounces to
Mail Stop MV 237              [e-mail])
Opinions are personal;  facts are suspect;  I speak only for myself|

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

From: Kevin W. Reed <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device
Organization: TeleSys Development Systems (TNET), Mesa, Arizona 602-649-9099
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 13:57:09 GMT


[e-mail] (Fred Blonder) writes:

>> Has anyone heard of a digital writing device presumably using
>> lightpens or something equivalent, that has two "terminals" for
>> people to use to communicate over the phone as if by writing? ...

> Back around 1967 or so I saw a system in use at the TWA terminal at
> what was then Friendship (now BWI) Airport.

About the same timeframe, I remember going on a field trip to the
local Fire Dept.  This was either in Temple City or Arcadia, CA.  They
had a box with a pen in it that when they received a call, the
instructions and what not were written on the paper remotely by the
dispatcher.  They then took the paper with them on the call.

They demonstrated it to us by having the dispatcher write something
like "Hi Kids ..."

It was the main attraction of the field trip.


Kevin W. Reed (kreed)          TELESYS DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS (TNET.COM)
[e-mail]                     2359 W De Palma Ave, Mesa AZ 85202
System Administrator / Unix BBS Developer  BBS/UUCP/DATA 602-649-9099

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

From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Fred Blonder <[e-mail]>, writes:

>> Has anyone heard of a digital writing device presumably using
>> lightpens or something equivalent, that has two "terminals" for
>> people to use to communicate over the phone as if by writing? ...

> Back around 1967 or so I saw a system ... normal ball-point pen
> connected to a plastic tab going into a box. It also had a wire
> coming off, giving a simple switch closure ... The box read the pen
> motions and sent them to a receiver elsewhere ... to duplicate the
> writing onto another piece of paper in real-time. The paper on the
> transmitter and the receiver where both adding-machine type paper
> rolls

The device you are describing is called a "Telautograph"(R) machine,
manufactured by the company of the same name.  With the advent of
facsimile machines in the 1980s, Telautograph devices sort of died
off, the way facsimile killed off almost all U.S. domestic telex use.
But Telautograph Corporation is still in business today.  What do they
do?  They make fax machines under the name "Omnifax"!  We have one in
our office.

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

From: [e-mail] (Clarence Dold)
Subject: Re: FAX Mailbox Services
Organization: a2i network
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 00:24:39 GMT


Jack Bzoza ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Delrina (the makers of WinFax and PerForm) has just announced a fax
> mailbox service exactly as you describe.  It will ship (i.e. be
> available) in about two weeks time.

> It is currently the ONLY way to retrieve a fax sent to your fax
> mailbox directly to your hotel room with your laptop.

> Nice idea, but "the ONLY way"?  Hardly.
> Expensive?  yes.
> Offered by Delrina?  I think not.  Looks that way.
> I believe it is offered by MCI.

WinFax 4.0 _requires_ a class 1 Faxmodem for mailbox retrieval.  The
Class 2 faxmodem that I have cannot be used.

If you want a cheaper alternative, that has been in use for some time,
call 1-800-audiofax, and ask for the name of a "travel mailbox" dealer
in your area.

I must admit that the integration into WinFax is kind of cool.

I use Winfax to retrieve faxmail to my machine now, from an Audiofax system.

Clarence A Dold - [e-mail]
                - Milpitas (near San Jose) & Napa CA.

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: Bulk Call Display
Organization: XeniTec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 17:41:20 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Tony Harminc <EL406045@
BROWNVM.brown.edu> wrote:

> So what interface are they using to receive the Call Display data ?
> It must be some sort of bulk interface, since they are certainly not
> letting it ring once and waiting for the data to come down the wire
> between the first and second rings.  I wasn't aware that any such
> interface was tariffed or standardized.

It's ISDN Primary Rate Interface, the same retail service which you
can get on your PBX at work.  Bell call it Megalink service.


Vance Shipley, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #219
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07051;
          13 May 94 12:57 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18981; Fri, 13 May 94 09:03:12 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18972; Fri, 13 May 94 09:03:10 CDT
Date: Fri, 13 May 94 09:03:10 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #220

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 13 May 94 09:03:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 220

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Networking Alternatives For Third/Other World (William M. Eldridge)
    Cell One NY/NJ: New Feature (Stan Schwartz)
    Rates in Alaska and Hawaii (Bob Schwartz)
    Wireless Data Services (Pete Farmer)
    Re: Book Review: Police Call & Beyond Police Call (Al Cohan)
    USPS and Smart Cards (Steve Cogorno)
    Dealing with Obscene Callers in the 90's (Mike Durkin)
    Responses From Telcos (was: CO/NY DC and Boston) (Doug Reuben)
    Directory Assistance Companies ([e-mail])
    Verifone Junior Programming Hints Summary (Ry Jones)
    Cell Fone Kloned ... Theft (Ry Jones)
    Communication Networks (FDDI-ATM) Course (Richard Tsina)
    BCE Plans Satellite Broadcast Service (Toronto Star via Dave Leibold)
    Canadian Carrier ACC - First Quarter News (ACC/CNW via Dave Leibold)
    Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip (John R. Levine)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (William M. Eldridge)
Subject: Networking Alternatives For Third/Other World
Date: 12 May 1994 19:52:25 -0700
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program


I'm interested in devoting part of our Web/Gopher/Ftp archive here to
issues in Networking in the Third/Lesser Developed World.  I'll be
heading to Macedonia in October to work on their network, and I
realize the issues are quite a bit different between Europe and
Africa, but I would like to create a one-stop archive (as well as a
mailing list) that people can go to for information on such things as
satellite feeds, packet radio nets, turning 286's into useful network
devices, telephony alternatives, and so on, to allow useful services
where budgets are quite tight and telecoms aren't always modern.

To start with, I'd heard there was an American group set up to deal
with East European networking, but I was never able to find out any
actual information (like name and contact) for this group.

If you could provide me with any information or connect me with people
interested in these matters, I'd be greatly obliged.  Also, if you're
interested in receiving info as it comes in, send in your e-mail
address and I'll make up a list (please include the word "3rd" in the
title for easy sorting).


Thanks,

Bill Eldridge     [e-mail]    310-206-3960 (3987 fax)

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

From: [e-mail] (Stan Schwartz)
Subject: Cell One NY/NJ: New Feature
Date: 13 May 1994 00:33:22 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


I was just down at a local Cell One dealer where a friend works, and
he gave me one of the brochures for "Voice Dialing".  From any cell
phone (connected to CO NY/NJ, of course) you can store up to 20 names
and call them from the system's memory, or you can say the digits into
the phone one-by-one.  You hit #<SEND> to enter the Voice Dialing
menu, and after that all the cellular functions are accessable by
voice.  The system continuously checks the last 20 samples of your
voice to adjust to changes in voice (their example is if you have a
cold), equipment, and atmospheric conditions.

The charges? Here is the structure effective sometime in June:

(In addition to regular monthly access and airtime)

 Voice Dialing  (Stand-alone) $6.95/month
 Voice Mail     (Stand-alone) $6.95/month
 Voice Mail Plus(Stand-alone) $9.95/month

 Voice Dialing + Voice Mail $9.95/month
 Voice Dialing + Voice Mail Plus $12.95/month

The first month is free on all of these.

Any questions, call CO NY/NJ at 1-800-242-7327 (but I like to call 611
from my cell phone and run up the free airtime while waiting on hold).


Stan

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

Subject: Rates in Alaska and Hawaii
From: [e-mail] (Bob Schwartz)
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 17:27:17 PDT
Organization: Bill Correctors, Inc., Marin County, California


Recently, I heard that Alaska has only two equal access carriers.
AT&T, MCI, and Sprint are not equal access carriers there. Could it be
true?

Other than wondering why $$$ makes it so (if it is so), it follows
that rates must be pretty high for LATA calls.  Is the whole state one
LATA?

Also, I'd like to know what are the day rates for calling the lower
48.  Are the rates for Interstate calling banded?

Final question about Alaska: are there *problems for Alaskans calling
into mainland 800 numbers? If so are these problems caused by poor
carrier interaction or by mainland companies that don't *accept* such
high priced calls?

The fellow that I heard this from was looking for sales people to
offer .17/minutes to Alaskans for intra state/LATA calling. Is this of
interest to readers in Alaska or is it old and tired news? The inter-
state rate he quoted was .21/minute. Interested? Let me know and I'll
give him your voice number.

The same applies to Interstate calls (inter island calls in Hawaii
however, I'm sure the *usual* carriers do operate in Hawaii.


Regards,

Bob Schwartz                                       [e-mail]
Bill Correctors, Inc.   [phone]   Marin County, California

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

From: [e-mail] (Pete Farmer)
Subject: Wireless data services
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 17:46:52 -0800
Organization: Tetherless Access Ltd.


I've noticed that there's been very little posted to this list
regarding wireless *data* services.  Anyone know why?  There are some
very interesting developments in the wireless arena, both for short,
bursty text messaging (a la RAM or Ardis) and for higher bandwidth, IP
connectivity within metropolitan areas.

Am I simply looking in the wrong place, or is the interest level not
very high, or is there a need to establish a new group regarding
wireless data services?


Peter J. Farmer                       Internet: [e-mail]
Vice President, Marketing             Voice:    415-321-5968
Tetherless Access Ltd.                Fax:      [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those messages are welcome here, but
I do not seem to get very many of them. I'm not certain if any other
newsgroup is currently handling the topic or not.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 12:11 EST
From: Al Cohan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Book Review: Police Call & Beyond Police Call


Pat, Gene Hughes was not only a neighbor of mine when I was in Jr.
High School, but he is now also a relative of mine. At a recent family
get together, Gene and I had a long talk about his publications.

Although he likes getting mail, frequently he is inundated with angry
purchasers of his book claiming: I bought your book and our local
police department is [enter local city] isn't listed. True, up to 50%
of *many* local agencies either ignore the FCC renewal requests or
forget to renew the license! What is the FCC going to do to a Fire
Department, red tag their transmitters?  No, but Gene does go on to
explain that his copyrighted work (compiliation, I suppose) is obtain
from official records and if no license exists, then no listing exists
 -- or in some editions he prints frequencies previously listed and
thought to be in use!

So what does the FCC do about compliance with state, local, agencies?
They now have a program for something Gene called "preference licensing"
or something to that effect. What *can* and in some cases actually
happens is that if a license is not renewed and a neighboring entity
files on the frequencies of the expried license, the FCC gives the
frequencies to the new licensee, rejecting the subsequent late renewal
application from the former agency! DO you have any idea what it costs
to do a frequency seach, co-ordination and re-programming (and retuning
duplexers) for a major public agency? I do, and it don't come cheap.

If any of your readers buy the current Police Call series and don't
find their local agencies listed, I suggest they call the local agency
and ask them "When does your FCC license expire"? I'll bet there will
be a lot of red faces -- and save the agency a lot of aggravation.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good point you raise about the lack of
cooperation/compliance between a local emergency agency and the FCC.
I've always noticed that Police Call carries that very disclaimer in
the front of the book. Mr. Hughes says that a lot of agencies do not
comply -- have no current license -- and therefore may not be listed.
I hope when you talk to him next you'll mention how useful I have found
his new publication, and that I hope it will be arranged by frequency
in subsequent editions just like the original. Mention to him also that
his partnership with Tandy/Radio Shack for the sale of the books seems
to be a good one also. Radio Shack scanner customers love the books.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: USPS & Smart Cards
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 10:28:33 PDT


Does anyone have an idea as to why the USPS and IRS (or whomever is
proposing this) wants to use "Smart Cards"?  WHy wouldn't the just use
mag-stipe cards?  The installed based of mag-stripe readers (at ATMs,
supermarkets, schools, etc.) is already in place.  Why change to these
new cards?

Are the Smart Cards supposed to actually "hold" the data?  I think
that is potentially dangerous.  What if I lose the card?  Is there a
backup?  Besides, isn't the point having a network to centralize data
into one repository (or at least a distributed, but constantly
accessible repository)?


Steve   [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, as someone mentioned yesterday,
this whole thing may be just a big crock anyway. It seems it went from
idle conversation at a social gathering to the point of "President
is ready to sign order" in a very short period of time. Yeah, what if
you lose the card?  Wouldn't that make a great time for the finder?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Durkin)
Subject: Dealing with Obscene Callers in the 90's
Date: 12 May 94 15:27:43 -0400
Organization: DECUServe


Hello,

   My wife received three obscene phone calls last week and in
contacting the phone company to follow-up on any possible future
invasions of this sort, the operator referred me to the Anonymous Call
Group at my local RBOC. She also stated tracing the call via IQ
services, *57, would get the call originator's number to show up on my
billing information, but that it takes five calls in a row to get any
action. I am in Southeastern Pennsylvania and I thought it best to
check this information out prior to launching any further actions.  I
don't think PA has yet lifted the ANI/CID restrictions?  I did check
the Telecom Archives, but was unable to find any documents on prank
calls and locating/prosecuting the culprit.  Any pointers/advice?


Thanks,

Mike Durkin  Intracorp
1205 Westlakes Drive
Berwyn, PA 19312
[phone] - Voice
[phone] - Fax


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We've covered this in various past issues
of the Digest (which are in the Archives) but off hand I could not tell
you which issues to look for without going to look myself. If some readers
have a specific reference to which back issues had those things maybe they
will pass them along. Yes, there is a lot you can do to end this type of
nuisance, and telcos will cooperate if you agree to prosecute.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Cid Technologies)
Subject: Responses From Telcos (was: CO/NY DC & Boston)
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 13:52:36 PDT


In response to my (usually) long post about Cell One/NY's extended
roaming rates and how NYNEX needs to catch up, Pat wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Doug, you have written to the Digest on
> many occassions over the past few years on cellular systems and their
> various shortcomings. Do any of the cell companies *ever* respond to
> your articles here, or your inquiries of them and make the desired
> changes? Have any of them ever corrected their problems after you gave
> them notice?   PAT]

Well, it depends what you mean by respond -- I get all sorts of
responses; just recently a guy wrote back to me and said something to
the effect of "I didn't understand a word of what you said, but it
sounded very interesting to me, thanks!".

But yes, many of the cell co's which I post about do eventually
directly respond. A recent post about NYNEX brought a response
regarding the lack of a "Do Not Disturb" (sorry, Ericsson :) ) code
the on BAMS AT&T switches in DC for NYNEX customers. As noted in
yesterday's posting, this situation has not been resolved as of yet,
but at the very least the post seems to have served as a reminder that
there is a problem which needs to be addressed.

A post about four years ago regarding CO/NY's problems with its
roaming partners drew a swift and effective response -- in a few weeks
all of the problems were cleared up, and I got to know a few people
there who I can talk to whenever something else comes up. (And I know
I've said this before, but it bears repeating: CO/NY and most other
McCaw systems are probably the most responsive, concerned, polite, and
friendly cellular companies to deal with, and manifest a *genuine*
desire to listen to customer complaints and promptly address them).

More recently, a non-cellular complaint responding to a question about
Cable&Wireless' service drew a number of responses from C&W, and ANI
-> CID delivery suddenly started working again in some areas. (Hey
guys, can you do West Hartford, CT, 203-233 too? It used to work there
as well ... thanks! ;) )

A post about PageMart cutting back on the number of digits drew a LOT
of responses (thanks!). Some guy was even considerate enough to do a
breakdown of the costs associated with transmission of 15 digits vs.
24 digits, and I got two calls from managers at PageMart about the post
saying basically that 22 (or 24?) digit service had been restored.

So in general, yeah, I do get responses from the companies which I
criticize. In some cases, the response is a direct message or call
from a representative in the top levels of the firm. At other times, I
get a e-mail message or a phone call from someone who works at the
company, sees that I have a problem, and tries to work it out with me
(ie, a tech person or someone at that level of corporate operations.
And finally, there are cases where I post something, and "mysteriously"
the problem gets resolved - no phone calls, no messages, it just suddenly
starts working again right after the post goes out over the net. (I
like these the best -- no need to send "Thank You" notes or make
followup calls! :) )

I don't mean to sound like I am trying to use the Digest as my
personal "Telcom-problem-server", where I deposit messages so that the
telcos and cellular companies can read them. I'd like to think (and
forgive me if this sounds too lofty) that it raises the level of
awareness to these issues, even by a fraction of a degree. Many of
these problems won't be solved unless enough customers notice it and
complain about it. It is also frequently the case that a cell company
will not even be aware that a problem exists. The dynamics of roaming
in all of the newly emerging call-delivery regimes can change so
frequently that it becomes potentially difficult if not impossible for
a roaming and/or networking department at a cell company to keep up
with all the issues that develop.

Clearly, most of the posts that I type up stem from a certain
disfunction or lacking which affects me, but I think that most of
these problems may at some time also affect other customers, and that
is probably why I do get responses.

I must add that I am continually amazed at the well, "power" that the
net has in terms of distributing the right information to the right
people, which I think more than anything is why a lot of these issues
that I mention are eventually addressed. One important (and probably
obvious) point: If you do post a complaint or raise an issue which you
would like addressed, leave your phone number. Many of the people who
read these at whatever telco are getting a faxed or hard-copy version
of your post and have no way of responding to you directly via e-mail,
or may not even know how to. I recently "discovered" this, and have
subsequently been getting more responses in a more timely manner than
before.


Doug    CID Technologies    [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: More and more people from telcos and
cell companies are 'coming aboard' on the mailing list for the Digest.
There is not a day goes by I do not add at least three or four --
usually more -- names to the mailing list of people involved with some
telco or another. Its good to know that when problems are discovered
someone is out there paying attention.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (JosephH888)
Subject: Directory Assistance Companies
Date: 12 May 1994 16:56:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


We are interested in knowing about companies that can lower our more
than $5,000 monthly in directory assistance charges.

Please post response here or e-mail direct to [e-mail] or
74124,2401 on Compuserve or fax to 609-953-7233. Personal business
fax, so no cover page or name required.

Thanks.

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

From: Ry Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: Verifone Junior Programming Hints Summary
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 10:53:36 PDT


Many people replied with useful information on reprogramming a Verifone.

Here's a quick summary of what I did and where I am today:

Verifone of Beaverton has yet to mail me any information.

I pulled the battery and -poof- the memory was dead, but it still says
memory positions 79 and 78 are <RESERVED> and I cannot reprogram it
because it asks for a PASSWORD? when I hit OPTION-STORE.

It no longer has a merchant ID and won't read cards. It defaulted from
AMEX VISA TRU-VALUE CHECK MASTERCARD to CREDIT CARD, CREDIT CARD,
CHECK, PRIVATE CARD, PRIVATE CARD.

Does anyone KNOW the default password, or how to reset it? This is a
VERIFONE-JUNIOR version 2.05 (Displayed on boot and on a sticker on
the ROM).  It has a Z80 and 32K of ROM, 32K of RAM.

Email me and I'll summarize the results.


Ry

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

From: Ry Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cell Fone Kloned ... Theft
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 11:24:24 PDT


My cell fone was kloned in Chicago a few years ago with many thousands of
dollars of calls to Columbia, etc.

GTE took the charges off, no problem, but they required I send them a
copy of the bill (!) and a letter stating that I didn't make the
calls. No funny fone stuff.

This past month, a cell fone of my pal's was cloned and used for
nefarious purposes. Cell One (in 206, I'm from 812) took the charges
off AFTER the phone was returned to be re-programmed at an authorized
Cell One Dealer.

Weird.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Communication Networks (FDDI-ATM) Course
Date: 12 May 1994 19:10:28 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


U.C. BERKELEY   Continuing Education in Engineering
Announces a short course on Communication Networks:

COMMUNICATION NETWORKS: FROM FDDI TO ATM
(August 9-10, 1994)

     This course provides an overview of the operating principles and
design guidelines for communication networks, and includes a
description of the popular current networks and a discussion of major
industry trends.  Topics include: History and Operating Principles,
Open System Interconnection, Overview of High-Speed Networks, Physical
Layer, Switching, Trends in Data Networks (FDDI, DQDB, Frame Relay,
SMDS), Trends in Telecommunication Networks (SONET, Fiber to the home,
ISDN, Intelligent Networks, ATM) , Topological Design of Networks,
Control of ATM Networks.  Comprehensive course notes will be provided.

Lecturers:

PRAVIN VARAIYA, Ph.D., Professor of Electrical Engineering and
Computer Sciences, University of California, Berkeley.  At Berkeley he
works on stochastic systems, communication networks, power systems and
urban economics. He is the author of "Stochastic Systems: Estimation,
Identification, and Adaptive Control" (Prentice-Hall, 1986) and
coeditor of "Discrete Event Systems: Models and Applications"
(Springer, 1988).  He is a fellow of the IEEE.

JEAN WALRAND, Ph.D., Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer
Sciences, University of California, Berkeley.  He is the author of "An
Introduction to Queuing Networks" (Prentice-Hall, 1988) and
"Communication Networks: A First Course" (Irwin/Aksen, 1991).

For more information (brochure with complete course descriptions,
outlines,instructor bios, etc.,) send your postal address to:

Richard Tsina
U.C. Berkeley Extension
Continuing Education in Engineering
2223 Fulton St.
Berkeley, CA 94720
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
email:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 13 May 94 23:37:54 -0500
Subject: BCE Plans Satellite Broadcast Service
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


{The Toronto Star} this week reports of a new Canadian broadcast
satellite service proposal. BCE, the parent company of Bell Canada and
Northern Telecom, announced a proposed $60 million/four-year
investment in a multi-channel satellite broadcast service. Plans are
to get the service started April '95, eventually offering up to 100
Canadian and U.S. channels. This is intended as competition to
Directv, whose operations are expected to start up in Canada later in
1994.

BCE is teaming up with Canadian Satellite Communications (Cancom) and
WIC (Western International Communications). Cancom already runs its
Oak-encrypted (soon to be compression-encrypted) superstation package;
WIC operates various stations such as CHCH Hamilton (on the existing
Cancom package). Needless to say, cable industry representatives have
not reacted favourably to this "death star" service.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 12 May 94 21:29:12 -0500
Subject: Canadian Carrier ACC - First Quarter News
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


[from an ACC press release via CNW]

ACC TELENTERPRISES LTD. REPORTS RECORD QUARTERLY REVENUES AND PROFITS

TORONTO, May 10 /CNW/ - ACC TelEnterprises Ltd. ("ACC") today
announced its results for the first quarter of 1994.

For the three months ended March 31, 1994 ACC reported record
quarterly income of $305,317 or $.05 per share compared to $133,768 or
$.03 per share for the same period last year. First quarter 1994
revenue was $25.3 million, up 38% from $18.3 million a year ago. The
Company's volume of business as measured by billable minues increased
64.7% to 112 million minutes for the quarter, up from 68 million
minutes in the first quarter of 1993.

Stated Robert C. Watson, President and Chief Executive Officer, "We
are pleased with these results and with the ability to differentiate
ACC from other resellers through sound financial management and a
commitment to profitability."

The Company experienced strong growth in toll minutes from both
commercial and residential customers. Commercial toll minutes have
grown 40% over the first quarter of last year. Residential toll
minutes grew to 17% of total minutes from less than 1% of total
minutes in the first quarter of 1993. Growth in residential tolls is
attributable to the success of the Company's university and affinity
programs. The Company currently has exclusive, multiyear marketing
agreements with seven universities, two colleges and two major service
associations.

Gross margin after network costs improved to 32.2% compared to 28.4%
in the first quarter of last year. This reflects the implementation of
the first phase of equal access, as well as increased network
efficiencies resulting from continued growth in customers, as the
Company has expanded into Albert and Manitobe and continued to
increase its residential customer base.

Depreciation and amortization expense doubled to $1.4 million from $.7
million in the first quarter of 1993 due to the change in useful life
of dialers to two years, the increase in amortization associated with
the acquisition of the ISM customer base in July 1993 and the
acquisition of two agents in the first quarter of 1994.

Selling, General and Administrative costs increased to 23.1% of
revenue from 21.6% a year ago. This increase is mainly due to
increases in payroll and other costs related to expanding the business
in new markets and administering the growth in billable minutes.

Watson further stated, "The results reflected continued strong sales
growth even in the face of pricing pressures. While our primary goal
is to build market share, we are equally focused on customer service
and financial performance. Companies focussed on delivering a quality
product while meeting the customers' needs will be the winners."

The Company is making ready for equal access and the related
conversion costs.  The Company believes the costs to convert existing
customers to an equal access network could be (dependent on CRTC
actions) approximately $500,000 over the next two quarters. Stated
Watson, "Equal access, coupled with the opportunity to offer new
products, like 1-800 service, will allow us new avenues to provide
value added service to our customers, but the associated start-up
costs will place pressure on Second Quarter and Third Quarter
earnings".

ACC TelEnterprises Ltd., a Canadian company headquartered in Toronto,
provides worldwide long distance voice and data service to business,
residential and university customers in Ontario, Quebec, British
Columbia, Manitoba and Alberta. The Company operates in 32
metropolitan centres and currently has an annualized revenue run rate
in excess of $100 million.

ACC TelEnterprises Ltd. is traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange and
the Montreal Exchange under the symbol "ACL".

[detailed financial data omitted; available through the CNW fax service]

For further information: Robert C. Watson, President and Chief Executive
Officer, ACC TelEnterprises Ltd., Etobicoke, Ontario, [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip
Date: Fri, 13 May 94 2:29:59 EDT


I was scrutinizing my cellular bill this evening and noted this
fascinating (well, sort of fascinating fact):

My long distance carrier is Sprint, which bills directly, not through
my cell carrier NYNEX.  For about three quarters of the LD calls,
Sprint billed the call as a minute shorter than NYNEX did.  I presume
that this is because NYNEX starts the clock as soon as I hit Send,
while Sprint doesn't start until the call supervises.  On the other
hand, for roamer calls with the LD charges billed through NYNEX, the
LD and cellular times are the same.

If you use an LD carrier who bills through your cell carrier (notably
AT&T), the LD times are all the same as the cellular times, meaning
that you're paying for LD minutes you didn't actually use.

Another advantage of separate LD billing is that you can get the
various silly discount plans, e.g. I have Sprint's Most plan.  The
number I call the most is my own home number (while roaming in New
York and Connecticut, primarily), which also has Sprint service, so
the LD minutes are 40% cheaper than they would be otherwise.


Regards,

John Levine, comp.compilers moderator
[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #220
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07661;
          13 May 94 13:51 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21480; Fri, 13 May 94 10:31:06 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21471; Fri, 13 May 94 10:31:04 CDT
Date: Fri, 13 May 94 10:31:04 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #221

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 13 May 94 10:31:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 221

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Toll Free Prank Calls (Douglas Adams)
    Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows (Mark W. Schumann)
    Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows (Michael G. Godwin)
    Re: Firms Vie for Three-Digit Phone Numbers (Nigel Allen)
    Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Randy Gellens)
    Re: Internet White Pages (David McIntyre)
    Re: Internet White Pages (Bill Blum)
    Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID (John R. Levine)
    Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where? (Eric Jacksch)
    Re: FTP Server Site (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Looking For Information on Faxmail Systems (Jeff Robertson)
    Re: Internet by Satellite (Edwin Wise)
    Re: Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers (Harbir Singh Kohli)
    Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: 'NNX' Area Codes?  I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway (Doug Adams)
    Re: DID Loophole or I'm Screwed up? (Vance Shipley)
    Re: DunsNet (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Call Display From New York (Danny Burstein)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Adams Douglas)
Subject: Re: Toll-Free Prank Calls
Organization: CTS Network Services (CTSNET/crash), San Diego, CA
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 19:03:44 GMT


> Southern Bell were at the dude's door the next day with a warrant and
> local police officers for backup. Naturally everything in sight relating
> to telecom or computers was seized -- the usual routine in cases which
> involve phreaking. Over the three billing cycles during which this had
> been going on it cost Falwell several thousand dollars which Southern
> Bell wrote off for goodwill, charging it to AT&T. AT&T filed criminal
> charges against the phreak and asked for restitution.

Do I recall correctly that AT&T lost this suit? On the grounds of
something like Falwell's global advertisement of the 800 number
constituted "solicitation for use of service" or some other legal
jargon?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You stand corrected. They did not lose.
The complaint was not that he had been solicited to use the service and
then did so ... the complaint was that contrary to tariff and in violation
of the law he caused the telephone to ring repeatedly in an effort to
harass. Virtually (maybe every) state in the USA has laws on the books
relating to causing another's telephone to ring then not speaking up when
the connection has been established. As a side note, the case was reported
in various media including {The Advocate}, a national newspaper for gay
people. {The Advocate} gleefully reported how Falwell had changed his 800
number after the paper had reported the story earlier in detail, including
giving his 800 number in the article. The paper then promptly gave out his
new number, with one of those 'we do not encourage you to violate the law
by calling Falwell's new number which is 800-xxx-xxxx' type reports.

The usually jovial Falwell (when he has a rally, there will always be a
large crowd of gay people there to protest and counter-demonstrate; he
never fails to walk over, smile and shake hands with all the gay guys, take
some out to lunch afterward on his expense account and thank them for being
there; he once said if all the gay people did not show up everywhere he
went he might consider paying them to show up) responded that if guerilla
warfare was now the tactic he wondered what the results would be if 'a few
million' conservative right-wing Christians were advised 'not to break
the law' by calling the {Advocate's} 800 number for subscription renewals
and 'the mailorder sale of porn magazines and sex toys ...'. Apparently
the owners of the {Advocate} gave that cheerfully stated threat some very
solemn consideration and decided not to publish Falwell's 800 number any
longer.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark W. Schumann)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 19:39:42 GMT
Organization: Systems for Today's Retailer, Brecksville, Ohio USA


In article <[e-mail]>, Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>> [Telecom Digest Editor's Note:... Very few [radio call-in shows] are
>> willing to provide an 800 number for you to camp out on at their
>> expense.

> A nationally syndicated one comes from here in the Washington, DC area.

> The phone number to call into it is 1-800-G-G-Liddy.

> Anyone else know of any beyond Rush Limbaugh, which was posted here
> earlier?  Another local station has its own 800 number for its call-in
> programs.

What Do You Know gives its number as 1-800-WHA-KNOW.  As in "One,
eight hundred, wah-no.  Or whack now."

It's on American Public Radio at 1100 EST Saturdays, at least on WCPN
90.3 FM in Cleveland.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael G. Godwin)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 01:57:18
Organization: BDM International, Inc.


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

>> [Telecom Digest Editor's Note:... Very few [radio call-in shows] are
>> willing to provide an 800 number for you to camp out on at their
>> expense.

> A nationally syndicated one comes from here in the Washington, DC area.

> The phone number to call into it is 1-800-G-G-Liddy.

> The name of the host of the show is left as an exercise to the reader. :)

> Anyone else know of any beyond Rush Limbaugh, which was posted here
> earlier?  Another local station has its own 800 number for its call-in
> programs.

There's also the "Don (Geronimo) and Mike (O'Meara)" show that also
originates from here in the D.C. Area.  They've been a fixture locally
for years and finally went national six to twelve months ago (maybe
even longer, I can't remember).  They're picking up new markets all
the time.  Their number is 1-800-636-1067.

And lets not forget the infamous Greaseman, who now broadcasts
nationally out of L.A.  He has an 800 number but it escapes me at the
moment.  I would imagine that Howard Stern also has one but I'm not
sure.


Mike

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 01:59:50 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Re: Firms Vie for Three-Digit Phone Numbers
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet, Ottawa, Canada
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In a previous article, [e-mail] (Monty Solomon) says:

> Excerpt from {The Boston Globe}, Friday, May 6, 1994

> Businesses eager for a new outlet in the information age grabbed up
> three-digit telephone numbers awarded in a first-ever lottery by
> Southern Bell yesterday.

> The company, a unit of BellSouth Corp., assigned the numbers, 211,
> 311, 511, 711 and 811 in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and Orlando.

Advocates for the hearing-impaired in Canada convinced Bell Canada to
assign 711 to the voice relay service that allows the hearing-impaired
who use TDDs (telecommunications devices for the deaf) to communicate
with hearing people who do noot have a TDD.  I think that other
Canadian telephone companies will also adopt the 711 number. (The 711
number does not work yet in some communities with older switching
equipment. People there will still have to dial an 800 number to reach
the voice relay service.)

I do not know whether any hearing-impaired advocacy groups formally
opposed BellSouth's application to offer the n11 numbers to private
businesses, but it would make sense for the U.S. to adopt 711 as a
uniform national number to reach the local voice relay service.


Nigel Allen   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 01 MAY 94 23:12:00 GMT
Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet


> Anyone who has access to the Internet ...  can reach City Hall by
> addressing their message to [e-mail].

Why are they in the Commercial domain, and not the Government domain?


Randall Gellens         [e-mail]
Net**2 656-6350     (Please forward bounces to
Mail Stop MV 237         [e-mail])


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because, as I understand it, '.gov' only
applies to the *federal* government. I don't think it was ever defined
for local or state government use.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David McIntyre)
Subject: Re: Internet White Pages
Organization: QMS, Inc.
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 16:15:59 CST


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jan
Richert) writes:

> Could anyone email me the exact title of the Internet White Pages,
> publisher and ISBN number?

ISBN: WASTE-OF-MONEY
URL: ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet-addresses/lists


david_mcintire@ 2 Opinions expressed  2 More fun than I
cts.qms.com     3 are entirely my own 3 should be having
fnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnord
PGP 2.3a key available. Finger [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 21:38:30 EDT
From: Bill Blum <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Internet White Pages


Tried to send e-mail back to original requestor (J Rickert) ... but I
either copied the address down incorrectly (or else  ;-)
Perhaps he means this book:

The Internet Directory
by: Eric Braun
Fawcett Columbine 1994
ISBN 0-449-90898-4

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 06:24:19 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID


> In other words, per-line blocking is a bad idea because subscribers
> are too dumb to unblock calls when they want to unblock them, although
> they're not to dumb to block calls when they want to block them.

This is not what was said at all: a correct statement would be that a
subscriber might not know how to unblock or, that unblocking was
needed, or even that the line was blocked when an emergency call is
placed and they might not have blocked it.

We have already seen the question appear relating to "How do you know
with per line blocking if it is toggled on or off ?" One answer would
be star-six-seven on and "something else" off but the phone company only
has 100 star numbers now.

In that case it is not hard to imagine a scenario where all that can
be done is to dial 911 (of course 911 uses AMI not caller-id *now* and
for that matter, it would not be that hard to program a switch to
unblock calls to certain numbers.

Personally, I agree with the basic service being per-call blocking. I
doubt that additional features (just like unlisted numbers) will be
available for those who need them. While I understand the poster's
comments, it is too bad he felt the need for additional and unwarrented
psychological loading.


Padgett

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

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 13:04 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller ID
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> I picked up a copy of the FCC's Caller ID order, which is available by
> FTP as /pub/Orders/Common_Carrier/orcc4001.txt or orcc4001.wp.  (Kudos
> to the FCC for making this info available so easily and quickly, by
> the way.)

A few readers have pointed out that these files are much easier to
find if you know that the FTP site is fcc.gov.  Oops.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Jacksch)
Subject: Re: CallerID With Serial Port - Where?
Organization: a.k.a. insom.ve3xej.ampr.org
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:21:39 GMT


> fine investment. Who else sells CID boxes with serial ports?   PAT]

While slightly different, CS ICON Inc. in Manotic, Ontario (613)
692-2480 sells a board for PC's called CSID.  The board not only has
the capability of receiving caller-id information, but also can switch
the call to one of three output ports, take the phone off-hook, dial
dtmf or pulse, does distinctive ring detection, and has a host of
other features.  It will run under ms-dos, windows, or as a TSR.  The
product is excellent for securing dial-in lines as well as use in a
home or small office environment.


Cheers,

Eric

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 03:09:44 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FTP Server Site
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Kenn Krasner <[e-mail]>, writes:

> Can anyone point me to some detailed info on setting up an FTP
> server site?  I'd greatly appreciate it!

You need three things: a computer with an Internet connection; the
priveleges on that computer to run a process that can access the
network directly on the FTP port, as well as various files on the
system which belong to anyone running on the account selected, unless
you plan to run anonymous FTP only and only allow it access to its own
files or files shared with it; and an FTPD server.

FTPD server are readily available from many places.  You will need a C
compiler for most of them to recompile sources for your machine.  Note
that you need an FTPD server, not an FTP client.  There are two parts
to FTP; the client FTP program that dials up a site and asks for
files, and an FTPD server that accepts incoming calls and returns
information in response to requests.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Robertson)
Subject: Re: Looking For Information on Faxmail Systems
Date: 13 May 1994 01:03:03 GMT
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


> I am looking for information on systems that can handle fax calls on a
> store-and-forward basis. I've used systems like FaxFacts from Copia,
> but am not sure about their support on a few key issues:

> CLID support
> DID support

> If anybody has information on software/hardware to do this, I'd
> appreciate the information.

Try Ibex FactsLine for Windows it has a DNIS/CLID software module
(requires proper Dialogic hardware and phone lines).  I have installed
a similar system up here in Toronto.


Computer Telephone Integrators (CTI)    Fax-On-Demand
3044 Bloor St. W.                       Call Centre Automation
Toronto, ON, Can., M8X 1C4              Computer Telephone Int.
(416)-399-0584                          IVR & Predictive Dialing

JEFF ROBERTSON                  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Edwin Wise)
Subject: Re: Internet by Satellite
Date: 13 May 1994 05:31:22 GMT
Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange


Mr. Soonthon Lupkitaro ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I do not know its advantage to access Internet via satellite. Can anyone
> give me some idea?

No, really -- a net hookup via outer space has some definite
advantages.  If you are in the outback, running a cable to the nearest
industrial city can pose a real challenge.  If you live in a small
town, a business hookup can also get extremely expensive.

I, too, am interested in the possibilities of satellite hookup to the
net.  Can it be done? (doh -- anything *can* be done) Is it done?  How
expensive is it?  Who do I talk to?


Regards,

Edwin   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harbir Singh Kohli)
Subject: Re: Help Needed Contacting 1-800 Numbers
Date: 13 May 1994 08:42:32 +0200
Organization: Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway


Why don't you do what I always do? Call directory information foreign
and get the numbers you need. Though I never call the local directory
information, I call AT&T's information number and get the local
number; you need the name and location.  You can use AT&T USA Direct
etc. The numbers will be in the {International Herald Tribune}. Sprint
and MCI also offer this service but they have very poor service in
terms of picking up the phone in my experience.

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number
Date: 13 May 1994 05:46:27 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Barry S.
Rein) writes:

> We're moving soon and we'll have to get a new phone number.  For
> $10.00 Pacific Bell will let me choose any phone number with the right
> prefix as long as it's not already taken.

> I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to
> remember.  Restaurants are supposedly willing to kill for a memorable
> phone number, so I wonder if there is any research or recommendations
> on how to select one, ie what combinations are remembered; what
> combinations are most often mis-dialed, etc.

> Incidentally, our exchange prefixes are 398, 791, 794, 797, and 798 -- 818
> area code.

Well, I am sure the criteria you mention are important, but ... I
suggest that others are important too.

For example, maybe you prefer an exchange that does *not* support
Caller-ID, so that when you call others they will not block you, yet
will not see your number.

Or maybe you prefer an exchange that *does* offer Caller-ID.

If you prefer the former, be aware, of course, that sooner or later
your exchange will get upgraded to Caller-ID.

Why not ask for an exchange that is ISDN capable?

Last but not least, there are still exchanges that do not let you
choose your long distance carrier (force you to AT&T).  You don't want
one of those, do you?


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did not think there were any central
offices not yet equipped for equal access. Are there really?   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 06:52:16 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes?  I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate


> In some prior articles, the term 'NNX' has been used to refer to the
> new format for area codes debuting in International Dialing Zone 1 on
> January 15, 1995.

> While this is the format that is being added to the current area code
> system is technically correct with respect to the additions, I think
> that this term is wrong and misleading.

I disagree.  People have been referring to the new area *codes* as
"NNX" codes because (as you mention), that's exactly what they are.
Contrary to your first line above, I've yet to see anyone refer to the
new overall area code *format* as "NNX", only as "NXX", which is
correct.

> Based on this, references to the new area codes should say 'NXX' area
> codes, and not 'NNX' area codes, as it might indicate that the old
> area codes with 0 and 1 as the middle digit are being replaced by the
> new area codes, which is not the case.

I think such an assumption is a non-sequitur.  Why would anyone think
that the appearance of new area codes such as 334 and 520 imply that
all the old area codes are going to change?  No one worried about such
things when new N0X/N1X area codes were introduced.  I, for one, am
going to continue to use "NNX" when discussing the new NPAs.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Adams Douglas)
Subject: Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Information Superhighway
Organization: CTS Network Services (CTSNET/crash), San Diego, CA
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:21:04 GMT


Lauren Weinstein ([e-mail]) wrote:

> "TV & MOVIE MANIA" RADIO SHOW HITS THE INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lauren Weinstein is a long time participant
> in the Internet, and a charter subscriber to TELECOM Digest, dating back
> to 1981 when this journal was first published. From time to time I like
> to reprint his classic message, "The Day the Bell System Died", and
> before long it will be time for it again. His latest venture, the "Neon"
> thing, has been enormously successful and if you have not called to
> listen to it, you really should.   PAT]

PAT, I would also think it prudent to mention that this serves as a
fine example of how advertising on the Net can work and commercial
services here can be distributed without rudeness or disruption of
other Net users.  Best of luck to Lauren, I think the first choice for
an interview guest was inspired -- and a sign of a true net.person :).

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: DID Loophole or I'm Screwed up?
Organization: XeniTec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 01:45:46 GMT


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

> Per FCC Part 68 and TELCo tariffs, anything other than audible ring
> and busy tone (with some exceptions) is "meaningful" -- and the call
> must be supervised (answered).  This includes calls routed to
> TELCo-operated Voice Mail systems, which have been known to forget ...

Exceptions include recorded announcements like:

"You have reached an out of service number at ABC Corporation"

Unfortunately some carriers were able to convince the FCC that this
was enough of a problem that they now require manufacturers of PBXs to
hard code answer supervision for trunk to trunk calls including those
to recorded announcement trunks.  They put the onus on the manufacturers
to prevent people from being able to take advantage of the telcos.  The
unfortunate result is that now companies must return supervision when
a call is forwarded to another company location even if it not answered.
Supervision will be returned no matter what after a few seconds.  In
most cases all recorded announcements will now return supervision.

As I understand it it the basic rules haven't changed as far as when
answer supervision must be returned by an existing PBX.  What has
changed is that to manufacture or import PBXs into the United States
they must be inflexibly configured to return answer supervision when a
call is answered.

If you call a company location in city A and the call is directed
across the companies private TIE line network to their location in
city B, and the call is unanswered, supervision is not required.  If
you have an existing network which has been in service for a number of
years, and your telephone equipment supplier is professional, this is
probably the case.  The call is unanswered, the call is not billable.
Those are the rules which have governed telephone service for decades
upon decades.

A new PBX would be required to return answer supervision within a few
seconds of seizing the outgoing TIE trunk.  The call will pretty well
always be billable now.  The same deal with recordings, once you route
the call to an intercept recording the PBX will return answer
supervision regardless of the content of the message.

This probably seems reasonable or just to many of you but to me it's
another case of watering down the service of all the law abiding users
for the sake of an undetermined amount of cheating of the telcos.  The
onus should have been on them to detect those abuses instead of the
manufacturers and users of equipment bearing the expense and
inconvenience.  Typical though.


Vance Shipley, [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 05:33:00 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: DunsNet


On 03 May 1994 10:49:04 PST, [e-mail] (Thrivikrama
Shenoy) said:

> DunsNet is a corporate packet switching network of Dun & Bradstreet
> Corporation. It is a X.25 packet switching network spanning U.S,
> Europe, Australia. Recently I heard it reached India too.

Is that pronounced "Dunce-Net"?  Hey, just askin'...

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: Re: Call Display From New York
Date: 13 May 1994 01:37:12 -0400


In <[e-mail]> Tony Harminc <[e-mail].
edu> writes:

> A colleague left a message on my machine here in Toronto while he was
> waiting for a plane at JFK airport in New York.  To my surprise, the
> Call Display data was not 'out of area' as it usually is for calls
> from the USA, but the rather unlikely number 212 210-0000.

What's even more unusual here is that JFK airport is in the borough of
Queens in NYC, and thus has areacode 718, not 212 ...


[e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #221
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08432;
          13 May 94 15:08 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23743; Fri, 13 May 94 11:44:37 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23733; Fri, 13 May 94 11:44:34 CDT
Date: Fri, 13 May 94 11:44:34 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #222

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 13 May 94 11:44:30 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 222

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop? ([e-mail])
    Re: Graceful Degradation (Bill Tighe)
    Re: What is the Mercury Button? (Neil Watson)
    Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Attempts? (Kaita Seikku)
    Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Attempts? (Chip Sharp)
    Re: GSM and Airbags (David Breneman)
    Re: 3270 Emulation (Jack Hamilton)
    Re: 3270 Emulation (William M. Eldridge)
    Re: Meeks Defense Fund (Stephen Cohoon)
    Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Delrina Fax MailBox Retrieval and Class 2 Modems (Jack Bzoza)
    Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (John Musselman)
    Digital MSK Modem Questions ([e-mail])
    Request For an FTP Site For X509 (Pat Worden)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Butch lcroan/.nameBalcroan Lilli)
Subject: Re: Can Residential Voltage (?) Drop?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 07:29:25 GMT


[e-mail] wrote:

>>> Is voltage somehow involved in "ringing" so that a decrease would
>>> cause to small a *something* for devices like modem cards and handsets
>>> to respond to?  Where does this happen, and what's the fix?

>> Ringing is a low-frequency AC signal applied to the line (Typically 90
>> volts at 20 Hertz).  Tell the repair desk that "ringing voltage is not
>> being applied".  They will likely find the problem to be the line
>> equipment (printed circuit card in modern exchanges) feeding your
>> line.

> If the above call to the local TELCO doesn't work please submit
> private e-mail and I will give you the answer you can then decide if
> you want to make it public after it is tried ... BTW if it is what I
> suspect it is be prepared for the other line to have the same problem
> shortly ....

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do tell us more!  PAT]

I am not sure all problems mentioned above relate to this little
problem about to be mentioned ... but always be aware there is the
possibility of a "PAIR-GAIN DEVICE" or "SUBCRIBER CARRIER" between the
voltages the CO generates on analog tip and ring pair and the analog
tip and ring pair that is attached to the phones in question. I would
also like to caution regarding all phones as there is no way the
phones you get free from {TIME & LIFE} for a subscription is as good
as the NTI, AT&T, GTE or other phones purchased at the Phone-Mart in the
mall.

1.) PAIR GAIN devices are of various generations and some work better
than others at ringing more phones than one. The voltage and current
can both be in question.

2.) The capacitance can vary greatly between a "cheapie" phone and a
more expensive phone. There is also the resistance between the T & R
that can cause a shorting or shunting of a AC signal such as the
ringing voltage.

This can also cause the phone to ring once and then stop because of
the momentary short cause by the insulation breakdown cause the 20
milliamp current caused by a off hook condition. This is read by the
CO as an answer! Then the ringing stops and so does the current flow
and ooooppps no answer! This was found to be the case in a state that
will remained unnamed ... we (NTI) had a engineer camped out at the
customer site wait for the problem to be reproduced and as he was
watching TV on came an advertisement ... he went to the store in the
mall that was giving away one of these phones for free just for coming
down ...  well it was tested next day and the above was found. They
had been giving them away all month long. This was the problem that
had went to a VP level to find ... oh BTW a Automatic Line Insulation
Test (which had been requested at least three times by NTI but telco
said NO IT WOULD BE A WASTE OF TIME) found several of these "$3.95"
phones ... not a defective piece of software as the telco had suggested.


Butch     email [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Tighe)
Subject: Re: Graceful Degradation
Date: 13 May 94 11:24:24 GMT


[e-mail] (jerry levin @ Trident Data Systems)
wrote:

> Can anyone explain to me what is meant by graceful degradation when
> referring to a data bus?

Computer redundancy can be implemented in many ways and the method
used depends on the demands of the application.

"Graceful degredation" refers to a redundancy method used for
applications where it is advantageous to keep all resources on line
when they are functional.  As modules fail they are taken off line and
the total computer power is reduced.  Thus computer power "gracefully
degrades" and error recovery techniques hide the failure from the
users.

Sequoia uses this method for on line transaction processing.  Computer
modules, 68xxx I beleive, run in parallel and if one fails, the load
is shifted to the remaining units.  Users may notice an increase in
response time but they still have a working system.

Since no expensive modules are sitting idle, the customer gets high
performance and reliability for the lowest possible cost.

Some applications such as aircraft control cannot work with a degraded
computer so full idle backup units must be used.  Some aircraft
systems have triple redundancy, two backups for each working computer.
Expensive but necessary.


Bill Tighe             Email:  [e-mail]
Phone:  [phone]   FAX:    [phone]

PCMCIA; People Can't Memorize Computer Industry Acronyms

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

From: [e-mail] (Neil Watson)
Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button?
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:13:11 GMT


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

>>> Detailed question about Mercury button deleted.

The Mercury button is a slightly special "one press" memory button.

To access Mercury you need to dial their access code (131 for the 2200
service), wait for dialtone again (high pitched noise) then dial a 10
digit PIN (for identification) followed at last by the called number.

The additional complexity is that the Access code will have to be
dialled in whichever mode your BT exchange will support (ie it may
have to be pulse) and the rest of the number after the Mercury DT has
to be DTMF (tone). Thus a phone that can switch between pulse and tone
dialling mid-way through a memory dial is a requirement. If you're in
a tone-dialling area (which is most exchanges now), then this isn't an
issue.

Other things that go into the "suitability" for use on Hg are the
ability to sequentially dial memories (to dial a certain relative we
dial mem 1 followed by mem 5) and the ability to dial other numbers
while the phone is still dialling the memory. Also your "last number
redial" register needs to be 24 digits or so!

 From this information you will realize that it is not strictly
necessary to have a phone with the fancy blue button to use Mercury. I
personally have a normal phone that I've programmed mem 1 to do the
Mercury predial and it works just fine. Then again a single, clearly
identified button to identify the long distance carrier is simpler.

Another thing to take into account is Mercury's recently announced 132
service which uses ANI/CLI to determine the authenticity of the
caller.  To use this you only need dial 132 followed by the called
number.  Unfortunately it requires a modern BT exchange and so isn't
available everywhere that can access Mercury yet ... (yes, I know CLI
isn't available to subscribers in the UK yet, but LD carriers are a
different matter.)

> They have a perfectly good BT "Tribune" phone set that has some
> special attachments for the hearing impaired, but are under the
> impression that they can't use it if they want to use Mercury. (I have
> a feeling that they don't really need the Mercury phone set at all.)

I don't know about the Tribune -- many of the BT sourced phones didn't
have sufficient memory versatility to do the job for a Mercury Blue
button, but may well have enough for 132 access.


Good luck,

Neil

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

From: [e-mail] (Kaita Seikku)
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts?
Date: 13 May 1994 07:12:42 GMT
Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Computing Centre


TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> ... Some people, you see, leave the speaker turned off all the time
> and as a result don't even realize they are connecting to a live
> person in errror instead of another modem. I would rather have seen a
> rule saying that if voice was detected instead of carrier, the speaker
> would automatically turn on ...

What if the modems were equipped with DTMF receive capability, and
then the software while waiting for the connection to establish, would
fall back if any DTMF was detected? (Then it would just be tough to
those people who would not know about the DTMF implementation  ...)

Or actually, my real opinion :

As the new features are programmed into the switching software, there
should be a new command (like *21*redirection) to ignore calls from
the number that last called me (which would be a great help against
those "%$&/()= phone sales persons, too).

Of course thers's a problem in this, too, since your (B-subscriber's)
switch does not always get the A-subscriber number complete. (I mean
the old technics, not the deliberate disabling of caller ID, there
should be a command to ignore ALL calls that have been originated with
caller-ID disabled).


internet : [e-mail]  answering machine->pager : [phone]
real life: Seikku P. Kaita                 phone (or FAX) : [phone]
visit at : Saastajankuja 4b32 TAMPERE         On The Air  : OH3NYB
            ^^  ^ ^  ..these four a's should have double dots above them,
           since they are front vowels (as in word 'that'). Isn't it a pitty
           that in English the word GHOTI can be pronounced like word FISH.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually the feature you suggest has been
implemented. Call Screening allows either the entry of a number from which
the subscriber no longer wishes to receive calls or if that number is not
known (because the calling party blocked his ID) an entry for 'last call
recieved' in which case the CO will note the number and block further calls
 from it to the recipient even though the recipient is not given the number
in an effort to avoid violating the privacy of the caller.  Here in Illinois
Bell territory, we use *60 to add/delete numbers to our Call Screening
directory. If thus screened, the calling party gets an intercept message
saying the called party 'is not receiving calls at this time.'  It does not
say 'is not receiving calls from *you*' ... just 'not receiving calls'. Of
course the calling party can go to another telephone if they wish, but few
people bother; they simply take the hint and don't call back.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 08:22:29 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Chip Sharp)
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts


FYI,

Most countries have a redial limit much less than the FCC's current 15
redial attempts.  For example, Japan has a limit of 2 redials.

Some countries relax that limit somewhat if the redials are spaced a
certain amount of time apart.  You have to check with each country's
regulations to determine that time.

One interesting question is: Does the redial limit apply to ISDN
terminals or just to PSTN modems?  If it does apply to ISDN, does it
apply only to Speech and 3.1 kHz Audio (Voice-band data) calls or does
it also apply to 56/64 kbit/s data calls and multirate (i.e., n x 64
kbit/s) calls?


Hascall H. Sharp    Teleos Communications, Inc.
System Engineering    2 Meridian Road
            Eatontown, NJ  07724  USA
voice:  [phone] fax:    [phone]
email:   [e-mail]

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

From: daveb@jaws (David Breneman)
Subject: Re: GSM and Airbags
Date: 12 May 94 22:43:59 GMT
Organization: Digital Systems International, Redmond WA


Ben Burch ([e-mail]) wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]> Bill Tighe, [e-mail]
> writes:

>> ...  Some Audis in the early 80s would respond to RF by having the
>> cruise control go to full throttle while the ABS disabled the brakes!

> Ah, Bill, do you have any pointers to documentation on this?  I
> believe that the causes of the (fatal) Audi "unintended acceleration"
> events have always been in considerable doubt.  Audi claims that it is
> "driver error", since one can always override the throttle with the
> brakes, but since I have seen other cars have a simultaneous brake and
> throttle failure, I have always wondered.

This story is indeed bogus.  The only way ABS could "disable" the
brakes would be if it took out a wrench and unbolted the pedal.  The
infamous unintended accelleration legend is entirely the result of
people pressing down on the gas when they should have been using the
brake.  At least it allowd some people to pick up some really nice
cars cheap when the value of Audis dropped after these scare stories
circulated.


David Breneman                        Email: [e-mail]
System Administrator,                 Voice: 206 881-7544  Fax: [phone]
Product Development Platforms
Digital Systems International, Inc.        Redmond, Washington,  U. S. o' A.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Hamilton)
Subject: Re: 3270 Emulation
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 23:00:27 GMT


[e-mail] (Stillwater Systems) wrote:

> I'm looking for a good Shareware 3270 Emulator for Windows. I do a
> great deal of work in the VAX/VMS environment and use WRQ's Reflection
> 2 for Windows, however, this is not suited for the IBM mainframe
> environment. If you know of any 3270 Emulators for Windows, could you
> please provide me with the information I need to obtain them.

Your question really doesn't give enough information.  What are your
options for connecting to the mainframe?

If you can connect through SLIP or PPP or something else that provides
Winsock services, there is at least one tn3270 program available via
ftp from sunsite.unc.edu.  I don't remember the exact path, put it's
comething like micro/pc/winsock.

There are also several books on the market which include the dial-in
only version of NetManage's Chameleon v3.  It's not shareware, but
it's only $25 or so.


Jack Hamilton      Postal: POB 281107 SF CA 94128  USA
[e-mail]     Packet: kd6ttl@w6pw.#nocal.ca.us.na

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

From: [e-mail] (William M. Eldridge)
Subject: Re: 3270 Emulation
Date: 12 May 1994 19:42:01 -0700
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program


> I'm looking for a good Shareware 3270 Emulator for Windows. I do a
> great deal of work in the VAX/VMS environment and use WRQ's Reflection
> 2 for Windows, however, this is not suited for the IBM mainframe
> environment. If you know of any 3270 Emulators for Windows, could you
> please provide me with the information I need to obtain them.

We've had good luck with McGill's TCP3270.  It's pretty cheap as well
(don't remember the per machine cost, but a site license is something
like $500).  Contact Pierre Goyette ([e-mail]).

(Program requires Lan Workplace or Winsock)


Bill Eldridge   [e-mail]   310-206-3960 (3987 fax)

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 11:30:12 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Stephen Cohoon)
Subject: Re: Meeks Defense Fund
Organization: Computer Science Engineering at the Univ of Texas at Arlington


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Digest Editor notes:

      [Details of net.libel.defendent deleted]

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ...
      [Moderator's legitimizing deleted]

> The law says no libeling, period. Big corporation, little company,
> single individual, no matter. Newspapers have a little more freedom in
> this respect and all of us have a bit more freedom where politicians
> and 'public figures' are concerned, but no one can deliberatly libel
> another without paying the consequences.

      [More good points from Moderator deleted]

> Inform the net of your situation and plead for funds, but do not give
> us the bit about how the net is so different and special.
> Now I repeat: it seems a worthy cause otherwise. Lots of netters have
> come to my rescue in the past and I am glad to bring this latest need
> to the attention of our generous readers.   PAT]

This type of request has been showing up more frequently recently.
Someone finds themself in legal trouble and tries to rally the "net"
behind their cause.  Pat's statements are exactly on point.  If you
want the support of the net community then state your case.  Don't
just appeal to our sympathy based on our possession of a modem.  Did
Meeks make libelous statements or not?  What facts support his claim
that he is innocent?  Why should I believe that the people whose names
appear in this posting do in fact support his cause?  In my opinion
this request is suspect at best.  I believe in the value of the net
and moderated digests such as this one.  However, like all the other
forms of media, there are standards of journalism that must be adhered
to or the value of the media will disappear.


Just my opinions,

Stephen Cohoon   cohoon@cse.u ta.ed


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, if the names which appeared in
the article were there with the permission of the people they represent
(and I doubt the author just picked the names out of the ether and
attached them without permission) then I have no questions about the
authenticity of the appeal. Those are all respected net citizens. But
as you stated, I wish they would realize that merely having a modem and
being connected to the Internet is no longer -- if it ever was -- a
good enough common denominator. Merely publishing an e-journal or
maintaining a mailing list is not a tie that binds either. If anything,
the tie that binds e-journal editors/publishers/list maintainers ought
to be a desire to be treated on a par with the traditional print media,
and that includes the 'right' to get sued once in a while when you flap
your jaw at the wrong time, or when someone gets bent out of shape and
claims that you did. And our objective of course must be to defeat such
suits when they arise, thus my printing of the appeal. Still, some
people are their own worst enemies; that is particularly true on the net.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 10:20:32 PDT


Said by: Karim.Farrag

> For quite a while now I'am searching for a specific telephone probably
> manufactured by AT&T.Specific features: narrow receiver, the speech
> unit of the receiver is bent almost 90 degrees; the receiver is shaped
> like an L , wire phone, mostly seen in black colour.I suppose it most
> be a very common model in the US , because I saw in many different
> movies (ex. In the Line of Fire ,Last Action Hero, etc.). Unfortunaly
> AT&T here in Europe wasn't as cooperative as I thought. Now I am
> hoping that someone knows which phone I am talking about (telephone
> manufactor, model number) or maybe the main address of AT&T in the
> US.  Many thanks in advance.

It sounds like you are referring to the MERLIN/System 25,75, etc Voice
Terminals.  You will not be able to use these without a Control Unit,
which will cost more than $1500 in most cases.  The phones themselves
range from $250-500 depending on the size.


Steve  [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015

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

From: Jack Bzoza <[e-mail]>
Subject: Delrina Fax MailBox Retrieval & Class 2 modems
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 19:15:00 -0400


In a previous message to Jack Bzoza, Clarence Doid said:

>> WinFax 4.0 _requires_ a class 1 Faxmodem for mailbox retrieval.
>> The Class 2 faxmodem that I have cannot be used.

To which Jack Bzoza replied:

> Yes.  you're right.  That is a technical limitation of the hardware as
> 1t elates to the fax protocols. You also need a computer capable of
> running Windows.  I guess you won't be able to use it until you spring
> for $100 for a new modem.

BUT JACK BZOZA WAS WRONG !!

Catherine Murphy, of Delrina's Quality Assurance department advises:

"You may be referring to old information because for Fax MailBox
retreival using WinFax 4.0 Class 2 modems can be used. So can CAS
modem.  Only the remote retrieval is limited only to Class 1 modems.
When the UK version of WinFax with MailBoxes is available it will be
limited only to Class 1 modems. I hope this information is useful."

Sorry for any confusion I may have caused.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Musselman)
Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding
Date: 13 May 1994 04:54:27 -0700
Organization: North County Communications, San Diego, California


Mark W. Earle ([e-mail]) wrote:

> It should be noted that some roaming costs, though, have dropped in
> the last five months. The per minute charge is lower, and the daily
> fee is not charged. But this is not "universal" you still have to
> check where you intend to roam with the carrier and find out the up to
> the minute info. Of course the roam rate and daily fees (or lack
> thereof) influence greately how and how much the phone is used while
> out of town.

Roaming is still a ridiculous cost! Another thing I stress about: I am
a US West Cellular customer in San Diego. I travel to Phoenix often to
visit friends and family. I wanted to get a Phoenix number to avoid
roaming and take advantage of my dual-nam phone. It was cheaper to go
with Bell Atlantic in Phoenix than it was US West. US West could have
had 1 1/2 times the business from me, however different markets are
differently priced. For people like myself, I would like to see
cellular carriers that are in multiple cities offer a bonus to people
who have multiple numbers in multiple cities ...


Just my thoughts,
[e-mail] -John C. Musselman -Software Developer/System Analyst

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Digital MSK Modem Questions
Date: 12 May 94 16:21:08 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services


Hello there,

    I have some questions about MSK bit error rate performance.
Going through literature and papers I have encountered a number of MSK
implemenatations and different points of view. I have the following
questions:

1. Do all MSK implemenatations have the same performance? Serial MSK,
Parallel MSK, Fast MSK etc?

2. Parallel MSK is an OQPSK with half sine wave shaping the
transmitted pulse.  Therefore, the Pe (Probability of Error) for MSK
is the same as that for QPSK and BPSK (since Pe for BPSK and QPSK are
the same). MSK can also be viewed as orthogonal BFSK. However, the Pe
for orthogonal BFSK is Q(sqrt(Eb/No)) where the Pe for BPSK is
Q(sqrt(2Eb/No)). Thus, we have two different types of MSK giving
different performances. Is the above correct?

3. Also, in the literature it is mentioned that Serial MSK has a
better performance at higher bit rates? By performance do we mean Pe?
What is the reason for that? Does serial MSK has the same theoretical
performance as the parallel MSK?

4. I have seen in a book, I cannot recall which book was that, that
the PSD of a stationary process tells us about the probability of
occurence of each frequency component. In other words, if the PSD is
large at 1kHz for example then we can say that there is high
probability that the frequency component at 10kHz will occur. Is that
true? The reason that the PSD is a statistical function it should have
some statistical interpretation.

I would very much appreciate your response.


Thanks in advance,

Chris

Pleaase e-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Pat Worden)
Subject: Request For an FTP Site For X509
Date: 12 May 1994 21:31:35 GMT
Organization: U.C.S.D. Department of Communication


Can anyone send me a name for the site to download X509 protocol
descriptions?

Please send any replies to me a [e-mail]. I am borrowing
my wife's account due to a network screwup on my compnay's machine.)


Thanks,

Peter Benson

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #222
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09006;
          13 May 94 16:12 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26025; Fri, 13 May 94 12:42:04 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26012; Fri, 13 May 94 12:42:01 CDT
Date: Fri, 13 May 94 12:42:01 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #223

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 13 May 94 12:42:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 223

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    FCC Releases Fiber Deployment Analysis (Bob Keller)
    Radio by Phone (Gregory P. Monti)
    Query About 911 in MIDDLE of Phone Numbers (fico![e-mail])
    Cable Management (John Holman)
    FTS2000/DCTN Policy (David Vaughan)
    Regulatory Analyst Opening (Phil Bullock)
    Searching For GE TC-1000 in NY Metro Area ([e-mail])
    Trying to Convert WAV Files to 3-Bit ADPCM (Richard De A'Morelli)
    Phone Line in Use Indicator From Radio Shack (John Lundgren)
    Re: AT&T Collect Calling Comes to Canada (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Re: NANP and Switches (Alan Leon Varney)
    Re: NANP and Switches (David A. Avery)
    Re: Call Display for New York (Tad Cook)
    Re: Emerging Cellular Systems (Silas E. Cheeseman)
    Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors! (John Canning)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:09:00 EDT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: FCC Releases Fiber Deployment Analysis


                  FCC RELEASES FIBER DEPLOYMENT ANALYSIS

The FCC has released a report entitled "Fiber Deployment Update - End
of Year 1993."

This report presents fiber deployment data and associated information
on interexchange carriers, regional Bell holding companies, urban
fiber systems, and non-Bell local operating companies.

Current estimates indicate that interexchange carriers increased their
deployed fiber by about 5.6% during 1993.  The local Bell operating
companies' deployed fiber grew by about 27% during 1993 and stood at
approximately 6.3 million fiber miles at the end of the year.  Total
1993 fiber reported by local operating companies exceeded 7.2 million
fiber miles.  Twenty urban fiber entities listed in this year's study
have deployed about 242,000 fiber miles by the end of 1993.

Other local operating company data in the study include data on fiber
rings, fiber trials and investment, as well as limited information on
deployed subscriber copper and fiber.

This report is available in the reference room maintained by the
Common Carrier Bureau's Industry Analysis Division at 1250 23rd
Street, N. W., Plaza Level.  Copies may be purchased by calling
International Transcription Service, Inc. (ITS) at [phone].

For further information, contact Jonathan Kraushaar at [phone] or
632-1368.

                -FCC-

Bob Keller              Robert J. Keller, P.C.         Tel [phone]
A.R.S. KY3R         Federal Telecommunications Law     Fax [phone]
[e-mail]   finger me for FCC Daily Digest   CompuServe 76100,3333

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 06:43:52 EDT
From: Gregory P. Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Radio by Phone


An FM radio newsletter {FMedia!} notes that a Dallas firm, Media
Technology, is offering a service called Media Dialup.  Subscribers
can monitor live radio using touch tone commands.  214 330-8393.  I
think this is the company's main business number.

As a sampler, the firm allows you to listen to Dallas radio stations
using touch tone commands on 214 330-8821.  For FM, press 1.  For AM,
press 2.  To scan to the next lower station, press 4.  Next higher
station, press 6.  Ordinary toll charges apply.

I guess the market for this service is program directors and
consultants who want to hear what the big-market boys are doing.


Greg Monti          Arlington, Virginia, USA        [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 06:33:11 -0700
From: fico![e-mail]
Subject: Query About 911 in MIDDLE of Phone Numbers


A local radio stations here (KBOB -- "Turn your knob to Bob") recently
had to change their phone number after a dismaying percentage of their
calls started connecting to 911.  Their old number had 911 in the
middle of the number.  I seem to remember reading something about that
here in the TELECOM Digest.  The radio station seems to be baffled
about the phenomenon.  What's the scoop on this?

(The 911 people tended to get a bit miffed when they ran "you are the
tenth caller" type contests ...)

I believe I remember hearing mention that phone switches typically
would be programmed to pick up on common misdialings of 911 (9911,
9111, etc) and connect them to 911 in the interests of safety, since
it would common for that number to be misdialed out of haste or panic.
But sometimes the programming was a bit TOO overzealous.  Is that the
deal?

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 08:37:03 CST
Subject: Cable Management
From: John Holman ([e-mail])


I too am looking at cable management systems as well.  One thing that
is important to us is that the system software produces a good trouble
and work order tracking and reporting system.  We are installing level
3 voice cable to 110 type blocks on the wall and level 5 wiring for
data brought to rack mounted patch pannels.  Does anyone have any
regrets for using the rack mounting patch pannels for data?  We will
be using Cabletron hand Cisco routers.  Presently we have been using a
software that we cooked up here using Dbase IV.  It has worked well
but does not deal with IDFs very well.

The strong side of the software is quick trouble entry and trouble
ticket production with all important info including: building name and
address, type of equipment (ie.. answering machine, Pots, or data port
to board level PACX, billing account number, jack number, room number,
and maintanance account number.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Vaughan)
Subject: FTS2000/DCTN Policy
Organization: Information Technology Division, Naval Research Laboratory
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 14:30:37 GMT


I am looking for current and future (draft) policy regarding low bit
rate video (lbrv) over FTS-2000 and DCTN.  I am implementing dial-up
lbrv 384kbps over the FTS-2000 using Picture Tel System 4000 and
Teleos Model 40.  If you have any information that might help, please
let me know.


Thanks in advance,

David Vaughan    Dept. of Navy

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Bullock)
Subject: Regulatory Analyst Opening
Date: 13 May 1994 09:44:00 -0600
Organization: XMission Public Access Internet (801-539-0900)


                Utah CCS Seeks Regulatory Analyst

     The Utah Committee of Consumer Services has a Public Utility
Regulatory Analyst III position available. The Annual Salary will be
$31,884.00 to $39,610.00.  Regulatory Analyst is required to review
and analyze electric, natural gas, and telecommunications utility
operations to establish the reasonableness of operations, rates and
charges; prepare and present oral and written testimony as an expert
witness on behalf of residential, small business, and agricultural
interest during formal proceedings; participate in all aspects of
utility regulation; assist in formulation and articulation of public
policy interest and positions relative to utility operations; assist
the Committee of Consumer Services in fulfilling statutory responsi-
bilities.

      Minimum Qualifications: Master's degree in accounting, finance
or related field, plus four years of full-time paid professional
related employment, two years of which must have been with a public
utility or state regulatory commission, or substitutions on a year-
for-year basis as follows: related graduate level education for the
required employment, or full-time paid professional related employment
for the required education.  A rating of training and experience or
another method will be used to examine for this position.  Submit
current official state application (DHRM-7) and transcripts to
Department of Human Resource Management, 2120 State Office Building,
SLC, UT 84114 Opening date: 5-18-94 Closing date: 6-15-94 CTS.

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

From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
Subject: Searching For GE TC-1000 in NY Metro Area
Date: 13 May 1994 03:48:25 -0000
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


My parents are looking to buy a new cellular phone, but can't seem to
find the GE TC-1000 anywhere in the NY metro area (including into
Fairfield County and anywhere within a reasonable distance from
Westchester Cty).  Their main concern is that they want to stick with
Cellular One so they don't lose all their benefits from their current
contract.  Any help as to a vendor who has the phone and who contract
w/Cellular One would be appreciated.


Thanks in advance,

E-mail to the below address or post.

marc  <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard De A'Morelli)
Subject: Trying to Convert WAV Files to 3-Bit ADPCM
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:19:15 -0500
Organization: Spectrum Universal, Los Angeles, CA


>> You can solve both problems at once with a ZyXEL modem.  Not only will
>> it decode DTMF tones, but it will also play audio directly to the
>> phone line.  If you convert your WAV files to, say, 3-bit ZyXEL ADPCM,

I have been looking for quite some time for a shareware package that
would convert WAV files to 3-bit ADPCM, which would be suitable not
only for Zyxel modems, but other telecom specific voice cards as well,
such as Dialogic, Pika AVA-4, New Voice, etc.  I am especially
interested in a utility for the Pika AVA-4 card -- the only one I know
of is a commercial package priced at about $500, which is far more for
a voice editor package than I can afford. Any help would be most appreciated.


Regards,

Richard De A'Morelli, Spectrum Universal

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

From: sgiblab!kn.pacbell.com![e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Phone Line in Use Indicator From Radio Shack
Date: 13 May 94 19:56:58 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


This isn't another request for the phone line in-use indicator.  It's
a FAQ answer for the same.  Radio Shaft has:

Catalog Number 43-108 phone line in-use indicator

for those who are in need of such a thing (which seems quite often as
of lately).  I couldn't find the peg it came off of, so I can't tell
you what the price is.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But a quick stock check at the local
'shack' on the computer there priced it at $12.99. It is just a little
plastic box with a short modular cord on the end. It plugs into any
phone outlet and sits wherever you place it. When a phone on that line
goes off hook, the LED lights up. Simple as they come.

Radio Shack also has a new telephone/tape recorder combination which
is supposed to be very good for recording from phone lines. It has a
modular plug on the end also and you just plug it into the phone line,
add the tape and turn it on. It goes on or off automatically when a
phone on the line goes off hook. I'll see it later today or over the
weekend for the first time.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 11:28:32 -0400
From: Judith Oppenheimer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Collect Calling Comes to Canada


On May 5th Dave Liebold wrote:

> AT&T just announced the availability of its 1 800 CALL-ATT service
> in Canada. This now allows Canadian callers to place collect calls to
> U.S. destinations via AT&T. An introductory offer gives a 20% discount
> to the called party's charges, at least for the next several weeks.

> MCI's 1 800 COLLECT is still unavailable in Canada. There is a
> recording which says the service is hoped to be available "later this
> summer" -- a recording which is apparently still in place from *last*
> summer.

MCI released a statement a few days prior to AT&T's press release,
stating that it's 1-800-COLLECT offered Canadians collect calling
service into the U.S.  It gave the impression that the service is
available now.

What's up?


J. Oppenheimer    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 18:51:25 +0500
Subject: Re: NANP and Switches
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


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

> Paul A. Lee wrote in his article:

>> CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially
>> in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc..

> I don't believe this.  The whole purpose of the new NANP was to change
> from NNX to NXX, and to allow NXX type NPA's.  All switch routing
> software was designed to recognize that an NPA was N0X or N1X, and the
> CO code was NNX.

   You can believe what you want, but the NANP Administrator says:

 1951: Start of DDD
 1952-1971: N0/1X-NNX-XXXX format for numbers
 1972-1994: N0/1X-NXX-XXXX format for numbers
 1995-????: NXX-NXX-XXXX format for numbers

   So NNX for CO codes ended in 1972.  I started working on No. 1
ESS(tm) back in 1974, and its routing software had no problem with NXX
formats ...


Al Varney

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Avery)
Subject: Re: NANP and Switches
Date: 13 May 1994 05:52:56 GMT
Organization: CerfNet


In article <[e-mail]>, James Slupsky <jslupsky@pwss.
gov.ab.ca> wrote:

> Paul A. Lee wrote in his article:

>> CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially
>> in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc..

> I don't believe this.  The whole purpose of the new NANP was to change
> from NNX to NXX, and to allow NXX type NPA's.  All switch routing
> software was designed to recognize that an NPA was N0X or N1X, and the
> CO code was NNX.

In the Los Angeles area:

AC  CO  city     AC  CO  city           AC  CO  city       AC  CO  city
213 217 LA1      310 201 Beverly Hills  310 401 Downey     310 603 Compton
213 302 LA1      310 202 Culver City    310 402 Norwalk    310 604 Compton
213 303 LA13     310 203 Beverly Hills  310 403 Norwalk    310 605 Compton
213 306 LA1      310 204 Culver City    310 404 Norwalk    310 606 El Segundo
213 307 LA1      310 205 Beverly Hills  310 405 Lakewood   310 607 El Segundo
213 312 LA1      310 206 West LA        310 406 Norwalk    310 608 Compton
213 413 LA10     310 207 West LA        310 407 Norwalk    310 609 Compton
213 418 LA9      310 208 West LA        310 408 Compton    310 610 Gardena
213 502 Gardena  310 209 West LA        310 409 Norwalk    310 615 El Segundo
213 504 LA1      310 210 Lakewood       310 410 Inglewood  310 616 El Segundo
213 506 LA1      310 212 Torrance       310 412 Inglewood  310 618 Torrance
213 508 LA1      310 214 Redondo Beach  310 414 El Segundo 310 715 Gardena
213 600 LA9      310 215 Inglewood      310 416 El Segundo 310 716 Gardena
213 612 LA1      310 216 Inglewood      310 417 Inglewood  310 718 Gardena
213 613 LA1      310 217 Gardena        310 419 Inglewood  310 719 Gardena
213 614 LA1      310 218 Long Beach     310 501 Gardena    310 801 Pico Rivera
213 617 LA1      310 219 Hawthorne      310 504 Gardena    310 802 Norwalk
213 701 LA1      310 301 Mar Vista      310 509 Compton    310 803 Downey
213 702 LA1      310 302 Mar Vista      310 510 Avalon     310 804 Norwalk
213 704 LA1      310 305 Mar Vista      310 512 Gardena    310 806 Downey
213 707 LA1      310 306 Mar Vista      310 513 San Pedro  310 807 Norwalk
213 708 Gardena  310 312 West LA        310 514 San Pedro  310 809 Norwalk
213 717 LA9      310 313 Mar Vista      310 515 Gardena    310 812 Hawthorne
213 812 LA1      310 314 Santa Monica   310 516 Gardena    310 813 Hawthorne
213 912 LA2      310 315 Santa Monica   310 517 Lomita     310 814 Hawthorne
213 913 LA2      310 316 Redondo Beach  310 518 San Pedro  310 815 Culver City
213 917 LA1      310 317 Malibu         310 519 San Pedro  310 816 San Pedro
213 918 Gardena  310 318 Redondo Beach  310 601 Compton    310 901 Long Beach
213 919 LA1      310 319 Santa Monica   310 602 Compton    310 902 La Habra

This is a partial list not including AC 818 , AC714 or AC909


David A. Avery    [e-mail]
Avia Research     Flight Simulation


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I won't bother with a long list of the ones
here in Chicago like you did for LA, but I can assure you that once we
here went to 1+ dialing several years ago, whole bunches of exhanges of
this same form appeared here almost overnight.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Call Display for New York
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 14:59:21 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)


Tony Harminc <[e-mail]> writes:

> A colleague left a message on my machine here in Toronto while he was
> waiting for a plane at JFK airport in New York.  To my surprise, the
> Call Display data was not 'out of area' as it usually is for calls
> from the USA, but the rather unlikely number 212 210-0000.  I don't
> know exactly where he placed the call from (other than that he had
> cleared security at the time) or how he paid for it.  I haven't tried
> calling the number, but it seems very unlikely to be the actual number
> on the payphone.  I don't know which US carrier he used either -
> perhaps they are just early in implementing the new FCC requirements
> ;-) Assuming that the 0000 is fake, who would be setting the number
> that way?  The LEC (implying that the IXC doesn't get the real data)?
> The IXC making some privacy assumptions of its own?  The payphone
> owner (COCOT)?

I used the NPA program to track down that prefix, and it is served by
a telco central office in Manhattan.  According to NPA, the location
of the CO is at 40.75 degrees north latitude, 73.97 degrees west
longitude.

That CO serves the following prefixes:

210, 218, 252, 253, 270, 271, 272, 273, 282, 284, 286, 287, 297, 301, 309,
314, 317, 329, 338, 351, 359, 370, 372, 375, 377, 401, 404, 413, 419, 426,
448, 454, 455, 457, 458, 461, 462, 467, 469, 471, 476, 485, 490, 503, 537,
551, 557, 565, 573, 591, 599, 610, 622, 624, 625, 682, 687, 692, 697, 712,
813, 818, 850, 851, 856,,867, 878, 880, 883, 890, 905, 907, 916, 922, 949
953, 954, 972, 973, 983, 984, 986, and 987.

I suspect that the COCOT owner is transporting the calls to Manhattan from
the airport, and maybe serves them from PBX type trunks that give a
non-dialable seven digit number for the ANI.

Maybe it has something to do with an AOS (Alternate Operator Service)
that was handling the billing.

By the way, NPA is a fascinating program.  It has location, mileage, town
(and even zip code for USA numbers) data for all prefixes in the North
American Numbering Plan.  It is available for $25 from:

PC Consultant
P.O. Box 42086
Houston TX 77242-2086
Ph. 713/826-2629  (v-mail no answer)

I understand that you can leave a message with voice mail and they
will return your call.


[e-mail] (if it bounces, use [e-mail])| [put "attn Box #215"
Tad Cook    | Packet Amateur Radio:  | Home Phone:  | on fax or cover pg!]
Seattle, WA | KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA | 206-527-4089 |  FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Silas E. Cheeseman)
Subject: Re: Emerging Cellular Systems
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 22:53:47
Organization: NB*Net


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

> 2) What advantages do digital cellular systems have over analog?

Main advantage is privacy.  Conventional scanners cannot monitor the
calls.  Contrary to popular belief digital cellular does not have
better fidelity than analog.

> 3) For a cellular operator, what are the ideal frequencies to operate in
> and why?

870 to 890 MHz because that's where DOC (FCC in USA) say to.

> 5) What are the impacts of operating in the higher reaches of the
> spectrum, e.g. at GHz levels? What are the impacts of low power systems
> and their advantages?

Technical none, we've been doing it for years.  Medically there is a
belief that portable cellular phones may be linked to brain cancer.
For the record, I agree with this possiblity.


[e-mail]   Silas E. Cheeseman
Saint John, NB, Canada   [phone]  Computer/FAX

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone?
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 19:13:51 PDT


Said by: Ras Tafar

> name and vendors won't check to make sure the card number and name
> match. As for physical cards, a card reader/encoder could put my

Oh yes they do.  I worked for Macy*s California a couple of years ago,
and *every* telephone order that came in that was to be charged to a
non- R.H. Macy Co. Card (Macy's West, Macy's East, Bullocks, I.
Magnin, and R.H. Macy Presidents Club) had to be sent in for verification
with the card company.

Not only did the name, number and expiration have to be checked, but
also the address.  In fact, we could not accept gift orders via
telephone on MasterCard/Visa because the merchandise HAD to be shipped
to the BILLING address (even if it was a PO Box).  American Express
would allow merchandise to go to another address, but an American
Express agent had to call the Cardmember at home to verify the order.

Of course our cash-register system immeadiately verified the name and
address of Macy's Cards.

> automated cashiers like they have at gas stations. Since I've had my
> Discover card number used fraudulently at gas stations for two

I cannot speak to Sear's Financial Network's policies as we did not
deal with Discover Cards.


Steve    [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015

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

From: [e-mail] (John Canning)
Subject: Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors!
Date: Thu, 12 May 94 22:51:54 EDT


Pat -

In comp.dcom.telecom, you made the following comments about Shantanu
Jana's posting about AT&T's problems with billing:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Part or all of the problem lies in the fact
> that AT&T billing is done by the various local telephone companies and
> they (the local telcos) seem to not always be up to snuff at having the
> right software for billing in place. Probably AT&T should have mentioned
> to you when you first enrolled in their various offerings that in the
> event your bill -- as prepared and sent to you by the local telco -- was
> incorrect you should call them (as you have done) and they would issue a
> manual credit covering the differences between what they advertised and
> what the local telco in fact charged. I think you may be coming down a
> little to hard on them demanding a written apology, etc.   PAT]

I am no fan of our local phone company; they mess things up all the
time.  The first time I thought they got something right was when we
moved our office eight months ago.  Everything worked beautifully.
Until a month later when they suddenly disconnected our service by
accident.  They thought they were shutting off our old service but got
confused ...

In any case, I find Shantanu's story rather familiar.  I ran into a
similar problem last year when I tried to sign up for one of the
discount plans.  Everything was fine for two months.  Then, I was
suddenly cut off from the plan.  It took several phone calls to the
AT&T 1-800 number and two months before they got me back on the plan
and arranged for a credit for the previous bills.  To this day, I have
no idea why I was cut off from the program.

However, the experience we had with AT&T's Uniplan office was much,
much, worse.  When we moved our office last year, we met with our
local AT&T rep to go over our office move plans.  She wrote us up a
new contract and made arrangements for our new calling cards, 1-800
numbers, etc.  Everything worked fine except for the billing.  AT&T
kept sending our bills to New England Telephone rather than to their
Uniplan office.

It took them five months to get the billing directed to their Uniplan
office.  In the meantime, we were having to pay an extra $1,500 each
month to our local phone company.  We asked AT&T to issue us a credit,
but they refused to do it.  Instead, once the bills were finally
straightened out, we received a bunch of free service - partially due
to the accrued credits.  They also issued us a free month of phone
service to apologize for the comedy of errors that we had to live
through.

Unlike Shantanu, we spent *hours* on the phone with the billing office
folks from AT&T.  Through this, I learned that very few people at AT&T
understand their promotional offerings and only the service people who
fix things at 2 AM really understand how the phone system works.

Bottom line -- I believe every word that Shantanu said.  The problems
he experienced were caused by AT&T, not his local phone company.


John Canning
The Physician's Computer Company
Essex Junction, Vermont

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #223
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10549;
          13 May 94 19:15 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA00539; Fri, 13 May 94 15:10:04 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA00529; Fri, 13 May 94 15:10:01 CDT
Date: Fri, 13 May 94 15:10:01 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #224

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 13 May 94 15:10:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 224

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program (Barry Mishkind)
    Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (John Lundgren)
    Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point (John Lundgren)
    Re: Wireless Data Services (Joe Ford)
    Re: Bell Atlantic Gets Maryland Competition (Stephen Denny)
    Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? (Bob Allison)
    Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF? (Mahabala Sastry)
    Re: 3270 Emulation (Windows) (Roger Fajman)
    Re: Sprint "Combined Billing" Error (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Searching For High School Classmates ... Help, Please! (himsworth@aol)
    Re: Need Information on Complete PC (Brian Sinofsky)
    Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Peter Campbell Smith)
    Re: Direct Billing by AT&T (Jeffrey C. Honig)
    Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID (Robert Berger)
    Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Dave Niebuhr)
    Information Wanted on Large Digital Data Exchange (Rolly Noel)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 12 May 94 21:31 MST
From: [e-mail] (barry mishkind)
Subject: Re: McCaw Cellular One (NYC) Introduces Anti-Fraud Program
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ


>> 611 and 911.  Incoming calls, however, still work.  Dialing *560 + PIN
>> (SND) releases the phone and allows it to make calls.  This is, of
>> course, distinct from the lock feature of the phone, itself.

> Something sounds fishy about this to me.  Criminals today can capture
> mobile numbers and ESNs off the air.  What's to stop them from also
> capturing the PINs?  All they have to do is set their scanners to look

> "*560####" message to "unlock" the number.  Pretty bogus security, if
> you ask me.  Certainly gives customers the _feeling_ that something is

I have to agree. This doesn't make me feel very secure. But, perhaps
the answer is more along the lines of what you imply ... the telcos
don't really care about the matter, except as a PR thing.

Not so long ago, one of the national TV networks had a program on the
PIN surfers that watch people at payphones dialing in their PIN. In
this case, the reporter was in contact with one of the LD carriers,
and as shown, they had computer reports within seconds of the calls
that were then made to Hungary, Sri Lanka, etc.

IF the computers can catch this that fast ... there is not reason they
can't "hold" a phone calling more than one country not in the profile,
and have an operator check upon the next call. Some with cell phones.
A quick check into the call probably would be apprecaited by the user,
rather than a $5000 phone bill.

Of course, if the phone companies are allowed a percentage of return
on investment, they wouldn't care about the level of fraud, since, not
only will they recover it in the rates, but ... the fraud *increases*
the gross and they make more profit in the end.  A cynical view
perhaps, but then I've dealt with the phone companies for years. It's
not unthinkable.


Barry Mishkind   [e-mail]  Tucson, Arizona

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip
Date: 13 May 1994 10:46:30 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


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

> I was scrutinizing my cellular bill this evening and noted this
> fascinating (well, sort of fascinating fact):

> My long distance carrier is Sprint, which bills directly, not through
> my cell carrier NYNEX.  For about three quarters of the LD calls,
> Sprint billed the call as a minute shorter than NYNEX did.  I presume
> that this is because NYNEX starts the clock as soon as I hit Send,
> while Sprint doesn't start until the call supervises.  On the other
> hand, for roamer calls with the LD charges billed through NYNEX, the
> LD and cellular times are the same.

[the point being that having one's long-distance cellular calls billed
separately could save money]

This is one reason a person might choose one cellular carrier over
another.  Of the two cellular carriers in New York, one (Nynex) lets
you pick your own long-distance carrier and be billed separately if
you wish, the other (Cellular One) forces you to AT&T and bills you
for it.  Or at least it was that way a few years ago, can current
customers comment?

Of course the sad part about all this (not the fault of the previous
poster) is that in New York, at least, the oligopoly pricing leads to
very expensive air time charges, for many callers 90 cents per minute.
This dwarfs the long-distance price component and reduces the benefit
of getting to choose your long-distance carrier.

One hopes that some day in the US there will be more than two
providers for portable phone service, to bring the price down.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number
Date: 13 May 94 02:21:34 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


I didn't ask for the one I got, but it fits perfectly.  ANd the FAX
number would have been nicer if it were 329 instead of 379, then it
would have been JOHN FAX.  Oh, well ... actually my voice number is
also JOHNIAC.  But no one seems to remember that one.

B C N U . .

(Now, if I could only get rid of that damn pager number)


John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
Rancho Santiago Community College District
17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
VOI (714) JOHN GAB \ FAX (714) JOHN FRY
[e-mail] \ [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point
Date: 13 May 94 02:29:07 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


It sounds like you're about to get into the wonderful world of Unix.
The addresses we have on the internet don't seem to want to let people
telnet into our site.  THis is because we have a network with only DOS
machines on it.  I have heard that we are going to have to get a Unix
box and a fully qualified domain name if we want to be fully on the
'net.  Hope that helps ...


John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
Rancho Santiago Community College District
17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
VOI (714) JOHN GAB \ FAX (714) JOHN FRY
[e-mail] \ [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Wireless Data Services
Date: Fri, 13 May 94 09:10:19 PDT
Organization: WLN


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

> I've noticed that there's been very little posted to this list
> regarding wireless *data* services.  Anyone know why?  There are some
> very interesting developments in the wireless arena, both for short,
> bursty text messaging (a la RAM or Ardis) and for higher bandwidth, IP
> connectivity within metropolitan areas.

> Am I simply looking in the wrong place, or is the interest level not
> very high, or is there a need to establish a new group regarding
> wireless data services?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those messages are welcome here, but
> I do not seem to get very many of them. I'm not certain if any other
> newsgroup is currently handling the topic or not.   PAT]

I'm also interested in wireless data services, particularly real-time
data links via cellular transmission to Unix file servers. Anyone out
there with experience or recommendations regarding cellular modems.

Is this group the most appropriate one? Anyone know of another group
focusing on wireless data services?


Thanks,

Joe Ford
Voice:        206-352-4434
Fax:        [phone]
Internet:    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, the coverage of telecom in this
journal is general in nature, and pretty much includes all the various
aspects of telephony. There are a few other specialized groups, but none
specifically as you described it ... so stick around, ask questions!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Denny)
Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Gets Maryland Competition
Date: 12 May 1994 23:27:08 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corporation, Plano, Texas USA


> with 800 numbers.  Portability is clearly in the works, but as I noted
> in an earlier message it'll be an enormous project involving billions
> of dollars of retrofit to the network to look up every single call in
> a carrier database to know who to route it to.  I'd be very surprised
> to see portability working before the year 2000.

As an employee of an equipment vendor, billions of dollars sounds real
good!  Can we have some of it upfront?

I am aware of discussions with unmentioned regional suppliers and some
potential new ones regarding number portability.  There are people
wanting to do it soon, even if on a small scale.  I agree the
full-blown implementation is *several* years out, but things are
moving faster in telecom now than 20 years ago due to competition.

As someone mentioned earlier, there are ways to do small-scale portability
now without any hardware or software mods but they are wasteful.

> One thing I can definitely promise is massive confusion before it's
> all sorted out.  Expect a lot of really stupid proposals, e.g.
> assigning each CAP a couple of area codes, or adding yet more digits
> to be dialed as a prefix to the subscriber's number.

I agree about the confusion state.  I think we are in it now.

There are two or three flavors of portability being addressed.  When we
don't say which version we are talking about, confusion reigns.

  1. phone company selection portability locally only (within the same
     LATA, but you select your provider)
  2. physical local portability (move your number with you within the
     LATA -  nice but not a big revenue producer, not likely)
  3. nationwide portability (take your number with you anywhere)

In some respects number two is supported but only within the same CO.
With number three you have blown all concept of area code being a
geographic area.  It now becomes just part of the number.

I might also point out that although every call could potentially need
a "lookup", 800 numbers are already being "looked up" via Global Title
Translation.  All 800 numbers are not typically looked up in one
single database used by all the world, rather in various locations.
In some respects it is a matter of scale to look up all numbers,
although I am by no means suggesting that the GTT mechanism do it.
Setup time is an issue.

One thing you can bet -- some companies will need to do it long before
any standards are set.

I'd be interested in hearing more discussion, please?


Stephen Denny             [e-mail]
DSC Communications Corp.  Plano, TX

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Allison)
Subject: Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary?
Date: 12 May 1994 22:08:51 -0500
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605


In article <[e-mail]>, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX
<omen!caf> wrote:

> The 1986 ZMODEM is public domain, as are the rz/sz sources of that
> vintage.

> Omen Technology has improved the performance and reliability of ZMODEM
> over the last decade.  The Good Stuff is not public domain.

   I have been told that there are important differences in ZMODEM
implementations that the user will notice.  It has been said that the
PD ZMODEM will puke baud barf if you cancel a dl, and it will screw up
if you try to put it in the background on a dl.  But 'they' say that
the higher priced ZMODEM (perhaps that which Mr Forsberg refers to)
doesn't have these faults.  Is this true?


[e-mail]
Please vote for rec.arts.ascii - CFV available in news.announce.newsgroups.

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

From: nsc!mirage.nsc.com![e-mail] (Mahabala Sastry)
Subject: Re: Any Modem Decode DTMF?
Reply-To: nsc!mirage.nsc.com![e-mail]
Organization: National Semiconductor Corp.
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:59:11 GMT


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

> There are several modems that will do that, mostly the better (read,
> higher priced) ones.  The USR dual standard will, with the following
> commands ...

>     ATH1%T

> The H1 takes the modem off-hook, the %T reads the touchtone.  Sending
> a character or dropping DTR will hang up the line.

TyIN 4000 Pro from NSC is a low end data-modem/fax/voice/audio/scanner
card that can do this. Mostly targetted for small office or home PCs.


Mahabala sastry

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

From: Roger Fajman <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994  00:01:07 EDT
Subject: Re: 3270 Emulation (Windows)


> I'm looking for a good Shareware 3270 Emulator for Windows. I do a
> great deal of work in the VAX/VMS environment and use WRQ's Reflection
> 2 for Windows, however, this is not suited for the IBM mainframe
> environment. If you know of any 3270 Emulators for Windows, could you
> please provide me with the information I need to obtain them.

There are freeware or shareware TN3270s.  Check out these files
relating to TCP/IP for PCs:

  PCIP     FAQ         Frequently Asked Questions
  PCIP     FEATURES    Features of TCP/IP Packages for DOS and Windows
  WINSOCK  APPFAQ      Windows Sockets Applications FAQ
  WINTCP   INFO        Windows and TCP/IP for Internet Access

They are available via anonymous FTP from list.nih.gov, directory pcip.
To order by email, send the command "get filename filetype" to
[e-mail].

To subscribe to the pcip (TCP/IP for PCs) mailing list, send the
command "SUB PCIP your name" to [e-mail].  It's
bidirectionally gatewayed with the comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
newsgroup.


Roger Fajman                                   Telephone:  [phone]
National Institutes of Health                  BITNET:     RAF@NIHCU
Bethesda, Maryland, USA                        Internet:   [e-mail]
Postmaster for CU.NIH.GOV/NIHCU, LIST.NIH.GOV/NIHLIST, NIH3PLUS
List owner for PCIP, SNSTCP-L, and TN3270E, all @LIST.NIH.GOV

P.S. - WRQ sells a version of Reflection with TN3270 capability.

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

Subject: Re: Sprint "Combined Billing" Error
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 13 May 94 15:39:57 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc.


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mike Pollock) writes:

> Sprint recently changed me over from direct billing to "combined
> billing" on my NYNEX local telephone bill.  Simple, right?  Wrong.  My
> final direct-from-Sprint invoice was contained activity through
> 4/10/94.  My first combined bill from NYNEX contained Sprint activity
> through 4/13/94.  The proximity of these two billing dates meant I got
> a _three_day_ billing period for Sprint long distance service on the
> NYNEX bill.  Now, I'm also a Sprint Select customer, which means I
> have a $6.85/month minimum.  In a normal 30 day billing cycle, I
> easily meet that minimum.  However, Sprint was nice enough to bill me
> $6.85 for this three day billing cycle because in those three days, I
> only made $1.20 worth of calls.

Etc.

Same situation here with me last April with Sprint/PacBell, but it
only took me two minutes talking to Sprint (once I got through the
voice-mail menus) The credit was on the the bill two months following.
No problem with either Sprint or PacBell.


Arthur L. Rubin: [e-mail] (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] (personal)

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

From: [e-mail] (Himsworth)
Subject: Re: Searching for High School Classmates ... Help, please!
Date: 13 May 1994 09:11:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Glen
Gilbert) writes:

I have spent the last three years building a database for a public
school alumni association in Manhasset, NY.  Cannot help you with your
specific request, but if you decide to go with a formal organization I
can help with by-laws, database format (Filemaker Pro), etc.

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Sinofsky)
Subject: Re: Need Information on Complete PC
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 12 May 1994 23:36:57 GMT


Al Cohan ([e-mail]) wrote:

> A friend of mine is sending me a couple of voice cards manufactured by
> the Complete PC. Can anyone supply info on how to reach this company?

Complete PC is now owned by Boca Research, Inc. in Boca Raton,
Florida.


Brian Sinofsky

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Campbell Smith)
Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number
Organization: Logica, London
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 08:55:26 GMT


[e-mail] (Barry S. Rein) writes:

>> ....  I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to
>> remember.  ....

2580 is a good one -- straight down the middle of the keypad.


Peter Campbell Smith, Logica plc, London.  Voice: [phone]
Fax: [phone]  Internet: [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Direct Billing by AT&T
Organization: Information Technologies/Network Resources;
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 12:17:57 -0400
From: Jeffrey C Honig <[e-mail]>


My AT&T billing is handled by my local small independent phone
company.  A couple of times I have called about AT&T billing plans and
rewards programs and have been told that I am not elligible because my
local phone company has decided not to offer said plan (although they
do offer Reach Out America).

Is there any way for me to be billed directly by AT&T instead of via
my local phone company?  Maybe by not selecting a default long
distance carrier and having to dial 10288 every time?

Also, my wife just received a $20 check offer from MCI.  Is AT&T still
countering these offers?


Thanks,

Jeff

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Berger)
Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:32:31 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

> Personally, I agree with the basic service being per-call blocking.

If you want per-call blocking on YOUR phone that's fine. I don't see
why they can't let the customer have his/her choice.

Once again the interests of greedy businesses are being favored over
the needs of the consumer.

I don't want any business I deal with to have my home phone number.
They WILL sell it to telemarketers, and there's no way I can prove who
did it.

IF they can't offer per-line blocking then they should drop the whole
Caller-ID crap altogether.

Emergencies are no excuse; 911's have had number ID for years.

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 15:13:33 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet


In TELECOM Digest V14 #221 [e-mail] wrote:

>> Anyone who has access to the Internet ...  can reach City Hall by
>> addressing their message to [e-mail].

> Why are they in the Commercial domain, and not the Government domain?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because, as I understand it, '.gov' only
> applies to the *federal* government. I don't think it was ever defined
> for local or state government use.   PAT]

I obtained a copy of all US sites that have an Internet connection
from Internic via the whois command (whois -h rs.internic.net "domain
*") on my Sun workstation (other systems may vary) and it listed
federal, state and local governmental entites as '.gov'


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  1+[phone]
                                          FAX   1+[phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for the clarification and
correction. I guess I've no idea why they are in .com then.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rolly Noel)
Subject: Information Wanted on Large Digital Data Exchange
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 11:16:16 -0800
Organization: Computing & Network Services, Univ. of Alberta


I'm looking for product info for large digital data exchanges that will
support:

 -- Attachment of 1000 V.34 modems on the front end,
 -- Have 4000 serial ports on the back end for connections to terminal
    servers, support for signal line flow control,
 -- Able to talk to modem and terminal server ports at speeds up to
    115,200 bps.


Thanks.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #224
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa13822;
          14 May 94 3:25 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11382; Sat, 14 May 94 00:25:18 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11373; Sat, 14 May 94 00:25:16 CDT
Date: Sat, 14 May 94 00:25:16 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #225

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 14 May 94 00:25:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 225

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Forum in NY (Jorge T. Negron)
    Need Weather-Resistant Phone (Kyle Rhorer)
    Footnote to A History of Underseas Cables (James H. Haynes)
    Loop Start to Ground Start Converter (Leroy Casterline)
    Alt.sex.beastiality.in.space.and.oklahoma (Dave Wade )
    Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service (Sudeepto Roy)
    Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Javier Henderson)
    Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Dennis Smiley)
    Dealing with Obscene Callers in the 90's (Paul A. Lee)
    Re: Local Competition -- Outside Plant vs Dialtone (Alan Leon Varney)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jorge T. Negron)
Subject: Telecom Forum in NY
Organization: CATT
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 22:56:43 GMT


Center for Advanced Technology in Telecommunications (CATT)
Presents:

FORUMS IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS PRACTICE
Supported in Part by the New York State Science and Technology Foundation

Polytechnic University, Five Metrotech Center, Brooklyn, NY 11201,
718-260-3050


NETWORK DESIGN AND ANALYSIS TOOLS

The design of computer networks has always been a difficult task and
it continues to become more challenging. With new network
architectures and carrier offerings emerging almost daily, and with
heterogeneous applications sharing capacity, building a network which
works at all, not to mention trying to optimize cost or performance,
is a formidable job.  Network planners and managers have therefore
become increasingly reliant upon automated tools to help with these
tasks.  These tools, which are interactive and graphically based,
allow the user to quickly analyze design alternatives, both
topological and architectural and to make key decisions about design
and configuration tradeoffs.

This talk will focus on the state of the art in network design and
analysis tools, their major functions, how such tools are architected,
how the user interacts with them, some of the algorithms used in these
tools, and on current challenges in extending such tools to deal with
increasingly large and diverse networks.  A live demonstration will be
given of INTREPID, a tool developed at the IBM T.J. Watson Research
Center and currently in use inside IBM.

SPEAKER: Aaron Kershenbaum is a member of the Network Design Tools
Group at the IBM T.J. Watson Research Center in Hawthorne.  His
current research is centered on algorithms and tools for the design
and analysis of high speed and multiprotocol networks. From 1978 until
1989, he was part of the Polytechnic University faculty where he
served as a Professor of Computer Science as well as heading the
Network Design Laboratory at Poly's CATT.  From 1968 to 1979, he was
part of the group at Network Analysis Corporation which did pioneering
work in network design, including the design of the original ARPANET.
Dr.  Kershenbaum is the author of the book, "Telecommunications
Network Design Algorithms" and co-authored the book "Network
Management and Control".  He is also the author of over 50 technical
articles and has supervised over 20 Ph.D. dissertations in the field
of network design. He is a fellow of the IEEE.

TIME & PLACE:
Tuesday, June 21, 1994   9:00AM - 10:30AM
Polytechnic University Auditorium
5 Metrotech Center Brooklyn NY
Trains: A, F, D, M, R, 4, and 5 are within 1 block of the Metrotech Complex

ADMISSION:

Corporate members of CATT's Associates Program and Polytechnic
students are invited free of charge. The fee for others is $5.00
Please be sure to call 718-260-3050 or FAX [phone] for a
reservation.


Jorge T. Negron ([e-mail])
Center for Advanced Technology in Telecommunications
5 Metrotech Center   Brooklyn, NY 11201

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

From: [e-mail] (Kyle Rhorer)
Subject: Need Weather-Resistant Phone
Date: 13 May 1994 22:55:51 GMT
Organization: KRUG Life Sciences, Inc.


I am looking for a manufacturer/distributor of a weather-resistant
phone for use as a house phone on the outside of a building.  It is in
an enclosure, but the normal consumer phones we have been using don't
stand up to the humidity of our South Texas climate :-) Please e-mail
and I will summarize if there is any interest.


Thanks,

Kyle

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

From: [e-mail] (James H. Haynes)
Subject: Footnote to A History of Underseas Cables
Date: 14 May 1994 00:08:42 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


Another interesting facet of history, also from George Oslin's book,
is the relation between transatlantic cables and the U.S. purchase of
Alaska.

After the 1858 ocean cable failed and the transcontinental telegraph
line was completed Hiram Sibley, president of Western Union, decided
that a route up the west coast of America, across the Bering straits,
and across Russia to Europe offered the most likely prospect of
success.  Work started on this project, which was abandoned when the
1866 ocean cable proved successful.

In the course of the work Sibley visited Russia to see about buying a
right-of-way along the coast of Alaska, then Russian territory.  A
Russian noble told Sibley that for the kind of money he was offering
Russia would just about be willing to sell the whole territory.
Western Union decided it didn't want to be in the real estate
business; so Sibley suggested to Secretary Seward that the U. S.
government should take advantage of the Russian offer to sell.

Other figures mentioned in connection with this event are Leo Tolstoy,
who was made a count in recognition of his work promoting telegraphy
in Russia, and a U.S. diplomat named George Kennan.  Oslin doesn't say
so, but I would presume the latter is an ancestor of the living
diplomat with the same name.

Alaskan natives built suspension bridges using some of the steel wire
left behind when the telegraph company abandoned the project.


[e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:30:29 -0600
From: Leroy Casterline <[e-mail]>
Subject: Loop Start to Ground Start Converter


Dear telecom wizards,

My company has a box that connects between a PBX and the CO on PBX
analog loop start trunk ports, as follows:

-----                  -----                  -----
| P |    loop start    | B |    loop start    | C |
| B | <--------------> | o | <--------------> | O |
| X |                  | x |                  |   |
-----                  -----                  -----

We now have a need to connect in a similar fashion in a gound start
environment, as follows:

-----                  -----                  -----
| P |   ground start   | B |   ground start   | C |
| B | <--------------> | o | <--------------> | O |
| X |                  | x |                  |   |
-----                  -----                  -----

Does anyone know of an existing device which could be connected
between our box and the PBX, and between our box and the CO, so that
we can work in the above environment without re-engineering our analog
interface or changing our software?


Thanks,

Leroy Casterline   Cahill Casterline Limited   303/484-2212

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 14:11:15 MDT
From: djw@aerie (Dave Wade )
Subject: Alt.sex.beastiality.in.space.and.oklahoma


> I, too, am interested in the possibilities of satellite hookup to the
> net.  Can it be done? (doh -- anything *can* be done) Is it done?  How
> expensive is it?  Who do I talk to?

& From [e-mail] Thu Jun  3 13:55:52 1993
& From: Duane Dubay <[e-mail]>
& Subject: Your Order
& To: [e-mail]
& Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1993 12:48:12 -0700 (PDT)

& David,
& Thanks for your Usenet order.  Your order # is ...have any questions
& about the status of your order.
& The complete charges are $1828.00.  $1800 for the system and
& $28.00 for shipping and handling.  Per your rquest, it will be
& shipped COD.  I can let you know when it ships so you can be
& prepared for delivery.
& If you have any questions, let me know.

& Thanks!

& Duane J. Dubay
& PageSat Inc.          "Where cyberspace and outerspace are one"
& 992 San Antonio Rd.
&Palo Alto, CA.  94303  [phone] or Email [e-mail]

And one final additional comment, there is a usenet newsgroup about
pagesat also ... just in case you need more information from another
satisfied customer ...

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

From: [e-mail] (Sudeepto Roy)
Subject: Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 13:16:38 -0800
Organization: Qualcomm Incorporated


Hello Fellow Netters!

Wonder if this is the right newsgroup to voice my indignace about
customer service from Long Distance companies.  In any case, I hope
that AT&T, Sprint and MCI are reading this!

These days, whenever you call the 800 customer service number of one
of the big three, it seems that you're made to wait for five to
fifteen minutes on an average before a voice that belongs to a real
person responds back.  Over the past few months, my friends and I have
been noticing these annoying delays in service.  You dial a number and
you're forced to wait and listen to music that you don't care about or
calling plans and advertisement that you care lesser. This is a
phenomenon that occurs round the clock -- I've called at traditionally
busy hours and traditionally wee hours (11p.m.- 7 a.m. for instance).

Mind you, I have no complaint about service.  Once an operator gets my
call, I can usually get my requests serviced easily.  In most cases,
whenever I metion that I had to wait for eight minutes the operator is
either bewildered or has the ready answer "Our networks are quite
busy, at this time of the day" -- at 1 a.m.?


Sudeepto Roy    Qualcomm Incorporated, San Diego, CA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The way they should respond to your query
is 'disproportionatly busy to the amount of staff on hand ...'. It is
not so much they are loaded with calls as it is they probably have only
two or three people serving the entire United States at that time of
night. As a test try calling three or four times at night versus three
or four times during the middle of the day in the middle of the week.
You'll find almost invariably you wait longer at night, despite the
smaller amount of calls since the limited number of people there are
still taking as many calls as during the day, and in all probability
they may be on manual filing/order taking if the computer is down for
updating and/or maintainence. If so, that would slow things down even
more.

I've noticed the same thing when calling Illinois Bell at odd hours of
the morning. They have operated customer service 24 hours per day for
about a year now but time and again, my call to them at 4 AM returns a
recording saying to please hold for a representative, and that 'the
approximate waiting time will be greater than ten minutes'.  Less than
ten minutes, they state the approximate number of minutes on their
recording, more than ten is merely given as 'greater than ten'.  When
I do get through to someone, it is often times obvious that the
'system is down' since the rep does not have copies of any records and
is taking notes by hand. For questions such as 'what is my balance
due?' the answer will be he does not have that information available
at the present time and will call me back later if I wish. I call an
800 number, so they are paying for the time on hold; I guess they
figure it is still cheaper than having more help on duty.

What is really annoying though is when they leave their desk (at any
time of day or night) and *forget to unplug their headset* from their
work station. The Automatic Call Distributor which tosses incoming
calls out to the reps uses a plugged in headset as its basis for
thinking a position is occupied and a person there is willing to take
calls. Normally the rep sits there and a 'click' in their headset
followed by hearing a person breathing on the other end tells them a
call has been given to them. If no headset is plugged in, the ACD
bypasses that position and moves to another idle one. So if you ever
call, wait on hold awhile and get 'answered', only to sit there and
hear talking in the background but no one actually talking to you then
you'll know what happened -- a headset is laying on the desk plugged
in while its owner has gone out to the bathroom or for coffee or
whatever. Given the volume of traffic they get, as soon as you abandon
the call to dial in again, there'll be an immediate seizure and some
other poor devil is now on that line waiting for a rep who never will
speak to him!  On a busy day/night you see, your hangup click in the
rep's ear is followed instantly (a half second later?) by a click and
breathing from the caller who follows you. Wires on the headset jack
make a loop when the headset is plugged in telling the ACD to toss
calls that way, thus the need to physically unplug it when leaving.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet
From: [e-mail]
Date: 13 May 94 14:51:09 PST
Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for the clarification and >
correction. I guess I've no idea why they are in .com then.  PAT]

Look at their address ... [e-mail]. CRL is just another
Internet services provider, looks like someone at City hall just got
an account there.

Just a thought.


Javier Henderson (JH21)    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dennis Smiley)
Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet
Date: 13 May 1994 16:15:58 -0700
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [login: guest]


> Why are they in the Commercial domain, and not the Government domain?

scarlos probably "rents" space from crl, like I do??


Dennis Smiley    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you two are probably correct.
Until now, we were assuming that San Carlos had its own Internet drop
there ... obviously they do not if you examine the address.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 17:04:37 -0400
From: /DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com
Subject: Dealing with Obscene Callers in the 90's


In TELECOM Digest V14 #220, Mike Durkin wrote:

> My wife received three obscene phone calls last week ... but it takes five
> calls in a row to get any action ...

and

> I don't think PA has yet lifted the ANI/CID restrictions ...

First, as for ANI/CID in Pennsylvania: I lived most of my life in
Pennsylvania (until less than two years ago). I watched with amusement
and disbelief as the Pennsylvania PUC handled Bell of Pennsylvania's
(now Bell Atlantic) application for tariff for Caller ID service. The
PUC's Advocate's office got involved and wound up getting the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court to declare, a few years back, that Caller
ID amounts to wiretapping. (Perhaps those folks also think that a
peephole in your front door is an invasion of privacy ...)

A feeble attempt was made within the state legislature to revise
wiretapping laws to clarify and permit Caller ID, but that was
thwarted by the "promise" of federal legislation or regulation to
"clarify" the matter (*clarification* by the federal government??!).
So far, the state supreme court decision stands and renders moot any
decisions about per-line or per-call blocking.  Various technophobes
have succeeded in thoroughly confusing the matter and in preventing
the state legislature from taking any action to permit CID.

As for dealing directly with the obscene calls: I learned a bit of the
law enforcement perspective on the matter when I received a threatening
call several years ago.

Pennsylvania law provides penalties for nuisance calls, obscene or
harassing calls, or threatening calls. Those three categories pretty
much define how the telco and law enforcement handle a situation.

Nuisance calls are the hang-ups, the kiddy pranks, and the breathers.
Obscene calls and harassing calls pretty much get lumped into one
category, because they all consist of a message that is intended to
upset or exert power over the recipient of the call, but they don't
carry any direct threat of harmful or criminal action. Threatening
calls actually convey a threat of action by the caller.

For example, a harassing call might consist of, "I'd like to **** your
**** until I ****," while a threatening call would state, "I'm going
to come over there and **** your **** until I ****." Granted, it seems
like a rather fine distinction, but it has to do with something like
"probable cause," as the cops explained it to me.

Nuisance calls are usually dealt with by the telco. Nuisance calls are
so commonplace that, until the telco sees a persistent pattern, it's
not worththe effort it takes to gather the evidence the telco needs
to justify its actions against the caller to the regulatory
authorities.

Harassing or obscene calls are misdemeanors, but the telco is still in
the best position to deal with them, and it deals with them in much
the same manner it deals with nuisance calls. The telco is stuck
having to justify yanking out some sleazeball's phone and denying him
the constitutional right to talk dirty to someone. And, of course, the
cops have much the same limitation, along with their obligation to go
after those who are really doing nasty things, instead of those who
are just talking about them. About the only thing you might be able to
get very readily is for the telco to change _your_ number without a
service charge.

When a threat is involved, the police take the point, using the
telco's resources in the investigation. Threats over the phone of acts
that would be felonious are themselves usually felonies.

When I had my problem, the police were very frank and realistic about
what options I had. If I didn't feel threatened or violated, and the
calls did not persist, then let it go. Chalk it up to the cost of
living in a tolerant society -- like a neighbor's occasional loud
party.

If I _did_ feel a threat to safety or sanctity, then I would have to
work with the police -- not the telco -- as my primary advocate. For
them to fulfill that role, the call had to include a threat ("He _did_
threaten you, didn't he?" was the essence of the heavy hint), and I
would have to pursue a criminal complaint clear through the
prosecution and conviction.  They gave me those realities to consider,
and left it up to me.

That's probably what you'll have to do, too.

Of course, for the garden-variety nuisance or harassing calls,
remember the basic rules:

- If a caller doesn't respond to two "Hello"s or within 10-15 seconds,
  hang up quietly without saying anything else. Most of these guys
  just want to get somebody -- anybody  -- P.O.ed;

- If the caller starts getting trashy-mouthed, asking or making personal
  or sexual questions or comments, or stops responding to you, and it
  isn't appropriate in the conversation, hang up;

- Don't give out any intimate, identifying, or compromising information
  to someone you don't know and didn't call;

- Remember that most nuisance callers get their victims by picking the
  directory listing -- even just the number -- at random, just to try
  and get a reaction. If you don't give them that big reaction (and
  the power or control they derive from it), most of them will give
  up quickly and not call back.


Good luck,

Paul A. Lee                           Voice  414 357-1409
Telecommunications Analyst              FAX  [phone]
Woolworth Corporation            CompuServe  70353,566
INTERNET  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 17:36:59 +0500
Subject: Re: Local Competition -- Outside Plant vs Dialtone
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


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

> [...]  it occurs to me that it might perhaps be interesting to
> consider splitting the LEC functions into an outside plant company,
> and (any number of) dial tone providers.

> Any dial tone provider would have to co-locate their switches at the
> local loop termination point, or have a POP there.  The outside plant
> company would maintain the local loops, and have a static switch that
> associated each local loop with one dial tone provider's switch.

    But Competitive Access Providers want to be able to offer local
loops as well.  Couldn't the "outside plant" be competitive too?
(After all, that's what the major CAPS have -- outside plant.)  Then
there would be competition in "local loop" provisioning when a new
office tower or sub-division went in.  So you have outside plant
competition AND dial tone competition.

> There would be no need for a global database of local number
> assignments, since each local number prefix would continue to map to
> one CO.  At the CO, the mapping between local loops and dial tone
> switches would be done.

> The outside plant company could be owned by the dial tone providers
> jointly, or could bill separately.

> This would allow for the continuance of the natural monopoly on local
> loops and other outside plant, while allowing different companies to
> compete in providing dial tone and features.

    So the outside plant "owner" would have a CO, which would have a
database "inside" that connects off-hook phones to a "dial tone"
provider?  And this CO would pass along "flashes" and "ringing" -- and
support coin phones (maybe) and ISDN lines and private-line services?
Sounds like a DLC (like SLC(tm)-96) to me, with a little "line-to-T1"
database -- not a CO.

    This is a "slick" (and rather old) proposal for CAP access --
works fine for outgoing calls.  On the other hand, now that the
correct "dial tone" provider has collected digits and determined that
the selected subscriber ISN'T attached to this particular switch, how
does one ROUTE the call to the destination's selected "dial tone"
provider?

   How to get incoming calls routed properly is the reason for
"database" suggestions when discussing "dial tone" competition.  The
outgoing solution(s) are much easier, and are also where the revenue
is.  The incoming problem is really one of fairly paying for
terminating the call.

   One model says that the "caller" pays for the call, so their
provider handles the call to the destination.  But what if the
destination NXX only gets service from some other set of providers?
(No one suggests that all CAPs have to serve all NXXs in a LATA.)
Does the traditional LEC get the call?  Or does the CAP have an
NXX-to-termination-provider database?

   The previous model is sorta like the IXC market today -- the caller
selects the IXC, and the IXC figures out a way to reach the
destination, even if it means going through a third party (another IXC
or the terminating LEC).  This only works if the "dial tone" provider
is willing to PAY in some form for access via the terminating
provider.  Maybe the "pay" is just a reciprical access agreement.  But
probably not -- after all, what "provider" would want to provide
service to a customer that only got incoming calls, or made their
outgoing call via some other provider?

   Following the IXC model would suggest that the "dial tone" provider
would pay a timed access charge to the terminating provider, or maybe
an untimed charge.  Either way, the concept of "free unmeasured
service" for such calls disappears.

   Another model suggests that there would be some big database that
maps dialed number-to-terminating-provider for every call -- something
that will cost a lot to implement (and who pays for that?).  But this
would get the call to the correct terminating provider, who can
recover their costs in the monthly telephone bill (or in per-terminating-
call charges).

   But whatever model is eventually used, I think the concept of "free
unmeasured service" for multi-hour calls will be eroded by the
introduction of CAPs.  If CAPs do not offer such service, those who
benefit most from that service will stick with the LEC.  The LECs
costs will thus be higher, without the (CAP-using) toll calls to
balance those costs.  The rates for such service will thus go higher,
until it balances the costs or folks opt for measured service.

Opinion of the future:

   I don't see a market for a CAP whose customers are mostly those
that want to make long unmeasured calls.  Over the long run (if they
are "modem" users) someone will offer something like an X.25 service
(packet of some type) and bill in some combination of per month and/or
per packet.  If it is cheaper than the remaining high-priced "unmeasured"
service, it'll sell.


Al Varney - just my opinion

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #225
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa14189;
          14 May 94 3:56 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11920; Sat, 14 May 94 01:15:03 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11911; Sat, 14 May 94 01:15:02 CDT
Date: Sat, 14 May 94 01:15:02 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #226

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 14 May 94 01:15:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 226

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Privacy (Matt Metzinger)
    Re: Cellular Privacy (Mike Borsetti)
    Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? (Ari M. Footlik)
    Re: NANP and Switches (David Esan)
    Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip (John R. Covert)
    Re: Wireless Data Services (Pete Farmer)
    Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Caller ID With Serial Port - Where? (Dan Lanciani)
    Re: Cell One/NY Rates for DC and Boston (Brent Whitlock)
    Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (John R. Levine)
    Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (Shawn Gordhamer)
    Re: Phone Line in Use Indicator From Radio Shack ([e-mail])
    Re: Direct Billing by AT&T (Brent Whitlock)
    Used Telco/Test Equipment Suppliers? (Eric Pearce)
    Cordless Phone Suggestions Wanted (Anand Gupta)
    Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book (Ken Thompson)
    Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Carl Moore)
    Caller ID Gets Me Jealous (Joseph Romero)
    Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? (Christian Weisgerber)
    Re: Call Screening Device (Leroy Casterline)
    Re: History of Underseas Cables (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 including Compuserve and GEnie.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Matt Metzinger)
Date: 14 May 94 02:30:54 GMT
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy?
Organization: Fidonet: The Tranquility Grille (1:147/3038)


Friday May 06 1994 09:58, [e-mail] wrote:

> Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 changed all of this.

Does anyone know where the full text of this can be picked up in
electronic format, preferably by FTPmail?  I have no direct FTP
access.


Matt Metzinger     [e-mail]
[e-mail]
1:147/[e-mail]   405-755-6136 The Tranquility Grille BBS

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 20:19:05 PDT
From: Mike Borsetti, Cellular One/San Francisco <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy


Let me add to the discussion that digital cellular provides much
higher privacy, as there are no publicly available scanners that can
descramble the "buzzing" generated by a digital conversation.

Additionally, the TDMA digital standard supports encription, which
will be available sometime in the near future.  Today's phones will
only need a simple reprogramming to take advantage of encryption.


[e-mail]     Cellular One/San Francisco

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:31:43 EDT
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet
Organization: Penn State University


Many universities are running a mail re-director at their domain name
e.g. @PSU.EDU which allows the user to always specify that as their
e-mail address, yet have it forwarded to their preferred e-mail
system.  In fact, there may be no mail reading capability at the x.EDU
server.

Also, mail to that address, which specifies a non-unique name, will
usually produce a list of userids/names that are close matches (some
limitations do apply).  Likewise, FINGER access, as well as Gopher and
PH will usually be found at such institutions.

Our gopher can be found at info.psu.edu which has a link to our PH
database.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ari Micah Footlik)
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts?
Date: 14 May 1994 05:22:56 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


[e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth) writes:

> Or the modem should detect voice and put out a AT-command like
> response ("VOICE") which would cause the comm software to cease, just
> like a "NO ANSWER" timeout. Shouldn't be hard for the DSP to detect
> voice.  Do common modems provide any such voice indication?

  Actually, I know that my old modem, a PPI 2400 internal, used to be
able to distinguish voice answers from data or no connections, but, I
don't remember how I got it to do that.  A number of comm programs I
have used have "VOICE" as a no-connect message option, though I don't
know if it is implemented.


Till Later!

Ari Micah Footlik    University Of Illinois
Champaign-Urbana, Illionis    E-Mail To: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: Re: NANP and Switches
Date: 13 May 94 19:52:26 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY


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

> Mr. Lee also writes:

>> CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially
>> in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc..

> I don't believe this.  The whole purpose of the new NANP was to change
> from NNX to NXX, and to allow NXX type NPA's.  All switch routing
> software was designed to recognize that an NPA was N0X or N1X, and the
> CO code was NNX.

There are 2910 NXXs that have the format NPA (N[0|1]A) in 62 NPAs.  I will
not include the NXXs here but the NPAs that have them are:

201   210   303      313    410   506   602      615    706   718   818      909
202   212   305      404    415   510   604      619    707   805   903      910
204   213   306      405    416   512   606      702    708   808   904      916
205   214   310      407    501   513   609      703    713   810   905      917
206   215   312      408    503   514   610      704    714   813   908      919
209   301


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 18:33:24 EDT
From: John R. Covert  13-May-1994 1836 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip


[e-mail] (John R Levine) wrote:

> If you use an LD carrier who bills through your cell carrier (notably
> AT&T), the LD times are all the same as the cellular times, meaning
> that you're paying for LD minutes you didn't actually use.

Well, we have the same cellular carrier -- NYNEX, and I have noticed
that this is _not_ true.  NYNEX only prints one time on the bill, the
air time, but the LD charge is correctly calculated for the number of
supervised minutes, on both roamer LD charges and local AT&T charges
billed by NYNEX.


john

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

From: [e-mail] (Pete Farmer)
Subject: Re: Wireless Data Services
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:22:53 -0800
Organization: Tetherless Access Ltd.


In article <[e-mail]>, I wrote that I had noticed
very little posted to this list regarding wireless *data* services,
and asked if I was looking in the wrong place.

I have since received a couple of e-maiols pointing me to
comp.std.wireless, where I do find postings regarding wireless
services.


Thanks,

Peter J. Farmer             Internet: [e-mail]
Vice President, Marketing   Voice:    415-321-5968
Tetherless Access Ltd.      Fax:      [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows
Date: 13 May 1994 16:27:39 -0700
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access


In article <[e-mail]>, Mark W. Schumann wrote:

> What Do You Know gives its number as 1-800-WHA-KNOW.  As in "One,
> eight hundred, wah-no.  Or whack now."

In the SF Bay Area, the local sports station provides a toll free
number (*SPORTS) if you are calling from a cellular phone via GTE.
And then the nationally syndicated computer talk show On Computers
(Sunday 10:00PDT) has a toll-free number.


Laurence Chiu             Walnut Creek, California
Tel: [phone] (work)  Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 21:31:43 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dan Lanciani)
Subject: Re: Caller ID with Serial Port - Where?


[e-mail] (John Harris) wrote:

> Try contacting  Vive Synergies Inc.,
>                 30 West Beaver Creek Road, Unit 2,
>                 Richmond Hill, Ontario  L4B 3K1
>                 [phone]   Fax [phone]

> This manufacturer advertises in the local paper as having a "CALL
> EDITOR II" for $199.00

Beware of this device.  The design is seriously flawed and Vive isn't
interested in fixing it.  Here is something I wrote about it a while
back when I (foolishly) bought one from HAL.  (HAL sells Vive's Call
Editor II, obviously ...)

The HAL box also has a fairly severe bug.  When a call comes in, you
see a lot of garbage characters on the RS-232 interface before the
actual CNID string.  Worse, what you are seeing is the box's echo
of garbage characters that it thinks came in over the RS-232 interface.
Sometimes it gets enough garbage to generate an ``Unknown Command''
response.  Chances are, sooner or laater, it will think it saw a
dial command ...

Details for those who care:

The Call Editor II (made by Vive) attempts to share the single serial
input of its 8031 microcontroller between the CNID chip and the external
RS-232 port.  It uses 1/4 of a 4053 (a rather odd choice given that the
other 3/4s appear unused!) for this purpose.  When the CNID chip detects
``interesting'' stuff on the line the 8031 switches the 4053 with one
of the P3 output bits (I forget which one) so it can look at the CNID
data.  When it is done, it switches back to listening to the RS-232
port.  Unfortunately, they are forgetting to clear their serial buffer
(or, at least, forgetting to wait a character time to account for garbage
in transit during the switch) so the command interpreter gets to see
random bytes.  The command interpreter echos these bytes to the RS-232
port and, of course, acts on them.  (The details here could be off
as they are based on a fairly cursory inspection of the circuit and
some of the ICs have their part numbers obscured...)

I tried to explain the problem to technical support at Vive but I
don't really expect much.  The first person didn't know what I
was talking about.  The second person denied the problem and added
the usual line that nobody else had ever reported anything similar.
The third person said that it is the fault of the CNID chip that they
use and cannot be fixed.  He insisted that all I needed to do was write
a ``software filter'' to ignore the garbage.  He did not seem to understand
that their command interpreter was seeing the garbage and could generate
spurious dial commands (or who knows what else).  He also said that
this isn't a problem with telephones in Canada (where they are).  An
``engineer'' is supposed to get back to me sometime so I can tell him
how to fix the firmware...

(Needless to say, the engineer never called back.)


Dan Lanciani    ddl@harvard.*

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: Re: Cell One/NY Rates For DC and Boston
Date: 14 May 94 02:09:18 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)


Does anyone know if there are any arrangements for roaming between
Ameritech (Central IL in particular, although Ameritech also operates
a cellular system in the Chicago area) and the systems in the
Westchester County, NY area (between NYC and Poughkeepsie)?
Hopefully, there is something besides the $3.00 per day/$0.99 per
minute deals...


Brent Whitlock        Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology
[e-mail]    Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering
            University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

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

Date: Fri, 14 May 94 01:25:00 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


I have bought stuff from The Wholesale House, 33852 Del Obispo, #45,
Dana Point CA, [phone], [e-mail].  They seem
mostly to handle electronics closeouts and overstocks.  Orders must be
prepaid by check or COD, no plastic.

For cellular phones, they have chargers, battery eliminators, cases,
and spare batteries, mostly in the $20 to $30 range.  For $120 they
have hands-free car mount kits.

I haven't bought any cellular stuff from them, since my phone is
permanenty mounted in the car and doesn't need any accessories, but
other stuff I've gotten has been good.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 18:38:54 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

>     Hutton Communications
>     4112 Billy Mitchell Drive
>     Dallas, TX  75244-2315
>     214-239-0580  Fax-214-239-5264
>     800-442-3811

> They had quite a few cellular accessories.

I called, and the salesperson told me they were strictly wholesale and
would not sell to individuals.


Shawn Gordhamer  [e-mail]   Rochester, Minnesota USA

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

From: [e-mail]@cc.usu.edu
Subject: Re: Phone Line in Use Indicator From Radio Shack
Date: Fri, 13 May 94 19:22:00 PST
Organization: Mt. San Antonio College


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But a quick stock check at the local
> 'shack' on the computer there priced it at $12.99. It is just a little
> plastic box with a short modular cord on the end. It plugs into any
> phone outlet and sits wherever you place it. When a phone on that line
> goes off hook, the LED lights up. Simple as they come.

Well, how would I go about making one?  Should be simple parts?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Check out the file in the Telecom
Archives. Your question is one quite commonly asked around here.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: Re: Direct Billing by AT&T
Date: 14 May 94 02:22:39 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)


Jeffrey C Honig <[e-mail]> writes:

> Also, my wife just received a $20 check offer from MCI.  Is AT&T still
> countering these offers?

MCI recently sent me a check for $50 if I would switch back to them.
I called AT&T and asked if they would match it.  I was told that AT&T
does not do that any more.  They don't want to play that game anymore.

The LD phone company wars have been good to me recently.  MCI convinced
me to switch with some incentives such as $100 free calling on
weekends in one month.  I was convinced to take their offer and let
them switch me.  Then AT&T called me to ask who authorized my long
distance company to be changed.  I felt like I was a kid being
reprimanded by my Mom.  I think the sales rep could have been a bit
more tactful.  But at any rate, she offered me $45 cash and a promise
of 20% discount on all phone calls for six months to switch back.  So,
since I'm not really all that fond of MCI, I took it.  Now, I'm being
offered $50 cash to switch back to MCI in addition to the incentives
they offered me before.  I don't know ... I think I would rather stay
with AT&T.


Brent Whitlock        Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology
[e-mail]    Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering
            University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 21:10:17 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Eric Pearce)
Subject: Used Telco/Test Equipment Suppliers?


Are there dealers for used telco and test equipment in the Bay Area
(or by mail order catalog)?

I'm looking for stuff like test sets, digit grabbers, T-BERDs, etc.


Thanks,

Eric Pearce | [e-mail] | O'Reilly & Associates
Publishers of Nutshell Series Handbooks and X Window System Guides
103 Morris St, Sebastopol, CA 95472  1-800-998-9938 or 707-829-0515

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

From: Anand Gupta <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cordless Phone Suggestions Wanted
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 03:56:24 GMT
Organization: Lafayette College


I am in the market for cordless phones.

I am planning to purchase around four or five phones for home use. I
would like some recommendations on brands. I am looking to buy
soemthing less than $ 100 each and need only minimal features. What
matters most is range, speech quality and reliability.

Brands that I am seriously considering: AT&T, Panasonic and Sony and
also Southwestern Bell.

I would like personal opinions preferably with model numbers etc.

Thanks a lot for your help. If somebody has any phones that he would
like to sell then contact me also.


Thanks,

Guptaa     [e-mail]

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

From: Ken Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book For Digest Readers
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 10:02:38
Organization: AT&T Global Information Solutions


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Terry Hardie) writes:

> From: [e-mail] (Terry Hardie)
> Subject: Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book For Digest
> Readers

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You would write to Dr. Race to receive
> your copy of the book. I am reprinting this as a reminder since several
> people have written *me* asking for a copy. I can't help you!  Write
> to the author at the address shown for him at the top of this message.  PAT]

I did and my message bounced.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well then, I suggest you try Terry Hardie,
the person who sent the original message, per his address above.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 12:27:05 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate


Actually, the history file does refer to area codes being generalized
from N0X/N1X to NXX.

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

Subject: Caller ID Gets Me Jealous
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 14 May 94 10:00:24 PST
Organization: Mt. San Antonio College


I hear of caller ID and I get jealous ... it is not offered here in
Los Angles, CA.  However, we do offer the services of call return and
call block.  Here is my theory ... if they offer these two services,
then the _phone numbers_ must be there.  Further more, they must be in
the phone bandwidth of 300-3kHz ... so the, if I had a scope, I could
check out the ring and notice patterns if I know who's calling ...
right??  I could then build a decoder ... am i just dreaming? They set
up the system, I'm just trying to use it.


Joseph Romero   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually yes, you are just dreaming.
Caller-ID has nothing to do with the ring you receive on your phone
at all. It is transmitted as data between the first and second rings.
No matter what kind of fancy equipment you wish to install at your
end of the line, the Caller-ID data will not be available to you until/
unless the central office sends it down the line ... an unlikely state
of affairs in California at this time.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 00:55:00 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Christian Weisgerber)
Subject: Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary?


In comp.dcom.telecom William J Rehm writes:

> As I understand the situation, zmodem is indeed a proprietary
> protocol.

No. The ZModem *protocol* is public domain.  Note there's an updated
version ZModem-90 which indeed is proprietary to Omen Technology.

ZModem implementations follow various schemes, e.g. Chuck Forsberg's
Unix rz/sz are somewhere between shareware and crippleware.

> I have admittedly limited knowledge of this situation, but this is how
> it was explained to me when I contacted the author's company.

I think you misunderstood Omen's/Chuck's response.


Christian 'naddy' Weisgerber, Germany  [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 17:43:32 -0600
From: Leroy Casterline <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Call Screening Device


> I am interested in purchasing a low cost ($30-$60) Call screener
> which connects to my phone.  Typically I expect it to block the
> ringing of the incoming call on my phone unless the caller presses in
> a security code using his/her DTMF phones.  I know somebody makes
> them. I will appreciate any information on it.

I have such a device, called 'Friends Only', which a client purchased
for me to evaluate.  The device seems to work as promised, and does
what was specified above.  According to the last page of the small
manual, the manufacturer is:

  KES Communications
  2029 S. Loop 250
  Midland, Texas 79703

They neglected to list their telephone number, a curious omission for
a communciations company.

One thing to consider before placing such a device on your line is
emergency calls.  These devices block ALL calls for which the caller
does not have the proper ID.  If the caller is calling to tell you
that a loved one was in an accident or to request permission to
perform emergency surgery on a dependant, you may regret your decision
to install the device.


Leroy Casterline

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 16:08:03 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: History of Underseas Cables


Some apparent anomalies in all three of these great stories may be
resolved by noting that Newfoundland did not join Canada until 1949.


Tony Harminc

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #226
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21847;
          15 May 94 14:33 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09102; Sun, 15 May 94 11:05:19 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09093; Sun, 15 May 94 11:05:17 CDT
Date: Sun, 15 May 94 11:05:17 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #227

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 May 94 11:05:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 227

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Call For Hearings on Assured Public Access to InterNet (Anthony Wright)
    Book Review: "Zen and the Art of the Internet" by Kehoe (Rob Slade)
    800 Number Billback (Alan S. Evans)
    The Future of Telephony ([e-mail])
    Help Needed on Call Iinitialization in GSM, TACS, AMPS (Nimal Senarath)
    Cellular Phones and Law Enforcement (Nigel 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 including Compuserve and GEnie.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 00:29:58 HST
From: NetSurfer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: NetSurfer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call For Hearings on Assured Public Access to InterNet


ON SENATOR INOUYE .. 93 Groups Press for Public Right-of-Way on NII

FOR RELEASE:  May 12, 1993     (The full text of the letter to Congress,
Media contacts listed below.   as well as a list of organizations that
                               have signed on, follow this release.)

             NINETY-THREE CIVIC GROUPS PRESS CONGRESS FOR
          `PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY' ON INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY


Washington, DC --

     A large and diverse coalition of civic organizations today called
for Senate hearings on the need to guarantee a "public right-of-way"
in telecommunications policy regarding the so-called information
superhighway.  The coalition letter, addressed to Commerce Committee
Chairman Sen. Ernest Hollings (D-SC) and Communications Subcommittee
Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-HI), was signed by 93 educational, library,
civil rights, civil liberties, religious, labor, arts, consumer, local
government, public broadcasting, disability rights and other civic
groups.  Senator Inouye has said that he intends to introduce
legislation, which is expected to be introduced shortly, designed to
achieve this goal.

     "We have come together to ensure that legislation designed to
regulate the development of the national information infrastructure
(NII) provides for a public space to guarantee the free flow of ideas
and information," the letter said.  "To ensure the greatest possible
diversity of voices on the NII, telecommunications networks must
reserve capacity for a `public right-of-way' through which noncommercial
educational and informational services and civic discourse can
flourish unimpeded by economic barriers."

     The coalition letter urges Congress to move beyond an exclusive
focus on the interests of the private sector in developing its
regulatory approach.  Specifically, the coalition calls for
Congressional hearings that would give the civic sector an opportunity
to demonstrate the need for strong public interest protections in the
NII legislation.  The letter outlines the need to assure access to the
information superhighway by rural Americans, low-income citizens,
minorities, individuals with disabilities, and the elderly.  "The
interests of the public must not be left behind," the letter
concludes.

    A copy of the full text of the letter, as well as a list of
organizations that have signed on, follow.

                              ***

CONTACT:    Jeff Chester - Center for Media Education
        202/628-2620

        Virginia Witt - People for the American Way
        202/467-4999

        Nancy Neubauer - America's Public Television Stations
        202/887-8409

                              ***

May 12, 1994

Senator Ernest F. Hollings
Chairman
Committee on Commerce,
  Science and Transportation
125 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Senator Daniel K. Inouye
Chairman
Subcommittee on Communications
227 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senators Hollings and Inouye:

We write on behalf of a diverse coalition of civic organizations
representing educational, library, civil rights, civil liberties,
religious, labor, arts, consumer, local government, public
broadcasting, disability rights and other organizations whose members
engage in civic discourse protected and encouraged by the First
Amendment.

For 200 years, American democracy has thrived because of the vibrant
debate fostered by the First Amendment.  We have come together to
ensure that legislation designed to regulate the development of the
national information infrastructure (NII) provides for a public space
to guarantee the free flow of ideas and information.  To ensure the
greatest possible diversity of voices on the NII, telecommunications
networks must reserve capacity for a "public right-of-way" through
which noncommercial educational and informational services and civic
discourse can flourish unimpeded by economic barriers.  In addition,
the public right-of-way promises to improve artistic expression,
democratic self-governance and civic culture and empower citizens to
become more active and informed.

We are heartened that S. 1822, the Communications Act of 1994,
addresses several critical public interest issues such as universal
service and preferential access for public uses, including hospitals,
libraries, educational institutions and public broadcasting.  However,
the public debate surrounding S. 1822 and the companion bill in the
House, H.R. 3636, thus far has focused primarily upon the interests of
industry, particularly the telephone and cable companies.  There has
not yet been adequate discussion about the interests and needs of the
public, the intended beneficiaries of the NII.

We understand that Senator Inouye is considering introducing a bill
that would provide for this public right-of-way.  Because such
legislation and S. 1822 would literally transform civic discourse in
this country, we urge the Subcommittee on Communications to hold
hearings on the establishment of a public right-of-way on the NII.
Hearings would give representatives from educational, health care,
library, governmental, community, religious, cultural and other civic
organizations, as well as individual users of the NII, an opportunity
to add their valuable perspectives to this debate.

In addition to the issues raised by the creation of a universally
accessible, non-discriminatory public right-of-way, other significant
public interest matters that should be examined in hearings include,
but are not limited to, ensuring that small town and rural residents,
as well as low income citizens, minorities, individuals with
disabilities and the elderly, are connected to the NII in a timely
fashion, guaranteeing that telecommunications carriers provide
non-discriminatory access to their networks for all users, deploying
the NII using rules of good governance, preserving the Communications
Act of 1934's mandate to encourage public telecommunications services,
providing adequate support for noncommercial programming and
information services, and facilitating democratic self-governance over
the NII.

The Subcommittee has a rare opportunity to ensure that the NII's
potential to reinvigorate our democracy is realized.  As these bills
move through Congress, the interests of the public must not be left
behind.  For this reason, we regard holding hearings on these public
access issues as an essential first step toward ensuring that NII
legislation promotes democratic values and fulfills the mandate of the
First Amendment.

Sincerely,


Access America
Actors' Equity Association
Alliance for Communications Democracy
Alliance for Community Media
Alliance for Public Technology
Alliance of Nonprofit Mailers
Alliance To End Childhood Lead Poisoning
AnchorNet Community Network Organizing Committee (Anchorage, AK)
Arts Wire
Association of Research Librarians
American Arts Alliance
America's Public Television Stations
American Association of Museums
American Civil Liberties Union
American Council of the Blind
American Library Association
American Federation of Television and Radio Artists
American Music Center
American Symphony Orchestra League
Artists For A Better Image
Association of Art Museum Directors
Association of Independent Video and Filmmakers
Association of Performing Arts Presenters
Association of Systematics Collections
Center for Civic Networking
Center for Media Education
Chittendon Community Television (Burlington, VT)
Citizens for Media Literacy
Common Cause
Communications Consortium
Consumer Federation of America
Dance/USA
Deep Dish Television Network
Fairfax Cable Access Corporation
Friends of the Earth
Government Accountability Project
High Performance Magazine
Institute for Public Representation
League of Conservation Voters
Libraries for the Future
Media Access Project
Media Working Group Incorporated
Minority Media Ownership and Employment Council
Museum Computer Network
National Alliance for Media Arts & Culture
National Artists Equity Association
National Assembly of State Arts Agencies
National Association for the Deaf
National Association of Artists Organizations
National Association of College Broadcasters
National Association of People with AIDS
National Campaign for Freedom of Expression
National Center for Law and Deafness
National Coalition Against Censorship
National Coalition of Independent Public Broadcasting Producers
National Coalition on Black Voter Participation
National Congress of American Indians
National Council of Churches
National Council of LaRaza
National Education Association
National Federation of Community Broadcasters
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
National Humanities Alliance
National Minority Public Broadcasting Consortia
National PTA
National Public Radio
National School Boards Association
National Trust for the Development of African-American Men
National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981)
New York Foundation for the Arts
OMB Watch
OPERA America
PEN American Center
People for the American Way Action Fund
Public Broadcasting Service
Public Citizen
Public Citizen's Congress Watch
Public Service Telecommunications Consortium
Safe Energy Communication Council
Screen Actors Guild
Self Help for Hard of Hearing People, Inc.
Shadow Congress Information Network, Center for Environmental Citizenship
Taxpayer Assets Project
Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc.
The Council of Literary Magazines and Presses
The Creative Coalition
The Literary Network
Theatre Communications Group
United Cerebral Palsy Associations
Office of Communication, United Church of Christ
Union Producers and Programmers Network
U.S. Catholic Conference
Writers Guild of America, East, Inc.


                          ###

Please distribute and repost widely.


Anthony Wright                    [e-mail]
Coordinator, Future of Media Project        Center for Media Education

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

Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 15:24:03 MDT
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Zen and the Art of the Internet" by Kehoe


BKZENINT.RVW  940216

Prentice-Hall, Inc.
113 Sylvan Avenue
Englewood Cliffs, NJ   07632
[phone]   FAX [phone]
or
11711 N. College Ave.
Carmel, IN   46032-9903
or
201 W. 103rd Street
Indianapolis, IN   46290
or
15 Columbus Circle
New York, NY   10023
800-428-5331
or
Market Cross House
Cooper Street
Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1EB
England
[e-mail] - Phyllis Eve Bregman
Beth Mullen-Hespe [e-mail]
Pat Carol 317-581-3743
"Zen and the Art of the Internet", Kehoe, 1994, 0-13-083033-X
[e-mail]

Kehoe starts out by quoting E.B. White's exhortation to students of
English usage from "The Elements of Style" with, "Get the *little*
book!  Get the *little* book!  Get the *little* book!"  Sound advice.
It applies equally to those just starting out on the Internet.  "Zen"
is a mere pocketbook in comparison to some of the other telephone
directory-sized guides, but a pocket guide is usually what is needed.
Kehoe has done a marvelous job of presenting the essentials, plus a
few interesting tidbits, while holding off from reproducing reams of
resources from those already available on the net, itself.

"Zen" is, itself, one of the very widely known and highly regarded
resources on the net.  It was also the first introductory guide to the
Internet published in popular book form.  Therefore, I am rather
shocked to note that this third edition, copyright 1994, proudly
boasts of over 50,000 copies sold.  I'd be delighted to do that well
as an author, but it indicates that the book is nowhere near as
well-known in the general populace as it deserves.

I should, having given these accolades, admit to a decided bias: this
is my type of book.  Those who are not happy with concepts and only
wish to know what button to press may find the book frustrating.
Mail, ftp, news, telnet and a number of other tools are covered, but
Kehoe does not reproduce, wholesale, help screens from elm and tin.
Since the specific programs you will use all have help features, Kehoe
evidently does not feel the need to waste paper explaining how to use
a program that you may not, indeed, need to use.  I agree, and it is
refreshing to see at least one Internet guide which gives clear
explanations of the essence of the Internet tools without having to
fill space with specifics which you will be able to get from the
programs themselves.  (In response to the first draft of this review,
Kehoe stated that Internet providers should be also providing
documentation for any system specific features.  He also mused on the
bewilderment newcomers must feel when confronted with a shelf full of
400 to 800 page guides for a system whose basics are supposedly fairly
simple.  Again I concur.)

Probably for the same reason, Kehoe does not reproduce an annotated,
or even expurgated, .newsrc file or "list of lists."  Some may say
that this is a lack on the part of the book and that it is less
interesting for not providing such a directory.  These resources are,
however, readily accessible on the net (Kehoe tells you where to find
them) and cannot, in book form, be anything more than an outdated and
possibly misleading first indicator.

There is, of course, nothing wrong with the large guides with all of
their lengthy references.  As the same time, most newcomers will want
a gentler, smaller introduction, rather than being dumped into a vat
of data.  For those to whom the sound of few pages flipping is as
music, this is definitely your book.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKZENINT.RVW   940216. Permission is
granted to redistribute in TELECOM Digest and associated mailing lists/
news groups.

Postscriptum: sadly, Brendan Kehoe was recently involved in a major
traffic accident.  In one of the network ironies, the flood of email
condolences to his personal mailbox had created something of a problem
for friends trying to help out.  Mid-January, however, saw a dramatic
improvement, and when I sent him the draft review he was beginning to
work on the backlog of mail.  (He responded far faster than many
authors who have no such excuse :-) By the time you read this it is
possible he may be back at work.  (He still has a huge backlog,
though, so don't expect any immediate answers :-)


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 19:11:57 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Alan S. Evans)
Subject: 800 Number Billback
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Recently I was introduced to the latest scam when our company's phone
bill showed 2 2-minute calls to an 800 number for which we were billed
$60.00.  The charges from this company (InfoAccess) appeared on our
NYNEX bill.  Our SMDR did not show a record of these calls having been
made.

When I called to discuss this with InfoAccess, they explained that
these charges were a monthly subscription charge to call their various
client services, which would continue until we gave notice of
cancellation.  I gave notice of cancellation and told them we were not
going to pay these charges because we did not make the calls.  Their
initial response was that we were responsible for calls made on our
lines, but when I politely, but firmly, insisted that we were *NOT*
going to pay for these calls, they agreed to credit our account for
the charges and block any subsequent calls from the two lines.  I then
took it one step further and asked if they could block calls from all
our lines, which they said they could do if we sent them a letter
listing our line numbers.

After that I contacted NYNEX.  I told them what happened with
InfoAccess, and that there had also been another 3 minute call to an
800 number which was billed to us for $11.85 from VRS Billing Systems.
I asked if we could request that NYNEX refuse to bill us for these
companies, or if we could request that NYNEX block calls to these
companies from being made from our lines.  No, to both questions.  The
person I spoke with was sympathetic, however, and did say that
although their procedure required that we call the company (i.e.
InfoAccess or VRS) that billed us to request credit, if that company
refused to issue the credit and we still contested the calls, NYNEX
could issue a "final recourse" to get the charges dropped from our
bills.  Then it would be up to these companies to try to collect from
us directly (good luck!).  The NYNEX representative also said that it
was NYNEX's position that all calls made to 800 numbers should be
*free* calls (after all, that's how telcos and businesses have been
marketing it for years).

Next I called VRS Billing Systems.  This time our SMDR did show a
record of the call (our PBX system allows any extension to make calls
to 800 numbers).  I argued that how could they legitimately charge us
for a call that was made to an 800 number.  After some discussion,
which eventually took me to a supervisor, they also agreed, as "a
courtesy" to us, to give us a credit for the call this time.  I
thanked them, and said that as "a courtesy" to them I would not be
filing complaints with the FCC and PSC this time.  (They even had the
nerve to say that they could not process our request to block multiple
lines unless we sent them the line numbers on diskette - I sent them a
letter anyway.)

In case you are interested, here are the addresses of these companies:

InfoAccess, Inc.                          VRS Billing Systems
527 3rd Ave., P.O. Box 327                P.O. Box 611987
New York, NY 10016                        San Jose, CA 95161
800-645-8830                              800-800-2526

Here are two other similar companies (info supplied by NYNEX on the basis
of customer complaints):

Zero Plus Dialing, Inc.                   International Telecharge Group
P.O. Box 791285                           9999 W. Technology Blvd.
San Antonio, TX 78216                     Dallas, TX 75220
800-456-7587                              800-825-5533

I was not familiar with ZPDI.  When I called them to ask for their
mailing address, the representative became *very* evasive.  It took
several point blank requests, plus a consultation with a supervisor,
before they gave it to me.

ITG also goes by the name ONCOR Communications.  I had run into them
before when they slammed our NYNEX coin phones.  Their strategy is to
get the numbers of NYNEX public coin phones and send a mag tape to
NYNEX's "Ballot Center" to change the 0+ carrier to them.  By the time
you find out about it, they have been ripping off the users of the
phones with outrageous charges for a couple of weeks.  If you change
the phones back, they keep trying.  The only way to stop them, and
other similar operators, is to request a "PIC freeze" from NYNEX.

I have sent letters to all of these companies requesting a block on
all our lines and indicating that we would refuse to pay any charges
they billed to our lines.  Even if this doesn't stop them, we will
have documented our intention.

I hope this helps you avoid a similar experience.  At least now you know
the enemy.


Alan Evans


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'way they can charge you for calling
an 800 number' is the same way AT&T can charge for it. For example you
can call AT&T's 800 number to put through a collect call to someone or
to charge a call to your credit card. Merely because you originated it
via an 800 number does not mean charges cannot be incurred for the call
as a result. In the case of the Information Providers who use an 800
number in this way, *someone* in your firm called the 800 number and
gave the answering operator permission to place the charges on your line.

Although you can request a block on the line against future charges of
this sort, you cannot legally refuse to pay the charges already incurred
since tariffs plainly state you are responsible for the use of your
instruments. The other end did deliver information to someone at your
firm who authorized it. That person may in fact have not been permitted
by your company to do so, but your beef would be with them, not with the
Information Provider. Because the amount in question was relatively small
your refusal to pay probably will not be dealt with further. The service
may possibly place you with an agency for collection, but it would not
be worth their time or expense to sue or go further with it than that.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: The Future of Telephony
Date: Sat, 14 May 94 12:55:18 PDT


What will telephony look like in the 21st century?  Here are some
accurate predictions:

CALLER ID -- Future phones will not only identify the caller in
advance, but will also subject a sample of the caller's speech to
Voice Stress Analysis, to determine mood.  I won't pick up the phone
if the caller is angry.

PICTUREPHONE -- cheap silicon and advanced compression algorithms will
make slow-scan video so cheap that every phone will have it.
Expensive phones will have pre-recorded images to be sent down the
line when the user doesn't want to be seen au natural.

FEELPHONE -- even in the 1980's, considerable patent literature
existed on tactile I/O devices.  This industry will explode once
communication standards are established, allowing Taiwan to churn out
compatible cheap phones.  The major use of these phones will be, of
course, phone sex.

SCANNERS -- Radio Shack will introduce a cellphone scanner that has a
chip which detects mindless chatter, and skips to the next channel
when it occurs so you won't have to sit there hitting the SCAN button.
Feminists will decry the detection of higher-pitched voices as a
parameter in the skip algorithm.

SMART ENCRYPTION CHIPS -- all fax machines, modems, etc. will contain
a smart encryption chip compatible with law enforcement requirements.
It will detect communications concerning possibly illegal activities
and forward such material directly to the FBI.  An AI simulation of
Dorothy Denning inside the modem will decide what is suspicious and
what is not.  Criminals will be forced to talk in ecret-say odes-cay.

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

From: [e-mail] (Nimal Senarath)
Subject: Help Needed on Call Initialization in GSM, TACS, AMPS
Organization: Dept. of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, Univ of Melbourne
Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 10:09:49 GMT


Hi there,

I am a research student in Mobile communications attached to Networks
Group, EE Dept, Melbourne UNiversity, Australia.

I want to model Call INitialization in TDMA, FDMA systems for my
simulation work. I want to know exactly how the decision of initial
Base STATION selection is done (i.e. At the call origination).

We know that the mobile checks for the highest received pilot signal,
and connect to that base station if that is sufficient. However what I
need is that how long mobile will measure this Signal Strength before
taking the decision and how often it measures this RSS values. (e.g.
It can be that average value of RSS over 0.5 seconds intervals may be
measured for about 'N' number of such intervals?; I assume measurements
at 0.5 intervals because that is the measurement interval used for
sending RSS values to the BS by the GSM system after the intitialization
process.)

Any real known data or any known procedure for a similar system is
what I am after. You may e-mail me or any helpful discussion in this
news group is greatly appreciated.


Gamini Senarath
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering
University of Melbourne   Parkville 3052  Australia
e-mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 15 May 94 04:45 WET
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Cellular Phones and Law Enforcement
Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-4151  Voice: 416-363-8676


Here is a press release from the Cellular Telecommunications Industry
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.


 Cellular Phone Industry and Law Enforcement News Conference Monday
 To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor
 Contact: Kathleen Lobb, 202-434-8527, for the Cellular
          Telecommunications Industry Association

   News Advisory:

   WHAT: Cellular phones are increasingly important tool in law
enforcement officials' crime-fighting efforts.

   At this press conference, the cellular telephone industry will
announce important new contributions to law enforcement agencies in
communities across the country.  Law enforcement officials and
industry representatives will discuss how police, community groups,
and private citizens are using cellular phones to fight crime.

   The announcement is part of the Cellular Telecommunications
Industry Association's (CTIA) "Salute to Our Nation's Law Enforcement
Officials" in recognition of National Police Week and National
Cellular Safety Week.

   WHO: Dewey Stokes, national president, Fraternal Order of Police

  Local law enforcement representatives and elected officials:
     Inspector Jacqueline Barnes, Metropolitan Washington Police
     Sgt. John Manning, Seattle Police Department
     Councilwoman Ruth Jones McClendon, San Antonio

     Thomas E. Wheeler, president, CTIA

  Senior executives from cellular companies:
     John E. Rooney, president, Ameritech Mobile Communications
     Mark Faris, vice president, Cellular One
     Robert Johnson, vice president, Bell Atlantic Mobile System

   WHEN:  Monday, May 16
          10:00 a.m.

   WHERE: National Press Club, First Amendment Room
          14th and F Streets., N.W., Washington, D.C.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sorry for the short notice on this. It
only arrived here in my mailbox over the weekend and I rushed it right
out into the next outgoing issue.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #227
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24039;
          16 May 94 0:18 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16376; Sun, 15 May 94 20:31:04 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16367; Sun, 15 May 94 20:31:02 CDT
Date: Sun, 15 May 94 20:31:02 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #228

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 May 94 20:31:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 228

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Paul Robinson)
    Re: San Carlos Joins Internet (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Anton Sherwood)
    Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number ([e-mail])
    Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line (Bill Tighe)
    Re: Wireless Data Services (Rob Lockhart)
    Re: Used Telco/Test Equipment Suppliers? (John Lundgren)
    Re: Verifone Programming Manuals (Glenn McComb)
    Verifone Junior Programmed! (Ry Jones)
    Re: Radio by Phone (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Replace POST-MAIL by FAX (Herb Effron)
    Re: Cellular Call Forwarding (James Holland)
    Re: Caller-ID Gets Me Jealous (David Hayes)
    Re: Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service (Jonathan Loo)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 19:43:08 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

>> Anyone who has access to the Internet ...  can reach City Hall by
>> addressing their message to [e-mail].

> Why are they in the Commercial domain, and not the Government domain?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because, as I understand it, '.gov' only
> applies to the *federal* government. I don't think it was ever defined
> for local or state government use.   PAT]

Wrong! It's because the entire city appears to be using an individual
account at CRL, a well-known public access provider in the San Francisco
Bay Area.


Andrew Laurence            Oakland, California USA
[e-mail]  Pacific Daylight Time (GMT-7)

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

Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 23:25:51 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


>> Anyone who has access to the Internet ...  can reach City Hall by
>> addressing their message to [e-mail].

> Why are they in the Commercial domain, and not the Government domain?

Probably because they obtained a mailbox on that system.  The FCC has
a mailbox at [e-mail] the same
way.

CRL.COM is listed as a domain server and as a site, so they can probably
handle domain service in the future.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because, as I understand it, '.gov'
> only applies to the *federal* government. I don't think it was ever
> defined for local or state government use.   PAT]

Doing a lookup on the Internic database, I think the following would
disagree with you:

Hawaii State Government (HAWAII2-DOM)      Domain Name: HAWAII.GOV
Iowa State Government, Department of Public Safety (IA-DOM1)
                                           Domain Name: IA.GOV
Maryland State Government (MD-DOM)         Domain Name: MD.GOV
North Carolina State Government (NC-DOM)   Domain Name: NC.GOV
Ohio Data Network (OHIO-DOM)               Domain Name: OHIO.GOV


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: San Carlos Joins Internet
Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 22:36:36 PDT


>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because, as I understand it, '.gov' only
>> applies to the *federal* government. I don't think it was ever defined
>> for local or state government use.   PAT]

> I obtained a copy of all US sites that have an Internet connection
> from Internic via the whois command (whois -h rs.internic.net "domain
> *") on my Sun workstation (other systems may vary) and it listed
> federal, state and local governmental entites as '.gov'

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for the clarification and
> correction. I guess I've no idea why they are in .com then.  PAT]

Look at the account name again: [e-mail].

The reason is that they have ONE account on a dial-up host.  The
company is CRL, which is based in San Francisco.  I think that there
use of "joins the internet" is a little misleading when they really
only have one accout.


Steve   [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015

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

From: [e-mail] (Anton Sherwood)
Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number
Organization: Crackpots for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 20:09:57 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Hugh Pritchard <0006348214@
mcimail.com> wrote:

> ... be warned that repeating digits increase the chances of people
> dialing your number by accident.  Some people tend to double a digit
> by mistake when they're dialing.  The doubled digit may make the
> dialed number into YOUR number.  I have a phone number of the form
> -xxyz.  People trying to dial -xyzt sometimes, "mysteriously," find
> they've dialed me instead.

I haven't had much trouble with that -- except when my number was
5333, I got a lot of calls for a furniture store at 5533.


Anton Sherwood   *\\*   [phone]   *\\*   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Many years ago a friend of mine had
an almost identical situation. His number was 2588, and the bus terminal
was 2558. No matter what the hour, day or night, his phone would get
calls from people wanting to know what time the bus was coming through
town, etc.  He finally gave up and got his number changed.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lord of Love!)
Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 20:16:15 GMT


The solution is simple ...

First of all: CallerID isn't gonna be offered in California for some
time to come! So put that fear (if you ever had one) to rest.

Second: When I choose my new phone number I picked 310-XXX-7777. It's
very easy to remember and will cause you no trouble at all! People
just keep it in their minds VERY easily. Trust me.

Third: Don't call Pac Bell and ask if the number is free! Check for
yourself!  When I called for my number they told me it was unavailable
 ... when I checked my requests it was not in use ... don't rely on their
help.  Once you get the number ... it's yours to enjoy and believe me ...
people will rarely forget it.


[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just because a number is not in service
does not mean it is available. The old owner may have it on temporary
suspension, or he may have paid to have an intercept there to refer it
elsewhere for a few months. Also, a number not in service may in fact be
reserved for some other customer who also requested it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Tighe)
Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line
Date: 15 May 94 14:44:18 GMT


[e-mail] (Michael D. Sullivan @ Express Access Online
Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA) once wrote....

> [e-mail] (Paul N. Bates) writes:

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

>>> My home is wired for two residential telephone lines.  Because of my
>>> proximity to an am radio transmitter (am 1550khz), many of my audio
>>> and telephone devices suffer from "radio noise", from that one station
>>> only though.  Some days it is worse than others, some days there is no
>>> interference at all.

> This is apparently an increasingly common occurrence, prompting the
> FCC to issue an information sheet that lists two phones that have
> tested as being highly resistant to RF interference.  I don't have the
> info at hand, but it might be available on ftp.fcc.gov.

At K-Mart yesterday I saw an in line RF filter for telephones. It was
a small plastic box with RJ-11 connectors on two ends and a short
RJ-11 extension cable.  The price was $8.95 and it was in an AT&T
bubble pack.  This might solve your problem.


Bill Tighe             Email:  [e-mail]
Phone:  [phone]   FAX:    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (RLockhart)
Subject: Re: Wireless Data Services
Date: 15 May 1994 12:08:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Pete
Farmer) writes:

> I've noticed that there's been very little posted to this list
> regarding wireless *data* services.  Anyone know why?  There are some
> very interesting developments in the wireless arena, both for short,
> bursty text messaging (a la RAM or Ardis) and for higher bandwidth, IP
> connectivity within metropolitan areas.

Certainly the most successful (read 'profitable' <grin>) of the
'short, bursty text messaging' services, alpha paging, gets some
coverage here as do the CDPD and circuit-switched cellular data links
in the Wireless Data Food Chain, but you're right in that there's not
a lot on the packet data services (e.g., ARDIS, RAM, generic DataTAC,
upcoming NexTel and the rest of the SMRs (pronounced SMuR like in
those little blue guys that used to be on Saturday morning cartoon
television :))) and eSMRs).  Some of these other links in the Wireless
Data Food Chain are covered in various places like comp.std.wireless
or comp.protocols.misc or ... but none seem to cover the overall
breadth of TELECOM Digest (or get the coverage on the commercial
services that Pat does).

Just out of curiousity, what does 'Tetherless Access Ltd.' do?  (If
that's an inappropriate question, Pat, my apologies.)


Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems
Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc.
Desktop I'net:  [e-mail]
Wireless I'net (<32K characters):  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Used Telco/Test Equipment Suppliers?
Date: 14 May 94 16:08:13 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Eric Pearce ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Are there dealers for used telco and test equipment in the Bay Area
> (or by mail order catalog)?

> I'm looking for stuff like test sets, digit grabbers, T-BERDs, etc.

Check out the latest Nuts & Volts magazine.  They have tons of ads for
used test equipment and much of them are from the Bay Area and Silicon
Gulch.

Also, the trade rags such as Communications Week, Data Comm, Network
World, etc.  You might call the local electronics stores, since they
may have surplus equip, but they probably have copies of N & V
available, too.

Best of success.


John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
Rancho Santiago Community College District
17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
VOI (714) JOHN GAB \ FAX (714) JOHN FRY
[e-mail] \ [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glenn McComb)
Subject: Re: Verifone Programming Manuals
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 06:49:31 GMT


Ry Jones ([e-mail]) wrote:

> With all this talk about Verifones, I am reminded that I have one (a
> Verifone Junior, tan model, green LED screen) with no manual. I bought
> it at a Tru Value going out of business sale; they didn't have the
> manual, or password, or anything. I called Verifone in Hawaii, and
> never got a response (and that was not a cheap call!).

I would be willing to sell you my verifone programming manuals.  Email
or call for details.  Make an offer, pay by check or credit card.



Glenn McComb  [phone]  McComb Research
Fax           [phone]  10440 Mann Drive
Internet      gm @ mccomb.com  PO Box 220
Compuserve    >MHS:gm@mccomb   Cupertino, CA 95015

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

From: Ry Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: Verifone Junior Programmed!
Date: Sun, 15 May 94 14:53:57 PDT


Many thanks to the person who sent me the Verifone Junior default
password!

For my version, 2.05, the code "166816" was indeed the password.

I am posting this to the list for posterity. If anyone ever needs this
code again, it will be in a well-known place.

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

Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 23:00:01 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Radio by Phone
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


"Gregory P. Monti" <[e-mail]>, writes:

> An FM radio newsletter {FMedia!} notes that a Dallas firm, Media
> Technology, is offering a service called Media Dialup.  Subscribers
> can monitor live radio using touch tone commands....  As a sampler,
> the firm allows you to listen to Dallas radio stations using
> touch tone commands on 214 330-8821.  For FM, press 1.  For
> AM, press 2.  To scan to the next lower station, press 4.
> Next higher station, press 6.  Ordinary toll charges apply.

> I guess the market for this service is program directors and
> consultants who want to hear what the big-market boys are doing.

Or it could be used to allow people to dial up a system that provides
announcements and listen to several different ones, or provide for
announcements in foreign languages.  If they can design a touch-tone
programmed radio, they can do it for tape recorders and other things.

Some examples would be offering conference call audio to multiple
callers without their being heard by the participants.  Another would
be to allow someone to set up a series of "feeds" for various events
and let other stations call up a number and tap into them, live as
opposed to needing a specialized downlink.  For a telephone connection
the sound was adequate, about what you usually expect for radio piped
over the telephone, e.g.  some of the information is clipped in a
noticable way.  Adequate for speech broadcasts, not so good for music.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Herb Effron)
Subject: Re: Replace POST-MAIL by FAX
Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 08:22:37 +0800
Organization: Seagopher


I have never had a fax machine. Instead, I use a 14.4 fax modem (which is
always set to receive) to handle almost all my correspondence today. I also
use e-mail of course.

BTW I'm a 28-year user of computers. That's 'years'! not 'years old'. ;-)

After the first two years of using a fax modem ('upgraded' myself from
my old 1200 baud modem), I was prompted from my experience with it to
make two major changes in the way I carry out routine business.

New way #1:

I now send a "Quick Fax" -- when I want to ask a brief question or
send someone an item. This avoids obligatory 'socialization' time when
calling someone by phone. By faxing a note, the recipient's answering
machine is not cluttered up with junk, provides a pre-prepared note
which frees the receipient from having to write down the message, its
phone number, when I called, etc. -- and then remembering where she
put the note.

If the recipient uses a fax modem also, then there's no paper to lose
either. Some of my colleagues tell me this is good for the environment
and they we should ask for a tax credit. :-)

The time it took for the 'comfort level to move from my brain to my
'gut' (having it feel 'natural') was about three weeks.

New way #2:

I now send _only_ fax correspondence (in place of 'paper') whenever
possible. This includes all of my business correspondence on letterhead
w/logos from two companies. A Mactintosh computer make this very easy
to do. The letter that's received is 'visually clean', i.e. it has no
streaks, spots, etc.

The time it took for the 'comfort level to move from my brain to my
'gut' (having it feel 'natural') was much longer in this case. About
two months.

I think it was the absence of a conventional 'signature' that was most
difficult for me to accept. At first I 'pasted' in my signature from a
scan. Now, I just put:


/s/ Herb Effron

and no one has yet complained.

BTW ... visit Seattle USA on the Internet. You can get there by gophering
to:
   gopher.seattle.wa.us

or just look for us in Washington State or under "S" in the gopher
directories.


Herb Effron

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

From: [e-mail] (Mr. James Holland)
Subject: Re: Cellular Call Forwarding
Date: 15 May 1994 16:56:01 GMT
Organization: Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark W. Earle)
writes:

> I'm in the process of closing out my cellular account with Southwestern
> Bell Mobile Systems of Corpus Christi, TX.  In the last bill was an
> insert sheet (yellow) indicating that starting with the July bill,
> calls forwarded would incur full airtime for the duration of each
> forwarded call. Presumably, the set up "star" code call to activate
> and deactivate forwarding will now cost a minute also.

> This is a significant change -- previously, there was no call to set
> up the forwarding (or turn it off) and no charge for the forwarded
> calls. Many folks used this as a super local area extender ... forward
> your phone, dial your cell phone number, and talk free for a long time
> to an area that was a LD/Toll call from the regular phone.

I have Cellular One service here in middle Tennessee. They offer a
service called "Super System" which basically makes the whole state a
local call.  I combine this with free weekends (for $10 extra/month)
and call-forwarding ($2 extra/month) [Super System is $15] and I have
the entire state as a local call. I use it extensively for modem
communications as well as voice.  This state is fairly large and both
area codes (615 and 901) are local to me (on the weekends). Also, I
can call FROM any area in the state that has Cellular One coverage. I
can use it from Memphis to call to Nashville and it either costs me my
regular local airtime rate or it's free on the weekend.

Call forwarding used to be free here also, but they changed that after
businesses started abusing it. They could forward to their business
number and get a much larger 'free' dialing area.

Are there other states/systems with something similar to Super System?
I'm curious ...


James Holland   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Hayes)
Subject: Re: Caller ID Gets Me Jealous
Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 14:39:09 -0600
Organization: ISIS, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, Joseph Romero <1jcr7732@
ibm.mtsac.edu> wrote:

> I hear of caller ID and I get jealous ... it is not offered here in
> Los Angles, CA.  However, we do offer the services of call return and
> call block.

Pac-Tell proposed Caller ID to the California Public Utilities Commission.
The Commission said "Yes, provided ..."

The "provided" is the crux of the problem. Some people do not like the
idea that every business they call will be able to build a telemarketing
list from the calls of the general public. Some people value privacy,
and buy unlisted phone numbers. Thus, Caller ID has technical answers
to this problem. The answers are called "blocking".

There are two kinds of Caller ID blocking. "Per-call blocking" is
activated when the caller dials a special prefix, *67, before a phone
call. If the telephone subscriber wishes to block all their calls,
they must dial *67 before every call they make.

The other type of blocking is "per-line blocking". Under this system,
the caller's phone number is blocked for all calls placed from that
phone. If the caller wants to, they may unblock a specific call by
dialing *67 before that call.

So the difference between these two is that the default with per-call
blocking is "Block when I tell you to," while per-line blocking says
"Block unless I tell you not to."

These two types of blocking can coexist. Some phones can have per-line
blocking, and others per-call blocking. The California PUC told
Pac-Bell that they could sell Caller ID if:

  1. They notified all subscribers that Caller ID and the two blocking
     services were available;

  2. They provided an opportunity for subscribers to select which type
     of blocking they wanted on their phone;

  3. If a subscriber with an unlisted phone number did not take action
     to select a particular blocking option, their phone would have
     per-line blocking.

So Pac-Tell does have permission to offer Caller ID. This service is
not available in your area because Pac-Tell chooses not to offer it,
not because the government prohibits it.

This same sort of thing has happened in other states, as well. The
phone companies have been extremely reluctant to offer Caller ID in
states where the public utilities commissions have required per-line
blocking.  Personally, I believe that the phone companies are afraid
that so many people would select per-line blocking (rather than
per-call) that no one would want to pay for Caller ID service.


David Hayes             PGP public key available on request, or send
[e-mail]  mail subject: help to [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 14:44:44 -0400
From: Jonathan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service


I agree that delays when calling the telephone company or anybody else
are troublesome.  In particular, the telephone company should answer
calls to repair service and the operator quickly, because many of
these calls are quite urgent: some people call 0 for emergencies, and
611 resembles 911, and the telephone company even recognizes that a
few calls to 411 are about life-threatening emergencies.  The repair
service at C&P Telephone, a Bell Atlantic Company (now simply Bell
Atlantic) was a bad culprit; not only was the wait sometimes in excess
of 5 minutes, but the initial recording when calling Maryland 611
failed to identify itself as Repair and not 911.  The automated system
that C&P/Bell Atlantic uses is not the best way to handle this.  C&P
has since hired more representatives, and Bell Atlantic (formerly C&P)
is now routing more calls to the smaller, but less busy, Washington,
D. C. office.

There are several ways to further improve the situation: allow both
the Maryland and D.C. repair offices to accept Maryland trouble
reports but continue to send calls from the Maryland suburbs to the D.
C. office, for example.  If there is more room available in the D. C.
office then they could even expand the D. C.  office, answer more
calls there, and allow users to dial the repair number with an area
code to choose an office.  Automatic routing to the least busy office
is not recommended, because if the system fails then it could be a
serious problem.


On a different topic, TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

What is really annoying though is when they leave their desk (at any
time of day or night) and *forget to unplug their headset* from their
work station. The Automatic Call Distributor which tosses incoming
calls out to the reps uses a plugged in headset as its basis for
thinking a position is occupied and a person there is willing to take
calls. Normally the rep sits there and a 'click' in their headset
followed by hearing a person breathing on the other end tells them a
call has been given to them. If no headset is plugged in, the ACD
bypasses that position and moves to another idle one. So if you ever
call, wait on hold awhile and get 'answered', only to sit there and
hear talking in the background but no one actually talking to you then
you'll know what happened -- a headset is laying on the desk plugged
in while its owner has gone out to the bathroom or for coffee or
whatever. Given the volume of traffic they get, as soon as you abandon
the call to dial in again, there'll be an immediate seizure and some
other poor devil is now on that line waiting for a rep who never will
speak to him!

I agree.  There should be a better way to handle the representatives'
leaving their desks; what happens if they remove the handset just
after a new call arrives?  I have had the experience that Pat has
described; if I wait a while then sometimes they hang up on me after I
sit there for a few minutes.  Sometimes it appears that people unplug
their handsets right after my call goes in; this may happen to the 0
operator once in a while.  (The experience that Pat describes does not
seem specific to any one company.)  Either way, it is very annoying.


Jonathan D. Loo  8147 Ellicott Hall
College Park, Maryland  20742    [phone]
(spring 1994 address good through May 16)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #228
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01384;
          16 May 94 16:28 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29017; Mon, 16 May 94 12:44:08 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29008; Mon, 16 May 94 12:44:05 CDT
Date: Mon, 16 May 94 12:44:05 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #229

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 16 May 94 12:44:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 229

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Reach Out and Pay Someone (Van Hefner)
    GTE Analog Pocket Phone (Gerard Carat)
    Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine (Rodney Weaver)
    Umass/Amherst Suffers From Week-long Service Degradation (Jonathan Welch)
    Info-Affaires Bell Audiotex Service (Nigel Allen)
    New Area Codes Assigned (Tom Ward)
    Inteljak Wireless Phone Jak System ([e-mail])
    Telecoms Training (Andrew Hartridge)
    Clipper [was Re: Fax Cited in Numbers Bust] (Joel M. Hoffman)
    Need Info on R.L. Drake Co. (Al Cohan)
    Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming (Gregory P. Monti)
    Nationwide CID, CLASS and Related Services (Jim Derdzinski)
    Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID (John R. Levine)
    You're Gonna LOVE This! (Van Hefner)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 16 May 94 12:33:58 EDT
Subject: Reach Out and Pay Someone


AMERITECH GIVING MONEY TO PAY PHONE, CALLING CARD USERS

CHICAGO, May 10 /PRNewswire/ --

The price of a pay phone or telephone calling card call is going to
get plenty "lucrative" for some lucky Ameritech customers.

The communications company is launching a sweepstakes program that
will give consumers on-the-spot awards just for using its products.
Starting next week, Ameritech will begin awarding cash prizes from $10
to $5,000 to hundreds of randomly selected users of its pay phones and
calling card.

"Some fortunate pay phone customers are going to finish their calls,
then find out they just won $5,000," said Karen Vessely, Ameritech's
president of pay phone services.

Ameritech representatives will be incognito at hundreds of its
publicly accessible pay phones on certain dates through the end of
July, on the prowl for the first person to make a coin call during
predetermined time periods.  The lucky caller will be asked to scratch
off an instant-win ticket that will tell them how much they won.  Any
of Ameritech's publicly accessible pay phones in the Midwest could be
selected.

During the campaign, every calling card call made using the Ameritech
Calling Card or Complete Card also represents an entry to win. Calling
card winners will be selected in a drawing in October.

Vessely said Ameritech is launching the sweepstakes to respond to
growing competition in the pay phone and calling card industries.

"We want consumers to realize the value and quality in using Ameritech
to provide these services, rather than AT&T or MCI, or another pay
phone company, " Vessely explained.  "The sweepstakes is a fun way to
get customers to look for the Ameritech brand."

For the "Make the Right Call and Go Wild" sweepstakes, prizes will
include five, $5,000 grand prizes; ten, $1,000 first-place awards; and
250 prizes of $10 and $50.  Customers will find out about the program
through bill inserts and an extensive radio and outdoor ad campaign
that begins next week.  Consumers also can participate in the contest
by submitting a write-in entry.

Ameritech helps 12 million customers communicate and manage information,
primarily in the Midwest.  It also has investments in New Zealand, Hungary,
Poland and other countries.


Van Hefner   Discount Long Distance Digest    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: All the 'genuine Bell' payphones around
here have been decorated with a little sticker saying 'Ameritech Sweep-
stakes' for a few weeks now. The stickers go on to say that 'your call
could be a winner ...'   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 16 May 94 04:48:29 CDT
From: Gerard CARAT <[e-mail]>
Subject: GTE Analog Pocket Phone


GTE plans to launch in the US a national analog pocket phone which
presents partial similarities with the dead CT2 Rabbit network in the
UK: Telego can be used inside the home as a limited range cordless
phone, transmitting signals through a normal wire telephone line.
Outside the home, it automatically switches mode and becomes a
cellular phone. However, it is not designed for customers who want to
"roam", that is use their phones when travelling long distances.

Does it mean that, when outside of home, it also works with base
stations and cannot provide roaming over 200 yards? Or will it behave
like a cellular network at least in the perimeter of several miles.
Can it be used in cars/trains or will users need to be in relatively
slow motion?


Gerard CARAT <[e-mail]>

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

From: 7657 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine
Date: 16 May 1994 10:54:27 -0500
Organization: Promus Companies, Inc., Memphis, TN


I'm having problems with a series of annoyance calls from an answering
machine, and I was hoping someone here could suggest a solution.

Someone has programmed their answering machine to call my number every
time they get a message, so throughout the day I get calls that have a
long pause, then a male synthesized voice says "Hello. You have a new
message.  Please Enter remote code." Normally these calls are during
the day while I'm at work, so I just need to delete them from my
machine, however, occasionally I get a call at seven in the morning,
which is downright annoying since I don't normally plan on getting up
that early. The number of calls per day range from zero to ten, with an
average of fifteen calls per week.

I've tried guessing at the remote code, and tried hitting numbers on
the phone keypad hoping that I can find a magic number that either
turns off his machine, or lets me leave a message. The only thing I've
discovered is that hitting "*" makes his machine hang up immediately.

The South Central Bell Annoyance Call Center hasn't been much help.
They put "tracing equipment" on my phone for ten days, and I called
them every day with a list of times for each call I received in that
day. After the ten day period, they sent the calling party a *letter*
telling them of the problem, then when the calls continued for another
two weeks, I called the Annoyance Call Center several times until
finally they *phoned* the calling party, who claimed that they did not
understand why I kept getting calls.

So now, another week later, I am still getting the calls, and the
Annoyance Call Center, being helpful as always, said that they would
make the effort to put their "tracing equipment" on my line for
another ten days. I am not hopeful that after they once again verify
the number from which I am receiving the calls that they will be able
(or willing) to do anything about it, so I'm asking for any suggestions
for a resolution of the problem.  The Annoyance Call Center could not
recommend anything other than letting them trace the calls again to
verify the source of the calls.

It is possible that the original caller returned their machine to the
store when they first received the letter, and that now someone new
has the machine with my number programmed in it. If this is the case,
then the Annoyance Call Center will need to do more than just send a
letter to the calling party.

I know that I could get Caller ID and call the people myself, but I
would like to avoid the expense of the connection fee, caller ID box,
and monthly fee, so instead, I am wasting hundreds, of not thousands
of dollars of the net's money to ask for suggestions.


Thanks,

Rodney Weaver   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is unlikely the machine went back to the
store and that now someone else has it. How would you explain the unlikely
coincidence that some second person (new buyer of returned machine) also
accidentally programmed the very same (wrong) number into the equipment?
Most likely the same person has the machine and simply is too ignorant to
get the equipment under control or doesn't care, etc. This means you will
have to attend to it for him.

Yes, definitly put Caller-ID on your phone line, along with 'return last
call'. Be certain to save all the receipts for your expenses, since he
will be paying for the costs you have incurred. Pin down the source of the
calls if you can, and use a cross reference directory (your local library
probably has one) to locate the owner of the number if his number is
published. Send him a polite letter by certified mail requesting that he
cease and desist from calling you on the phone and requesting that he make
whatever adjustments are required to any automated equipment in his poss-
ession and under his control so it will not make such calls either. Advise
him of the expense you have incurred in an effort to locate him and request
his check in payment. Conclude by telling him that you have previously
referred the problem to the Annoyance Call Bureau at telco and are sending
them a copy of this letter as well. You will give him ten days to bring
himself into compliance and submit his check to reimburse you for your
expenses, at which point you will assume suit in Small Claims Court is
required if he has not cooperated.

Send a copy to the Annoyance Call Bureau, also by certified mail. In the
event his number is non-published and not available in a cross-reference
book, then instead write your letter to the telco, advising them that you
now have the number and are demanding that telco disconnect his service
until/unless he brings himself into compliance. Quote his number in the
letter to them (along with his name and address if you have it) to show
them you mean business. If you cannot locate his name and address, then
refuse to pay for the portion of your bill which relates to the Caller-ID
service, referring the telco Business Office to the Annoyance Call people
and letting them know you needed the equipment to 'cooperate with an
ongoing investigation into the source of harassing calls you are receiving.'
Stand your ground and don't budge. Either the guy has his machine mis-
programmed to dial your number, or it is programmed correctly but dialing
incorrectly (both are his problem) or it is dialing correctly but some
equipment in the central office is on the intermittant fritz (telco's
problem, and less likely than the first two probabilities). You will get
the problem resolved, belive me. And, most important, *do not* harass him
in return!  However, an occassional phone call in which you actually speak
to him and attempt to counsel him can hardly be considered harassment if
you call in a courteous and business-like manner. Let us know how it all
works out.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 09:09:11 -0500
From: Jonathan_Welch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Umass/Amherst Suffers From Week-long Service Degradation


After slightly over a week of unreliable phone service things returned
to normal and the following appeared in the May 13th edition of "The
Campus Chronicle".

Jonathan Welch  VAX Systems Manager  Umass/Amherst  [e-mail]

                                  - - -
Telephone system returned to normal

As you know, the University had a major problem with the campus
telephone system which began last Monday, May 2. The symptoms of the
problem included calls being cut off, static, a "fast busy" tone when
calling on campus and telephones without dial tone. The symptoms were
sporadic and fairly random for both academic/administrative telephones
and residential telephones.

As soon as the problem started, Ericsson, the manufacturer and
maintainer of the telephone system, responded. Ericsson staff worked
straight through from Monday morning to late Thursday evening to
diagnose and remedy the problem. In addition to the normal three
on-site technicians, Ericsson brought in staff from their regional
headquarters in Northboro, and flew in a high level technician/ system
programmer from the Technical Assistance Center in Cypress, Calif.
They also had programmers in Cypress and Sweden working remotely to
stabilize the system and to determine the cause of the problem.

The problem with the system resulted from a unique set of circumstances
involving software parameters, system clocking and a normal maintenance
procedure performed on the system. The problem was exacerbated by the
increases of load on the telephone system we have experienced this
year.

The campus telephone system is a complex, distributed computer. Such
systems are designed with a great deal of redundancy and can self-correct
for many faults. Once the problem occurred, parts of the system were contin-
ually trying to reset themselves. In this instance, the complexity of
the system and its attempts at self-correction made it difficult to
trace the problem and stabilize the system. By Wednesday afternoon,
Ericsson had made substantial progress in correcting the problem. They
made a configuration adjustment in the system and implemented a slight
but important programming change in lhe software. This adjustment,
while straightforward, was difficult to install on the system because
of the heavy call volume on campus and the size of the campus system
(18,000 lines on 119 system modules).  What Ericsson accomplished is
analogous to fixing an electrical problem in a car traveling down the
highway at 50 miles per hour. The parameter they adjusted did not
initiate the problem, but the change allowed the system to return to
normal operations.

By early Thursday morning in the residence halls and noon on Thursday
in the academic/administrative area of campus, service had considerably
improved. Except for a brief interruption of service while circuits were
being tested, calls in progress were no longer interrupted by static
or cut off. There may have been some problems completing a call or
placing long distance calls while work was in progress. However, in
general TelCom was quite sucoessful at assisting individuals in making
their long distance calls. Ericsson has made adjustments in the system
configuration, system clocking and maintenance procedures to ensure
that this problem will not recur. I realize the telephone service
problems last week were very frustrating for everyone. Telephone service
is an important part of our daily lives and any interruptions or degrada-
tions in service are a very serious problem. I truly appreciate the
patience of the campus community while we struggled to deal wilh the
problem.

We in TelCom, as well as the Ericsson staff, were even more frustrated
(if that is possible) at not being able to get the problem resolved
quickly. We apologize for the difficulties and will work closely with
Ericsson to prevent this problem from occurring again.


Randy Sailer, director
Telecommunication Services

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

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Date: 15 May 94 21:49:05 -0500
Subject: Info-Affaires Bell Audiotex Service
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


Bell Canada and the Montreal newspaper La Press are running a free
French-language audiotex service, Info-Affaires Bell, featuring
business information. Call [phone] to use the system. Once you
have listened to a particular item, you can ask for information to be
faxed to you.

All the information is in French. I don't think that Bell Canada has
any plans to offer a similar service in English.


Nigel Allen

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Ward)
Subject: New Area Codes Assigned
Date: 16 May 1994 15:56:32 GMT
Organization: Pinnacle Online


In the latest release of AT&T's Area Code Handbook, the following new
area codes will be assigned:

OLD    NEW              Effective Permissive Dialing
NPA    NPA    State        Date      Date       End

206    360    Washington    1/15/95      1/15/95    7/9/95
205    334    Alabama        1/15/95   1/15/95    3/13/95
602    520    Arizona        3/19/95   3/19/95    7/23/95

Other new NXX NPA's assigned but not listed in this handbook are:

310    562    California
217    630    Illinois


Tom Ward   CompuServe: 73441,237
Internet:   [e-mail]
AT&T Mail:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lord of Love!)
Subject: Inteljak Wireless Phone Jak System
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 06:26:25 GMT


I bought this thing and it was completely useless!  Save your money
and aggravation by buying a good cordless phone.


[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Care to elaborate on the main problems
you were having?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Hartridge)
Subject: Telecoms Training
Date: 16 May 1994 13:03:49 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Andrew Hartridge)


Hi,

We are just about to expand into a new building and I find myself
faced with the problem of hooking up 1000 phone sets and many data
ports.  I have not had any experience with doing a new installation.
I've always just had to make do with what I have inherited.

Question: Are there any training organizations out there, or reference
materials on 'How to set up and configure telecomms systems' ... e.g.
pros and cons of different wiring closet configurations?

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Please reply via e-mail as I
don't get to read news very often.


Many thanks,

Andrew Hartridge

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

From: [e-mail] (Joel M. Hoffman)
Subject: Clipper [was Re: Fax Cited in Numbers Bust]
Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 20:27:12 GMT
Organization: Excelsior Computer Services


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

> The {New York Times}, as quoted by Dave Thompson:

>>    For 30 years, Raymond Marquez was a thorn to law-enforcement
>> agencies and a legend to countless gamblers in Harlem and East Harlem...

>>    But the authorities said yesterday that they had arrested Mr.
>> Marquez, 64, and his wife, Alice, 63, on felony gambling charges and
>> had raided and closed 56 gambling parlors and backroom offices ....

> Those whose business it is to mind everyone else's business will
> insist that the struggle against "numbers" cannot be won unless
> Raymond Marquez's successor is prevented from using effective
> encryption (that is, something other than Clipper).  They are right.

This seems to be a major source of misunderstanding.  The proposed new
law will >NOT< make it impossible for average users to encrypt their
data.  It will only make sure that the phone company encrypts the data
in a way that authorities can break.  There will still be nothing (as
there is not now) to prevent any user from implementing further
encryption.


Joel    ([e-mail])

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

Date: Mon, 16 May 94 10:39:00 EST
From: Al Cohan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Need Info on R.L. Drake Co.


I know this is a little off the subject but I have been desparately
trying to find the R. L. Drake Co. formerly of Miamiville, OH. I need
info, manuals, etc on their 424 Satellite Receiver and 424 Antenna
Positioner.

I remember that Drake, if it's the same company was a big player in
the 50's and 60's with ham radio. I assume it's the same company but
can't find them.  Any help would be appreciated.


Thanks in advance,

Al Cohan

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

Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 09:57:05 EDT
From: Gregory P. Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming


The May 13 issue of the newsletter {Communications Daily} reports that
Bellcore will hold seminars on the changes to the North American
Numbering Plan over the next six months.  They will be in Washington
June 16-17, Chicago Aug. 4-5, Dallas Sept. 15-16, and San Francisco
Nov. 10-11.

The story quotes North American Numbering Plan Administration Director
Ronald Conners as saying that, "telephone company switches and
customers' PBXs may need software or hardware upgrades or, in some
cases, may have to be replaced."  The story doesn't mention costs, but
gives a number for information: 800 TEACH-ME (800 832-2463).


Greg Monti   Arlington, Virginia, USA   [e-mail]

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

Date: 16 May 94 12:26:04 EDT
From: Jim Derdzinski <[e-mail]>
Subject: Nationwide CID, CLASS and Related Services


I have a couple of questions about CLASS services.

I know that the FCC has issued a ruling making is possible for
long-distance numbers to work with the Caller ID service that the
various LEC's are now offering.  Will the long-distance number
identification work with the other CLASS services like Automatic
Callback, Call Screening, Repeat Dialing, Call Tracing, etc?  I figure
it should, considering that if the calling number can be displayed,
then those services should be able to make use of it.  (For instance,
it would be nice to be able to repeat dial (*66) a long distance
number that is frequently busy.)

Another question I have concerns an oddity I have encountered here (in
the land of Ameritech).  It seems that when an older CO is finally
upgraded to work with CID, the calling numbers originating from it
will display, but Distinctive Ringing, Automatic Callback and the like
will not work with these numbers.  Is there some kind of update that
has to done to the equipment to register new CO's and such?  (This, I
guess, may be related to the above.)

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

Date: Mon, 16 May 94 00:20 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


I wrote:

> In other words, per-line blocking is a bad idea because subscribers
> are too dumb to unblock calls when they want to unblock them, although
> they're not to dumb to block calls when they want to block them.

Padgett wrote:

> This is not what was said at all: a correct statement would be that a
> subscriber might not know how to unblock or, that unblocking was
> needed, or even that the line was blocked when an emergency call is
> placed and they might not have blocked it.

Yes, they said that, but they had no concern whatsoever that people
who needed to block calls for various entirely valid reasons would
have trouble dialing *67.  Why is dialing *67 to block CLID easy,
while dialing *99 or something to unblock it hard?  Why isn't it a
problem that someone who needs to block CLID (cliche example: abused
wife calling spouse to negotiate about kids) might not know the line
was enabled for CLID or know how to block it?

I also find their scenarios about life-threatening CLID blocking a wee
bit far fetched, since telcos are moving fairly quickly to universal
911 and as far as I know all 911 systems use ANI.

The death scenario seems to be:

A) someone makes an emergency call to a number other than 911,
B) the caller's line has CLID line blocking
C) the caller is able to dial but unable to say where he or she is
D) the caller can't dial the unblock code
E) the callee has real-time access to reverse directory information
   (remember, this isn't 911) and so can quickly determine who the caller
   is and can rush over and save him and/or her.

Maybe I'm unduly sceptical, but this seems like an awful stretch for a
rationale to forbid a useful service already available in many states.
If this is a big problem, I don't understand why deceased CLID-less
phone users haven't been littering the landscape since the advent of
dial phones.

Many readers will be relieved to know that in today's mail I received
some stickers from NYNEX to apply to the phone in my trailer in
Vermont warning users that the line has default CLID blocking and one
has to dial *67 to enable it.  Of course, last month we got a postcard
advising us that 911 now works in our extremely rural town, so CLID
emergency calls are moot.

> We have already seen the question appear relating to "How do you know
> with per line blocking if it is toggled on or off ?" One answer would
> be star-six-seven on and "something else" off but the phone company only
> has 100 star numbers now.

True.  Fortunately, some of them remain unassigned so it's a perfectly
workable solution.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 16 May 94 08:08:45 EDT
Subject: You're Gonna LOVE This!!!


MCI AND FOX DON CAP & GOWN FOR GRADUATION  'MELROSE PLACE,'
'BEVERLY HILLS, 90210' & MCI LINEUP THE STARS WITH FREE HOTLINE

SEND A CELEBRITY GRADGRAM TO YOUR FAVORITE GRAD

WASHINGTON, May 12 /PRNewswire/ --

For the graduate who has everything, MCI and Fox Broadcasting Company
are offering personalized messages from the stars of FOX's "Melrose
Place" and "Beverly Hills, 90210," MCI said.  Callers can choose from
Andrew Shue (Billy Campbell) and Courtney Thorne-Smith (Alison Parker)
from "Melrose Place"; and Jennie Garth (Kelly Taylor), Tori Spelling
(Donna Martin) and Ian Ziering (Steve Sanders), from "Beverly Hills,
90210."

Beginning May 16th through June 30th, anyone can dial 1-800-671-5225
and send a message from the five most popular stars in television
today to the graduate of their choice.

MCI Celebrity GradGrams are pre-recorded messages from the actors --
providing congratulations, advice and tips on making it in the real
world after graduation.  The caller simply chooses which actor's
message to send from a voice-prompted menu, leaves their name and
indicates the home phone number of the recipient grad.  The message is
then automatically delivered.

With each call made, MCI will make a $1 donation up to $100,000 to Do
Something, a national non-profit organization which seeks to inspire
and assist young people to take problem-solving action in their communities.

"Young people have great ideas to improve their communities, but often
lack the resources and guidance needed to put their ideas into action,"
says Andrew Shue, actor and co-founder of Do Something.  "The support of
MCI and FOX will help Do Something give every young person the opportunity
to strengthen their community."

Founded in 1993, Do Something is dedicated to providing local and
national grants of up to $500 to young people to implement creative
community-building projects across the country.  Grant applications
are available at participating Blockbuster Video Stores, Guess?
merchants, Boys and Girls Clubs and other community organizations.

MCI, headquartered in Washington, D.C. is the nation's second-largest
long distance provider.  MCI offers residential savings and superior
customer service through a number of products and services including:
Friends & Family, Best Friends, 1-800-COLLECT, the MCI VideoPhone, MCI
Friends Around The World Anytime, The MCI Card and WorldPhone.

(This is so stupid it has to be heard to be believed! Of course this
comes from the same company that operated an 800 number that let you
play sound effects of 'a flock of seagulls' with your touchtone phone.
You are led through an IVR menu that let's you 'pick the star' <Tori
Spelling!> then record your name to be delivered to the phone number
you enter, at the time of day/night you wish it to be delivered! Need
I say more?!!?)


Van Hefner   Discount Long Distance Digest  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, I would not come down quite so hard
on them Vance. If the service is free (as it appears to be; there is
no mention of any fee being charged to the parents or proud grandparents
or friends or whoever place the order) then the fact that MCI is giving
a dollar for each call made is generous of them. Admittedly, none of
the people speaking in the messages exactly inspire me, but then, what
do I know about anything?  It doesn't say much for the USA of the 1990's,
but those television shows are among the most popular on the air today
so if those stars can do something to make a difference, let them have
at it. The people who would inspire *me* under the circumstances are
(as they say in college) 'dead white men' all of whom passed before any
method of recording their voice for future generations had been devised,
with a couple of exceptions. There are a few bright kids in the USA, but
promotions like the one you describe are intended for the not-so-bright
ones, many of whom also had stupid teachers. Let them have a few minutes
of happieness and hope in their otherwise dreary lives.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #229
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11782;
          17 May 94 19:47 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA24557; Tue, 17 May 94 13:38:09 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA24548; Tue, 17 May 94 13:38:07 CDT
Date: Tue, 17 May 94 13:38:07 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #230

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 May 94 13:38:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 230

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Wireless Communication Course (Richard Tsina)
    Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software (Rick Przebienda)
    1-800-OPERATOR Question/Problems (Danny Burstein)
    Samples From Telecomworldwire (Darren Ingram)
    Directory Map Shows NNX Area Codes (Linc Madison)
    SONET Management Standards? (A.N. Ananth)
    Need List of Area Codes Across U.S. (Joshua Kantro)
    Re: Bulk Call Display (Derek Andrew)
    Re: Bulk Call Display (Randy Gellens)
    Re: Loop Start to Ground Start Converter (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: Loop to Ground Start converters (Sheldon Kociol)
    Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service (Blake R. Patterson)
    Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (Steve Brack)
    Re: FCC Releases Fiber Deployment Analysis (Bob Keller)
    Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors!! (Steve Brack)
    Re: Need Weather-Resistant Phone (John Lundgren)
    Re: Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service (John Lundgren)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 17:12:22 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Wireless Communication Course
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


U.C. BERKELEY Continuing Education in Engineering Announces a short
course on Wireless Technology:

WIRELESS COMMUNICATION NETWORKS (July 26-27, 1994)

     There are technical bottlenecks to developing a ubiquitous
wireless multimedia environment: the capacity of the radio link, its
unreliability due to the adverse multipath propagation channel, and
severe interference from other channels.

     This course covers the principles and fundamental concepts
engineers need to tackle these limitations (e.g., a thorough treatment
of channel impairments such as fading and multipath dispersion and
their effect on link and network performance).  Topics include:
Introduction to Wireless Channels, Cellular Telephone Networks, Analog
and Digital Transmission and Wireless Data Networks.  Comprehensive
course notes will be provided.

Lecturer: JEAN-PAUL M.G. LINNARTZ, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of
Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of
California, Berkeley.  His work on traffic analysis in mobile radio
networks received the Veder Prize, an innovative research in
telecommunications award in the Netherlands.  At Berkeley he works on
communications for intelligent vehicle highway systems and multimedia
communications.  Professor Linnartz is the author of numerous
publications and the book "Narrow Land-Mobile Radio Networks" (Artech
House, 1993), the text for the course.

For more information (brochure with complete course descriptions,
outlines, instructor bios, etc.,) send your postal address to:

Richard Tsina   U.C. Berkeley Extension
Continuing Education in Engineering
2223 Fulton St. Berkeley, CA 94720
Tel: [phone]  Fax: [phone]
email:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
Subject: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software
Date: 17 May 1994 01:48:46 -0000
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


Hi,

We had a home grown telecommunication package that allowed us to send
alphanumeric messages to our PAC-TEL pagers. We are interested in
updating the softwaree. We are interested in reasonably priced
commercial software or in the protocol specs of the 800 number we
communicate with the old package.

Any help would be appreciated.


Rick
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: 1-800-OPERATOR Question/Problems
Date: 17 May 1994 07:55:50 -0400


I recently stayed in a hotel (Richmond, Va. Marriot) which had the
usual hotel phone surcharges. So, not wanting to burden myself with
huge add-ons to my hotel room, I decided to call collect.

Now, since I didn't know what extra costs would be added by the
hotel's contract with their service provider, I specifically used
'1-800-Operator' rather than "0" or "10288-0".

Well, I got the AT&T 'boing', the request for my name, and then got
the message 'enjoy your stay at the Marriot Hotel'.  Note again, that
this was a call placed through 1-800-opertor, NOT through a default '0'.

Alas, the call did not go through. Why? Because the person I was
calling was using his phone line and had call waiting. I heard the
ring, heard him click into my call and ask who was there. Yet the AT&T
switch somehow got this confused and, while the person I was calling
was still asking 'who's there', I got the synthesized voice saying
'your party appears to have hung up, please call again later'.

So this brings up two issues. First is the relationship with Marriot
and AT&T (remember, again, that this was a 1-800-operator call).
Second is the glitchy supervision when making calls to someone with
call-waiting.

Has anyone else had these problems? I eventually got through to my friend
by -paging- him and having him call me back ...


Take care,

[e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 94 16:36 BST
From: Darren Ingram <[e-mail]>
Subject: Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 1
Reply-To: [e-mail]


We would like to offer TELECOM Digest readers a special price on
subscription to Telecomworldwire. The UK price is gbp700 per year for
fax. We would be pleased to offer **ALL** businesses a single-copy
price of the same (payable in Sterling or credit card) for delivery to
an electronic mail box connected to the Internet.  The companies would
have to sign a piece of paper (yes, old fashioned!) saying they would
not redistribute the material and basically subject the copyrighted
works in the same way as a printed publication. Site archive licences
are available. For genuine bona-fida non-commercial users a very
generous (in excess of 50 percent) discount would be offered upon
signing a similar warranty which also says that the information would
be for their sole use only and for non-commercial purposes).  Also we
have another product called Satnews, which I will forward similar
offer details on later next week.

Here are some sample stories from a recent issue:


-THAILAND EXPANDS INTERNATIONAL CALL ACCESS

TWW-12 May 1994-THAILAND EXPANDS INTERNATIONAL CALL ACCESS
TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

BANGKOK, THAILAND- A plan by the Communications Authority of Thailand
to install a further 10,000 international telephone communications
circuits has been approved by the Thai Cabinet.  The Communications
Authority is to install 10,000 new circuits for international phone
calls, making up its fourth international transmission switching
centre.  Around Baht6,400 million will be spent on the project, based
at CAT's Bang Rak office.  The new circuits are set to be operational
by 1997, adding to the 7,000 existing international circuits in use by
CAT.  The Thai National Economic and Social Development board had
previously approved the plan, set to provide enough international
capacity until 2002, but plans are already being formulated to add a
further 25,000 international phone circuits between 1999 and 2017.

-AT&T WINS 'CONTROVERSIAL' SAUDI TELECOM CONTRACT

TWW-12 May 1994-AT&T WINS 'CONTROVERSIAL' SAUDI TELECOM CONTRACT
TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

WASHINGTON, USA/RIYADHI, SAUDI ARABIA- AT&T Corp has won a six-year
US$4 billion contract to provide state-of-the-art digital switching
and fibre-optic networks to Saudi Arabia, and within hours of the news
being confirmed the contract was dogged with controversy. There are
allegations that President Clinton assisted AT&T in its contract win
to the detriment of competitors.  The massive contract will see around
1.5 million new fixed lines being installed as well as a cellular and
wireless data providing service for around 200,000 subscribers.
Ericsson said that it was surprised at the scope of the bid and the
way in which it had been handled, and Northern Telecom said that it
half expected the move as negotiations between AT&T and the Saudis
were advanced when AT&T ended its exclusive supplier agreement with
Bell Canada Ltd -- a NT offshoot -- earlier this year.  Intense
lobbying by Clinton and other US officials is said to have also helped
secure a US$6 billion contract in March for commercial aircraft from
the Saudis, awarded to Boeing and McDonnell Douglas. The Australian
Financial Review reported that Clinton had personally wrote to King
Fahd of Saudi Arabia, urging him to look favourably on the AT&T bid.
The New York Times added that Ronald Brown, Commerce Secretary made
two personal appeals during trips to Saudi Arabia since last September
and Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, spoke on AT&T's behalf
during his own trip there a month ago.

-BELLSOUTH IN BELGIUM MOBILE DATA PARTNERSHIP

TWW-12 May 1994-BELLSOUTH IN BELGIUM MOBILE DATA PARTNERSHIP
TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

BRUSSELS, BELGIUM- As revealed in Telecomworldwire (TWW090594)
BelllSouth Corp's Mobile Data Inc business unit has joined forces with
France Telecom Mobiles International SA to jointly build and operate a
mobile data network in Belgium. This will be the first mobile data
network in the country. The new venture, known as RAM Mobile Data
Belgium, will spend around US$50 million on building the network, with
service scheduled to start in Brussels early next year. The network
will conform to the Mobitex mobile data standard, developed by
Ericsson and Swedish Telecom.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In another issue of the Digest to
follow later, a few more samples from a recent issue of Telecomworldwire
will be presented.    PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 23:03:22 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Directory Map Shows NNX Area Codes


It's May, which means the new San Mateo County directories are out
from Pacif*c Bell.  Of course, I immediately turned to the area code
map page, where I saw little inset maps showing area codes 520, 360,
and 334, which will come into use during the life of the directory.
No mention yet of any other NNX area codes.

Zowie kapowie!


Linc Madison  *  Oakland, California  *  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (A N Ananth)
Subject: SONET Management Standards?
Date: 16 May 1994 23:49:12 -0400
Organization: Prism Communications Inc, Annapolis MD


Can some knowledgeable soul throw light on the following questions:

- What protocol stack is specified by the SONET standard for
Operation, Administration, Maintainence & Provisioning? [I suspect the
answer is full blown CMIP, ACSE, ROSE as in Bellcore TR-303]

- What management platforms are currently in use at RBOCs in the US
that implement such standards? Are these proprietary platforms or
commercial implementations?

- In practice, do SONET equipment manufacturers implement the mgt
protocol specified for the OAM&P channel or is there some other
protocol is common use?        thanx for any help.


ananth      <[e-mail]>  Phone: [phone]
Prism Communications Inc

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

From: [e-mail] (KANTRO JOSHUA)
Subject: Need List of Area Codes Across U.S.
Organization: Graduate School and University Center, C.U.N.Y. New York, NY
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 04:00:42 GMT


Does anyone have or know where I can find a fairly up-to-date list of
all U.S.  area codes -- listed in numerical order and with the
corresponding region?  Thanks for any tips.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Check out the Telecom Archives in the
/areacodes sub-directory. We have reasonably up-to-date lists there in
numerical order.  Use anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 09:48:54 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Derek Andrew)
Subject: Re: Bulk Call Display
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Saskatchewan


In article <[e-mail]>, Tony Harminc <EL406045@
BROWNVM.brown.edu> wrote:

> So what interface are they using to receive the Call Display data ?
> It must be some sort of bulk interface, since they are certainly not
> letting it ring once and waiting for the data to come down the wire
> between the first and second rings.  I wasn't aware that any such
> interface was tariffed or standardized.

We have a service from our local telco called Bulk Calling Line ID.
We have a dedicated line to the telco, attached to a Bell 202 modem.
At 1200 baud, we receive a line of ASCII text with the date, time
calling line, called line, and an indication of whether the called
line was busy or idle.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 17 MAY 94 23:12:00  GMT
Subject: Re: Bulk Call Display


> So what interface are they using to receive the Call Display data ?

I believe there is just such a bulk interface available, called
something like SMDA (Service Message Desk Accounting?).  Anyway, I
think the deal is you order trunk connections, and one SMDA line for a
bunch of trunks.  Whenever a call comes in on one of your trunks, info
about the calling and called number (and maybe other stuff) is sent on
the SMDA line.  I think it is for answering services, voice mail
providers, and so forth.  But I imagine anyone could order it.


Randall Gellens            [e-mail]
Net**2 656-6350        (Please forward bounces to
Mail Stop MV 237            [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Ptasnik)
Subject: Re: Loop Start to Ground Start Converter
Date: 17 May 1994 17:47:01 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


Leroy Casterline <[e-mail]> writes:

> Does anyone know of an existing device which could be connected
> between our box and the PBX, and between our box and the CO, so that
> we can work in the above environment without re-engineering our analog
> interface or changing our software?

Mitel makes a four line loop/ground start converter that is part of
their SMarT line of dialing equipment.  Most of the SMarT stuff costs
a couple of hundred bucks per four line unit.  Graybar carries them,
or you could call Mitel at [phone] for a dealer near you and a
part number.  (That number is their West Coast office as of a 1988
brochure).


Dave Ptasnik     [e-mail]

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

From: robadome.com![e-mail] (Sheldon Kociol)
Subject: Re: Loop to Ground Start converters
Date: 17 May 1994 09:50:06 GMT
Organization: ROLM - A Siemens Company
Reply-To: robadome.com![e-mail]


Tellabs makes loop to groundstart converters.

Call 214-869-4114.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It has never been clear to me why, if a
person or company wants mostly ground-start lines with an occassional
line operating on a loop-start basis they simply do not order those
lines from telco in that fashion rather than going to the trouble of
purchasing equipment specifically to convert one to the other. After
all, isn't the default from telco loop-start lines? They certainly do
not charge any extra to send them from the CO that way.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 15:49:18 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, George Thurman <gst@gagme.
wwa.com> wrote:

> I had a 900 number that if you called it and gave them a telephone
> number, they would give you the name and address of the person who had
> that telephone number. (In most cases)

> The 900 number, 1-900-884-1212 has been disconnected, and I think that
> the company that provided the service has gone belly-up.  Does anyone
> know of any other 900 numbers that provide this same kind of service?

The UnDirectory service (Clarity Inc., P.O. Box 8357, Red Bank, NJ
07701, 908-530-5100) provides national dial-up reverse directory for
the whole U.S.  (Includes Alaska and Hawaii, but I couldn't get info
on numbers for Puerto Rico, or 800+ and 900+ numbers.)

DIAL: 900-933-3330, then use a touch-tone phone to enter ten-digit
numbers.  The charge is still $1.00 a minute -- cheaper and as
accurate as the defunct Telename service George mentioned.

A speech synthesizer says the name and address immediately after you
enter the last digit.  It's available 24 hours a day.

Ameritech offers Chicago-area reverse lookups (NPAs 312 and 708 only).
Call 796-9600 from 312+ or 708+ phones and pay $.35 for two lookups.
From outside those NPAs, call 312-796-9600; you just pay the toll.
This service uses human voice for prompts and synthetic speech (that I
find hard to understand) for the names and addresses.  Remember,
Chicago-area lookups only.

No info for unlisted numbers, either service.

Try the UnDirectory service:  900-933-3330 !!  ($1 a minute)


Blake Patterson    AT&T Bell Labs


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also please note that both services do
charge for their lookup time even if the result is a non-pub or no-record
available number. Still, it is worth it.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Brack)
Subject: Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories
Organization: University of Toledo
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 00:39:54 GMT


Bruce J. Miller ([e-mail]) wrote:

> ...Could someone knowledgeable supply me with the vital data on
> these companies?

Try Hello Direct, at 1 800 HI HELLO.  They offer a wide variety of
cellphone accessories, as well as many other telecom products.


Steven S. Brack         [e-mail]
Toledo, OH  43613-1605  [e-mail]
MY OWN OPINIONS         [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 16:54:29 EDT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FCC Releases Fiber Deployment Analysis


An ASCII version of the report, including the tables (but be careful
what editor you open it in as the tables have some very long lines) is
available at:

        ftp.clark.net:/pub/rjk/fib93rpt.txt

A complete zip file, including word processing formatted documetns and
*.wk1 format worksheets for the tables is available on the FCC-State
Link BBS (202-632-1361) under file name 93FIBER.ZIP.  This BBS can
also be accessed through the FedWorld BBS (703-321-8020) or telnet to
fedword.gov.  Once connected to the FedWorld system, choose gateway
#84.


Bob Keller               Robert J. Keller, P.C.          Tel [phone]
A.R.S. KY3R          Federal Telecommunications Law      Fax [phone]
[e-mail]   finger me for FCC Daily Business   CompuServe 76100,3333

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Brack)
Subject: Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors!!
Organization: University of Toledo
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 11:35:00 GMT


Patrick A. Townson ([e-mail]) wrote:
 ...
: I think you may be coming down a
: little to hard on them demanding a written apology, etc.   PAT]

The way I've always been told to do business, and the way I've always
conducted my business, a computer and telecom consultancy, has been to
take every reasonable step to satisfy my customers.  If that means a
written apology for their wasted time on hold and for the inconvenince
caused by the billing errors, then so be it.  The days of "We don't
care.  We don't have to.  We're The Phone Company." are, at least as
far as long distance goes, over, and I say thank God they are.


Steven S. Brack           [e-mail]
Toledo, OH  43613-1605    [e-mail]
MY OWN OPINIONS           [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Need Weather-Resistant Phone
Date: 17 May 94 16:25:10 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


We have a few such phones, and they're just regular phones in weather
resistant housings.  I hope you have some way of securing the phone,
so you don't get people using your phone for toll and ringing up a big
bill.

You can get metal enclosures with a lock hasp in the hardware stores.
They are made for electrical stuff, but are big enough to hold a
phone.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For many years, the old Western Electric
Company made outdoor phones. They were inside little metal weatherproof
boxes with a hinged door on the front which could be locked with a key.
Quite reliable instruments, many are still around and if you find one you
should grab it. They were all rotary dial I believe, in gray boxes.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Annoying Delays: LD Customer Service
Date: 17 May 94 16:20:10 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


I was sending by FTP some stuff to Australia last week, and was
bothered by tha fact that the guy on the other end was not available
during what I thought were normal hours.  Then I checked out what time
it was over there.  I became acutely aware of what was happening.

When it's midnight here, It's teatime in Australia. +17 hours difference.

So we all have to remember that in this era of global telecom, there are
major time differences that can play tricks with our communications.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This becomes quite apparent when
someone in a distant land wishes to use the highly popular CB Simulator
service offered by Compuserve. Quite heavily populated by people in the
USA (in fact all but a small percentage of Compuserve's subscribers
are in this country), the 'CB' is fully loaded -- typically 600-800
users at a time on this, the original version of 'chat' or 'talk'
programs -- on Friday and Saturday night in the US time zones. From
midnight to 3 AM Eastern time, it will always be rocking, even during
the week on the 'adult' machine. Yet a check of the user logs for each
channel will reveal a handful of 100xx,xxxx accounts -- numbers assigned
to users in Europe and Australia -- hanging in there as well.  Despite
the fact that they are already well into Saturday/Sunday morning in
Europe and late Saturday/Sunday afternoon in Australia/New Zealand they
stick around. Then if one logs into the CB early afternoon on Friday
or Saturday using USA time, there won't be an American in sight.
It'll have several 100xx people all doing their thing while the USA
people are still in bed sleeping off their session from several hours
earlier. But for the intercontinental action on Compuserve CB, the
Americans won't return the favor. They make the European and Australian
people get out of bed at odd hours if they want to play!  The same is
true on the increasingly popular IRC (Internet Relay Chat) as well.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #230
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa12066;
          17 May 94 20:16 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27891; Tue, 17 May 94 15:12:18 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27882; Tue, 17 May 94 15:12:16 CDT
Date: Tue, 17 May 94 15:12:16 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #232

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 May 94 15:12:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 232

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Information Wanted on Callback Services (Andreas Werner)
    Callback Services FAQ v1.2 (Bruce Hahne)
    Re: SRI Ends Two Bobs' MGR (Will Martin)
    Re: Meeks Defense Fund (Greg Trotter)
    Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Redidential Phones (Gregory Ashley)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Andreas Werner)
Subject: Information Wanted on Callback Services
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 17:22:30 MET


Because of the urgent need to complete a project I am searching for a
more or less complete list of providers of callback-services. The list
should includes prices, countries and the adresses and communication
link of the provider.  All help most appreciated.


Best Regards,

Andreas W. Werner   Chemnitz / Germany
[e-mail]
[e-mail]   fax: ++49-371-255835


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This request came on the same day as the
FAQ which follows in this issue. They seem to go together nicely in this
issue of the Digest, with someone in Japan answering the question posed
by the reader in Germany. Indeed, this forum is international!   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Hahne)
Subject: Callback Services FAQ v1.2
Date: 17 May 1994 03:13:16 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


Changes since version 1.1:
- Added archive-name header to try to meet news.answers posting guidelines.
- Updated MTC entries, CSI entry, and Progressive Communications entry.
- Added entries for Global Access Callback, INTEX, Global Communication,
  Globalcom 2000, Kallback Direct, and STAR*Telecom.
- Created "other information" section and added some Japan-specific
  information to it.
- Added pointer to Discount Long Distance Digest.
- Attempted to get all phone numbers into a consistent format.

        LIST OF COMPANIES PROVIDING INTERNATIONAL CALL-BACK SERVICE
                                version 1.2
                                May 15, 1994


Introduction:

This list started as an attempt to gather information about companies
which provide call-back services to Japan.  Such companies allow you to
call from Japan to the U.S. at U.S. rates instead of at the (much less
competitive) rates offered by Japan's 3 international phone companies.

I have since found that most call-back companies provide call-back
services to many different countries, so I will not limit the
distribution of this post to newsgroups such as soc.culture.japan and
fj.life.in-japan.  However, the pricing information I give has a bias
towards examples connecting to or from Japan.

This document is in the public domain.  Please pass it around freely and
help people to save some money!  Please send additional information on
old or new callback companies to Bruce Hahne at any of the addresses
listed at the end of this post.

Companies are listed in alphabetical order.

This information is NOT guaranteed accurate, and may be based in part on
advertisements or fliers which are out of date, as well as on 3rd-party
reports.  For full details and up-to-date pricing information, contact
the companies directly.

NAME: Business Communications Management, Inc.
CONTACT INFO:   Business Communications Management, Inc.
                1320 El Capitan Drive, Suite 300
                Danville, CA  94526
                Phone: [phone]
                Fax: [phone]
                Internet: [e-mail]

HOW IT WORKS: Call your access number (in the U.S.?), then hang up.
  Their computer calls you back at a preselected number.
BILLING: $50 one-time enrollment fee.  $25 monthly minimum.  Billed to
  your credit card.
SAMPLE RATES:   Japan to U.S. or U.S. to Japan: $0.45/min.
                Japan to U.K. or U.K. to Japan: $0.74/min.
                Japan to Canada or Canada to Japan: $0.68/min.
                Japan to Germany or Germany to Japan: $0.91/min.
                (30-second minimum per call, billed in 6-second increments)
COMMENTS:  Rates are the same at all times of the day and week.
  Monthly statement is mailed to you.  No PIN.  You can register as many
  call-back numbers as you want.
NOTES:
- This company is a reseller of the MTC PASSPORT service, also available
  from MTC listed below.  They do not resell the MTC OneCard mentioned in
  the MTC entry.
- [e-mail] appears willing to fax out rate sheets so that you
  have pricing information in writing.


NAME: Global Access Callback
CONTACT INFO:   Telegroup, Inc.
                505 North Third St.
                Fairfield, IA 52556
                Phone: [phone] or 1-515-472-5000
                Fax: [phone]
HOW IT WORKS: Call a personal access number in the U.S., then hang up.
  Their computer calls you back at a preselected number.
BILLING:  No start-up fee, no monthly minimum.  30-second minimum per call,
  billed in 6-second increments.
SAMPLE RATES: Japan to U.S.: $0.79/min.
              U.K. to U.S.: $0.39/min.
              Canada to U.S.: $0.23/min
              Germany to U.S.: $0.63/min.
NOTES:  This service is also offered by H.V. Griner Telecommunication
  Associates; see below.


NAME : Global Communication
CONTACT INFO: 1163 Wunderlich Drive
              San Jose, CA 95129
              Phone: [phone]
              Fax: [phone]
HOW IT WORKS:
        - Call an assigned number in the U.S., then hang up.
        - When the system calls you back, say "Hello".
        - Wait for a beep tone and enter a 7-digit account number, a PIN,
          and the number you want to call.
BILLING:  They set up a positive account balance by placing a $200
  charge to your credit card.  Once the account is set up, you can elect
  either to have your balance automatically "refilled" and charged to
  your card, or you can make the requests "manually" by contacting the
  company.  There is no entry fee or monthly minimum.
SAMPLE RATES:   Japan to U.S.: $0.70/minute.
                Taiwan to U.S.: $0.89/minute
                France to U.S.: $0.70/minute
COMMENTS:  Usable from "almost anywhere in the world".
NOTES:  I don't know how many digits are in the PIN.


NAME : Globalcom 2000
CONTACT INFO:  Phone: [phone]
               Email: [e-mail]
HOW IT WORKS: Dial your assigned number (probably in the U.S.) and wait
  for a busy signal.  Hang up, and their computer calls you back, giving
  you a U.S. dial tone.
BILLING: Information unavailable.  Probably billed to credit card.
SAMPLE RATES:  Australia to U.S.: $0.88/min.
               Germany to U.S.: $0.57/min.
               Hong Kong to U.S.: $0.66/min.
               India to U.S.: $1.27/min.
               Japan to U.S.: $0.63/min.
               Sweden to U.S.: $0.54/min.
               Taiwan to U.S.: $0.80/min.
               U.K. to U.S.: $0.44/min.
COMMENTS:  Voice mail and fax store-and-forward services also available.
  24-hour operator assistance as needed.


NAME:  H.V. Griner Telecommunication Associates
CONTACT INFO:   Phone: [phone]
                Fax:  [phone]
                Internet: [e-mail]
                Compuserve: 73174,2250
HOW IT WORKS:   Dial an unlisted number assigned to you in the U.S.
  Their computer doesn't answer, but calls you back after you hang up,
  giving you a U.S. dial tone.
BILLING:  No startup fee, no monthly fee.  Billed in 6-second
  increments, 30 second minimum.
SAMPLE RATES: Japan to U.S.: $0.78/min.
NOTES:
- This company is a reseller of the Global Access Callback
  service, listed above.
- They are looking for agents outside of the U.S.


NAME: INTEX
CONTACT INFO:   1-800-877-1456 or 1-516-767-3040
NOTES:  No other information available.


NAME: Kallback Direct
CONTACT INFO:  Kallback Direct
               417 Second Ave. W.
               Seattle, WA  98119
               Phone: [phone] or 1-800-959-5255
               Fax:  [phone] or 1-800-949-5255
               Email: [e-mail]
NOTES: No other information available.

NAME:  Logical / Kokusai Telecom
CONTACT INFO:   2-1-1 Minamidai
                Nakano-ku
                Tokyo 164, Japan
                Phone: [phone]
Other information presently unavailable.  Supposedly their rates are 25%
below those of KDD, at all times.  This company is the Japanese agent
for a U.S. company.

NAME:  MTC OneCard
CONTACT INFO:   MTC Passport Telemanagement
                Call Clearance Center
                55 S. Market St., Suite 1435
                San Jose, CA  95113
                Phone: [phone]  or 1-408-298-2985
                Fax: [phone]
HOW IT WORKS: Dial local access number, your PIN, the phone number
  you're calling FROM, then hang up.  Their computer calls you back and
  gives you a U.S. dial tone.
BILLING:  $5 for initial account setup.  Billed through your credit card.
SAMPLE RATES:  Japan to U.S.: 70 cents/minute?
COMMENTS:  Works from anywhere in the world with a local access number:
  about 45 countries.  Other services (speed dialing, conference calls,
  etc.) also available or will be available soon.
NOTES:
- MTC also sells a callback service called "PASSPORT", listed below.
- I have had serious problems trying to figure out which phone number(s)
  or addresses to use to contact MTC to request service. So far I have 3
  postal addresses, 5 phone numbers, 3 fax numbers, and at least one
  person has reported being told that MTC doesn't offer the "OneCard".
  This is clearly not true, since I have one.  See the entry below for
  more MTC addresses and phone numbers.
- MTC is allegedly receiving 100 new customers a day, so you may need to
  be patient about signing up and receiving information.


NAME:  MTC Passport
CONTACT INFO:   MTC Telemanagement Corporation
                1304 Southpoint Boulevard
                Petaluma, CA  94954
                Phone: [phone]  or 1-800-733-2682
                Fax: [phone]
                        or
                Passport International Telemanagement
                925 Lakeville St. #318
                Petaluma, CA  94952
                        or
                Nigel Grace, MTC Passport International Consultant
                Phone: [phone]
                Fax: [phone]

HOW IT WORKS: 2nd-hand information suggests it works as follows:  dial
  local access number, your PIN, then hang up.  Their computer calls you
  back at a predetermined number and gives you a U.S. dial tone.
BILLING:  $50 one-time enrollment fee?  $25 monthly minimum.
SAMPLE RATES:  From Japan to U.S.: 46.3 cents/minute, no per-call charge?
NOTES:
- See notes above on MTC OneCard.
- The Passport service is also resold by Business Communications
  Management, listed earlier.
- I have a second-hand report that the $50 enrollment fee has been dropped.


NAME: Progressive Communications
CONTACT INFO:   P.O. Box 5890
                Athens, OH  45701-5890
                Fax: [phone]
                Internet: [e-mail]
NOTES:
- Other information presently unavailable.


NAME: Star*Telecom
CONTACT INFO:  STAR*TELECOM
               9541 SW 148 Ave. Cir. North
               P.O. Box 163055
               Miami, FL  33196
               Phone: [phone]
               Phone, in France: [phone]
               Fax: [phone]
               Contact person: Ron Valme
BILLING: No enrollment fee, no monthly minimum.
SAMPLE RATES:  Netherlands to U.S.: $0.40/min.
               Austria to U.S.: $0.34/min.
               U.K. to U.S.: $0.29/min.
NOTES: Phone card available for travellers.  Other information unavailable.
COMMENTS: I have a second-hand report that this company is a reseller of
  the MTC Passport service.  If so then their prices should be similar
  to those I have listed for MTC.


NAME: Telepassport
CONTACT INFO:   P.O. Box 1003
                Chicago, IL  60690
                Fax: [phone]
HOW IT WORKS: There are two main methods:
  1: Dial a U.S. number given to you by Telepassport, then hang up.  Their
  computer calls you back at your home number.  PIN optional.
  2: Dial a local toll-free number for Japan, enter account number and
  PIN, then enter a number which requests a callback to wherever you are.
BILLING: $25/month minimum.  Billed via credit card or via electronic
  funds transfer (bank to bank).
SAMPLE RATES:
  From Japan to U.S., standard/discount/economy rates:  .98/.85/.79 ($/minute)
COMMENTS: PIN is 4 digits.  You receive monthly statements.  Service
  available all over the world.  Message forwarding, voice mail, and
  other services available.  For extensive information, email the following
  message to [e-mail] :
        reply [e-mail]
        info telepassport
        end


OTHER INFORMATION:

Van Hefner ([e-mail]) is the moderator of Discount Long Distance
Digest, a free weekly electronic publication which focuses primarily on
the long distance reselling industry but also covers other
telecommunications businesses.  It is targetted at telecommunications
resellers, NOT at casual consumers who want to lower their long distance
bills.  However, Mr. Hefner writes that "everyone is welcomed".
To subscribe, send email to [e-mail] and put "Subscribe Digest"
in your Subject: line.

Since this FAQ started out as a way of helping people in Japan to save
money on international calls, I'd like to put in a word encouraging all
of the above companies to do more advertising in English-language
publications in Japan.  Japan's three international phone companies
regularly take out enormous advertisements in my daily newspaper, but I
never see any ads from callback companies.  Since almost everyone listed
above is undercutting the best Japanese rates by a significant
percentage, particularly for calls to the U.S., it seems to me that the
possible returns on a few ads would be quite high.  I make no
guarantees, however; this is just a suggestion.  The present per-minute
rates of KDD, the major international long-distance provider in Japan,
are (after exchange rate conversion, $1.00 = Y103) roughly $2.16/min,
$1.74/min, and $1.26/min. depending on the time of day.  KDD has
recently started a 10% discount program which costs a few dollars extra
per month, but I don't know the details.

For discussions about Internet and other networking issues in Japan,
join the EFJ list:  send the message "subscribe Your Name" to
<[e-mail]>.  You will receive an acknowledgement giving more
information about the list.


Disclaimer:  I don't work for any of these companies.

Bruce Hahne
Current address:  [e-mail]
Lifetime address: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 94 9:37:51 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: SRI Ends Two Bobs' MGR


Regarding the supersession of shortwave by satellite-radio broadcasting:

This topic has been kicked around on some of the radio-related mailing
lists and newsgroups for a while. There are oft-stated arguments on
the subject and some ideas I've had that I've not seen elsewhere:

First off, cost of equipment for reaching relatively poor target
audiences: shortwave reception is cheap and simple technology these
days, even though many new receivers incorporate high-tech user
interfaces and features.  A basic SW radio can be bought for about $US
20 or so; a low-end digital-readout model for $US 50.  Satellite
reception costs a vast amount more, currently, and even if new-tech
audio-only satellite receivers are mass-produced they still will cost
more than this. Digital broadcasting may have some effect on this, but
I'm going to reserve judgement until I see what shakes out of the
trees regarding that whole issue.

There's a sizeable investment in shortwave transmitters and more are
being built every day. The countries and organizations that use these
aren't going to just shut them down and sell them for scrap anytime
soon. Same with the receiver investment among the populace -- they'll
still be used as long as anything is on the airwaves to pick up.
Actually, the main thrust of discussion/negotiation among shortwave
broadcasters at fora like the ITU meetings is the overcrowding of
broadcast bands and the resulting destructive interference. There are
far more candidates for SW broadcast spectrum space than there are
slots to give them. So even if some broadcasters cut their SW output,
the quantity of signal on the air will still remain high. Now, some
people may complain about the *content* of the signals, as the recent
increase in US-based religious/political shortwave broadcasters has
caused many comments among the hobbyists. But these people have a
strong and overriding motivation to spread their messages, and they're
probably going to stay on the air even if many government-funded
national services disappear due to budget cuts.

Also, there's at least one aspect that no one ever seems to mention:
you can hide your SW reception. I can listen in my bed to shortwave,
using a radio that's the size of a paperback book. In good-signal
conditions, I don't even have to extend the whip antenna to receive a
major broadcaster with a nearby relay site (for example, Radio Netherlands
with their Bonaire relay). No one has ever shown me how they can receive
 from a satellite without an external antenna of some kind, even if
technological advances make it possible to do away with a large dish
and low-noise-amp mounted at the feedpoint. How can I duplicate the
simplicity of this SW reception I have now in a satellite situation?

Consider the number of countries that have come out with edicts
banning or severely restricting satellite dishes in private hands:
China, Iran, Saudi Arabia have all been mentioned in recent news as
doing this. Even if technology makes "stealth" satellite antenna
setups possible in the future, it still will be risky in some
countries or under some regimes to have any external receiving
devices. The high frequencies used by satellite services make direct
line-of-sight reception necessary -- no whip antenna inside your house
will suffice. So shortwave still is better for reaching a target
audience that suffers such repression.  (Yes, shortwave can be jammed,
but it isn't a totally-successful effort; witness the Eastern Europe
and USSR experiences.)

Maybe the proliferation of satellite services will cause the amount of
shortwave programming directed specifically at developed areas to
decrease, with the former senders switching over to satellites and
relying on local rebroadcasting of the satellite-fed signal. The VOA
has done this in several areas, contracting with local FM or AM
medium-wave stations to relay VOA programming. The BBC has explicitly
reduced its shortwave-to-North-America services and stated that the US
public-radio relays of BBC signals is the reason. Personally, I don't
like this, since I feel the BBC should have a mission to give a
24-hour shortwave service to English-speaking areas all over the
world, but that's where our opinions differ. I'm lucky enough that a
local public-radio station relays the BBC World Service from midnight
to 5 AM (6 AM on weekends), but many North Americans do not have this
luxury.  I still tune in the BBC on shortwave at other times, and put
up with weak signals when I wish to hear a program at a time when
there is no North-American-directed shortwave signal (such as
mid-day). But this reduction of strong signals directed to a target
area here actually makes the shortwave-listening/DXing hobby better --
if there are fewer strong signals, it is easier to pull in weak DX!
And that weak DX will be the vast quantity of shortwave-broadcast
signals directed at other areas, which will still fill the airwaves.

Lastly, we're discussing this at a sunspot-minimum point (actually
still on the way down) in the solar cycle. Every time this happens,
people who can't remember over a decade back predict the imminent
death of shortwave. (Similar to the "imminent death of the Net". :-)
It didn't happen the last time, nor the time before, nor before that,
and we had other technological developments at the time that people
thought would kill off shortwave (television, for example). I think
people will still be broadcasting on and listening to shortwave 50
years from now, and probably fussing about how it is going to
disappear "real soon now" ...


Will

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Trotter)
Subject: Re: Meeks Defense Fund
Date: 17 May 1994 16:28:10 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Nowhere in the above report is any
> mention given of whether or not libel did occur. Note that the article
> seems to skirt that (to me) very basic premise ... instead, the
> writers complain of how the accused has very little money, is doing
> all this for free out of sense of volunteerism, and how the plaintiff
> is a big company with lots of money -- as though those facts alone
> meant anything. Big corporations have rights also; even AT&T is
> entitled to the protection of the law, the same as you or I. (Note: I
> use AT&T as an example only, I do not know who is suing him.)

I sent email to the fund address, asking for a pointer to the
supposedly libelous article. They asked me not to repost it.

Basically, it's an article about a direct mail firm that seems to have
some shady practices and has run afoul of regulatory agencies in
several states.

I don't claim to be an expert in libel. However, I do know that most
people think that libel is "a published untruth." However, this is not
the case.

If I remember my journalism days correctly, libel is "damage or injury
to reputation." Because of this, you can still libel someone while
telling the truth.

A typical defense for libel is that the article was "true and absent
malice."

After reading the inflammatory tone of Brock's article, I have opted
not to assist the defense.


greg

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

From: [e-mail] (Gregory C. Ashley)
Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Telephone Line
Date: 16 May 94 08:13 CST


In response to recent articles on radio interference I found an
internal company memorandum that may be helpful to some.  I don't know
how current the model numbers or phone numbers are.

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

AT&T makes modular telphone filters (Models #Z100A and Z101A) that are
designed to eliminate interference from AM broadcast stations.  The
filters can easily be plugged into any phone which has a standard
modular jack.  They are available at Phone Center Stores or can
ordered by calling the AT&T National Sales and Service Center at
1-800-222-3111.  NOTE: These filters are only effective for
interference from AM broadcast stations.  They are not designed to
filter out interference from CB or amateur radio transmitters.

Radio Shack makes a "snap-on choke" filter (Catalog #273-104) which is
designed to filter out transmissions from CB or amateur radios.  These
chokes are installed on the telphone cord by wrapping the cord around
and/or through the choke.  Chokes of many different types, also called
"ferrites", "beads", or "toroids", are available at most electronic
stores.

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

Greg C. Ashley    ([e-mail])

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #232
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa12229;
          17 May 94 20:20 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27198; Tue, 17 May 94 14:51:04 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27187; Tue, 17 May 94 14:51:00 CDT
Date: Tue, 17 May 94 14:51:00 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #231

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 May 94 14:51:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 231

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Palestinian Country Code (Bob Goudreau)
    Need New NPA Listings (Tony Pelliccio)
    Lexus Cellular Phones (Eric A. Litman)
    New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (Bay Area) (Henry Mensch)
    "Private" Message on CID Box ([e-mail])
    What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? (Victoria Matho)
    Information Needed on Telecommunications in England (Andy Kumeda)
    Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 2 (Darren Ingram)
    ANI Numbers For (408) Area Wanted (Neil R. Henry)
    Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? (Mark E. Daniel)
    Telephone Number Syntax Question (Ken Shirriff)
    Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! (Anton Sherwood)
    Re: 'NNX' Area Codes?  I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Anton Sherwood)
    Re: Trying to Convert WAV Files to 3-Bit ADPCM (Stu Whitmore)
    Texas Gets Caller ID (David Winters)
    Information Wanted on ITC Autonet (Chris Cariffe)
    Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Setup Access Point (John R. Levine)
    Re: NPA Readiness For 1995 (Alan Leon Varney)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 12:17:58 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Palestinian Country Code


According to a recent issue of the {Economist}, the recent agreement
between Israel and the PLO in setting up a "Palestinian Authority" in
the Gaza strip and the Jericho area includes provisions that allow the
Authority to issue postage stamps and to use a separate telephone
country code.  Does anyone know if the ITU has issued the new code
yet, and if so, what number was used?  The country code list for Zone
9 (which includes Israel, Jordan, etc.) in the Telecom archives shows
that 970, 978 and 979 are currently vacant, so I suspect that it will
be one of those.

Also, are any details yet available about the internal numbering space
that will exist within the new country code (i.e., what area codes and
local numbers will look like)?  I note that Jericho, along with
Jerusalem and lots of the West Bank, is currently part of area code 2
in Israel; will Jericho lines still be dialable as Israeli numbers
too?  (I can't find any listing for Gaza in the current Israel listing.)


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Pelliccio)
Subject: Need New NPA Listings
Date: 17 May 1994 18:15:25 GMT
Organization: Brown University ADIR


In order to keep our database accurate, I'm wondering where I can FTP
listings of recently changed and upcoming changes to the U.S. dialing
plan. ie, area-code splits. I could have sworn this information was
available via ftp on bellcore.com but cannot find it there. Anyone
know where it might be buried?


Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR
[e-mail], Tel. [phone] Fax. [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You might check out the Telecom Archives
also, in the /areacodes sub-directory. Anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric A. Litman)
Subject: Lexus Cellular Phones
Date: 17 May 1994 09:02:30 -0500
Organization: Proxima, Inc.


I was recently going over the phone options for the Lexus GS300, and
noticed that the phone system Lexus offers is a Motorola -- basically a
souped-up AlphaTac. When installed by a Lexus dealer, the phone
integrates with the stereo system and the AC to mute the stereo, lower
the AC, and allow conversations to be held over the car's audio system.
My question is, can my Motorola DPC550 handheld be integrated into
this system, or are there special "hooks" in the Lexus-specific phone?


Eric Litman    Proxima, Inc.

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 94 09:12:00 PDT
From: Henry Mensch <[e-mail]>
Subject: New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (Bay Area)


So, I'm at a Golden Gate Transit bus stop on Harrison and Third street
trying to go meet a friend in Santa Rosa ... there's no schedule
posted, and no phone number on the shelter. I extract my handy dandy
cellfone and dial '411' and ask for the number for Golden Gate
Transit. The lady who answers the phone answers with "GTE <someservice-
markhere> can I help you?". Apparently she couldn't because she could
not find a number for Golden Gate Transit in SF ... then I remember
this bill insert which gave information on this "new service."

I asked if I could get connected to the real information operator, and
I was informed that *6543 would work.  *6543 did indeed work, and I
got the number on the first try.

Moral of the story: to use GTE's new gimmicky directory assistance dial 411
or 555 1212 ... to get the real stuff dial *6543. Your mileage may vary,
especially outside the Bay Area.


henry mensch  /  oracle corporation    /   <[e-mail]>
 "on the internet, nobody knows you're a bear."  --tovah hollander
pob 14592; sf, ca  94114-0592; usa / NBCS: B3/4 w+ f+ g(-) k+ s+ m p(+)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Henry, a question and a comment: exactly
what does this *6543 hook get you into?  You said 'new, gimmicky directory
assistance' which leads me to wonder, did not GTE offer directory assist-
ance like any other telco until recently, i.e. 'new'?. Is the cellular
division of the company offering a new service and intercepting calls to
411 or 555-1212 which formerly had gone to a full directory bureau and
providing some limited sub-set of the directory?

My comment is that as a fine example of how telco service has gotten worse
since divestiture, there was a time, until maybe a decade ago when the
information operators *memorized* the 'top twenty' inquiries and did not
have to look for them at all. The airline and bus schedule information
numbers, the utility companies, city hall; all those were on the tip of
her tongue. So if you asked (for example) for the number for bus schedules
she would *instantly* reply, "eight three six seven thousand". The next
twenty or thirty 'often requested numbers' after the 'top twenty' were on
an index card at her position that she could glance at. It was only after
you got beyond that group of a few dozen numbers people were always asking
about that she had to actually use the directory.  Generally all the oper-
ators -- not just the directory operators -- knew the 'top twenty' by heart
so a person who dialed the zero operator for assistance could also be
immediatly connected. That's how it *used* to be.     PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (MUR)
Subject: "Private" Message on CID Box
Organization: WELLESLEY COLLEGE
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 14:28:37 GMT


Some of the calls I receive from areas that don't yet have Caller ID
service are picked up by my CID boxes as "private" (blocked) rather
that "out-of-area", even though the calling parties haven't blocked
thier numbers. This will be a problem when I install a blocked call
rejecting CID box.  Have others found this to happen? Solutions?

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

From: [e-mail] (Victoria Matho)
Subject: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator?
Date: 17 May 1994 12:35:19 GMT
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA


Does anyone know what an SME or synchronous modem eliminator does??


Thanks in Advance,

Victoria

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

From: [e-mail] (ANDY KUMEDA)
Subject: Information Needed on Telecommunications in England
Date: 17 May 1994 14:52:20 GMT
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


I am posting this for a colleague of mine who is doing research on
'Telecommunication in England'.

He would like some info on the  following topics:
    o  recent trends in their communication industry
    o  telecom carriers' market size
    o  cellular phones
    o  communications and broadcast satellites
    o  'Super Highways'
    o  or any other helpful info, or where to find them

Thanks a lot, and please respond to me via e-mail.  I will summarize
to those that are interested.


Andy Kumeda

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 94 16:36 BST
From: Darren Ingram <[e-mail]>
Subject: Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 2
Reply-To: [e-mail]


We would like to offer TELECOM Digest readers a special price on
subscription. The UK price is gbp700 per year for fax. We would be
pleased to offer **ALL** businesses a single-copy price of the same
(payable in Sterling or credit card) for delivery to an electronic
mail box connected to the Internet.  The companies would have to sign
a piece of paper (yes, old fashioned!) saying they would not
redistribute the material and basically subject the copyrighted works
in the same way as a printed publication. Site archive licences are
available. For genuine bona-fida non-commercial users a very generous
(in excess of 50 percent) discount would be offered upon signing a
similar warranty which also says that the information would be for
their sole use only and for non-commercial purposes).  Also we have
another product called Satnews, which I will forward similar offer
details on later next week.

Here are some stories from a recent issue:

-US COMPANIES TAKE STAKE IN SOUTH KOREAN MOBILE TELCO

TWW-12 May 1994-US COMPANIES TAKE STAKE IN SOUTH KOREAN MOBILE TELCO

TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA- Four US companies have been selected to take a
shareholding in South Korea's second mobile phone system -- now called
Shinsegi Mobile Telecom Co Ltd.  Pacific Telesis (PacTel) is to take a
10 percent holding, along with Southwestern Bell (7%), GTE Corp (4%)
and Qualcomm Inc (1.2%). The combined foreign stake is slightly more
than the 20.2 percent planned by the Federation of Korean Industries
(FKI), who co-ordinated the complex arrangements of appointing
national and international shareholders. The key South Korean
shareholders are the Pohang Iron and Steel Co (POSCO) with a 15
percent stake, Kolon Industries Co Ltd with 14 percent and around 240
local firms making up the remainder of minority shareholders. The
formation of the second mobile phone consortium closes a very
controversial -- and newsworthy -- chain of events which saw the
Sunkyong Group chosen to lead the contract, but this was abandoned
after charges of nepotism were made because the son of Sunkyong's
chairman is married to the daughter of ex-President Roh Tae-woo.
Sunkyong made a second bid, but later withdrew it after winning a 23
percent share of Korea Mobile Telecom Corp, operators of the existing
mobile network.

-ITOCHU BUILDS HIGH-SPEED CHINESE DIGITAL NETWORK

TWW-12 May 1994-ITOCHU BUILDS HIGH-SPEED CHINESE DIGITAL NETWORK
TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

BEIJING, CHINA- Itochu Corp has installed a 64kbit/s digital leased
line between Beijing and China for JAL Airlines Co, making it the fist
Japanese company to build a high-speed network in the country.  There
are plans to extend the link to cover Talien and Guangzhou.

-TRIAL OF CANADIAN INFO SUPERHIGHWAY PLANNED

TWW-12 May 1994-TRIAL OF CANADIAN INFO SUPERHIGHWAY PLANNED
TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

TORONTO, CANADA- A trial of an information superhighway in Canada is
set to begin which will test tele-medicine applications and distance
medical education.  The so-called Experimental Test Bed Network will
be sponsored by the non-profit-making Canarie Group Inc, a group of
over 100 private and public organisations created to develop the
country's next generation of telecommunication networks. Network
services worth C$7.5 million are to be provided by the Stentor
alliance and Unitel Communications Inc.  Initially regional networks
in Ottawa and British Columbia are to be formed before national
networks are formed by the year-end.

-CLI, INTEL ALIGN FOR VIDEOCONFERENCING PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT

TWW-12 May 1994-CLI, INTEL ALIGN FOR VIDEOCONFERENCING PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

NEW YORK, USA- Intel Corp. has formed an agreement with Compression
Labs Inc to jointly develop advanced videoconferencing products.  The
companies first broke news of their alliance in January but this is
the first definitive step of intent.  Compression Labs' products will
support Intel's PC desktop videoconferencing and dataconferencing
(workgroup) products. Intel is providing some development funding and
has purchased US$2 million of recently-issued Compression Labs stock.

-TENDERS FOR BRAZILIAN CELLULAR TO BE RELEASED

TWW-12 May 1994-BRIEF TRANSMISSION:TENDERS FOR BRAZILIAN CELLULAR TO
BE RELEASED
TELECOMWORLDWIRE--(C) 1994 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

RIO DE JANERIO, BRAZIL- Tenders for US$110 worth of orders to expand a
cellular communications network are shortly to be published by Telerj,
a business unit of Telebras.  Companies will be invited to bid for a
contract worth about $30 million to provide 22,000 new cellular lines
in Rio de Janerio state and in June the company will put out to tender
60,000 lines in the city of Rio de Janeiro, a deal worth around $80
million. Observers say that NEC is tipped to win the tender as in 1989
it was awarded contracts now worth US$200 million to supply 120,000
cellular circuits.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Part one of this sampling appeared in
a prior issue of the Digest today.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Neil R. Henry)
Subject: ANI Numbers Wanted For (408) Area
Organization: Remote Access Solutions, Los Gatos, CA USA
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 05:45:13 GMT


Can anyone provide private or telco ANI read-off telephones for San
Jose CA (408) area.


Many thanks,

Neil

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 03:05:52 EST
From: [e-mail] (Mark E Daniel)
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts?


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

> Illinois Bell territory, we use *60 to add/delete numbers to our
> Call Screening directory. If thus screened, the calling party gets an
> intercept message saying the called party 'is not receiving calls at
> this time.'

Do you have a limit on the number telephone IDs :) that you are allow
to block calls from?  Or do they charge you on a byte-used deal? :)
Like I always say, I'd rather have a list of allowed numbers and
forget the rest. :)

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

>> Or the modem should detect voice and put out a AT-command like
>> response ("VOICE") which would cause the comm software to cease, just
>> like a "NO ANSWER" timeout. Shouldn't be hard for the DSP to detect
>> voice.  Do common modems provide any such voice indication?

Sure.  There are indeed modems that will detect VOICE and do indeed
respond with VOICE.  Check in c.d.modems to be sure, but I believe
that it's mostly the highend Hayes' and I believe the US Robotics Dual
Standards which provide this feature.  I have a ZyXEL with old ROMs
that as of my ROM revision will not detect VOICE, but again I believe
this might have been added to the latest ROMs. :)


Mark E Daniel                   (Loving SysOp of The Legend BBS)
Inet: [e-mail]   [e-mail] (Direct INet)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a limit of ten numbers from
which calls can be rejected. A new entry to the list at that point
cause the oldest entry to drop off.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Shirriff)
Subject: Telephone Number Syntax Question
Date: 17 May 1994 06:07:12 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


It used to be that phone numbers had the syntax 123-456-7890 or (123)
456-7890. Now I see lots of numbers of the form [phone]. When
did this new trend occur, and what does the "+" signify?


Ken Shirriff            [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The +1 indicates the country code for the
USA and Canada along with countries using the 809 area code. By coincidence
'1' is also the access code we dial when placing a long distance number,
but in this instance it represents the country code.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Anton Sherwood)
Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works!
Organization: Crackpots for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 19:53:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Fred
Heald) writes:

> I tend to always dial the entire number (1-NPA-NXX-XXXX) first,
> and get the ridiculous message "We are sorry, it is not necesary to
> dial one and the area code for this call".  Well, this morning (in
> fact, calling Netcom) I accidentally dialed the 1-818, and the call
> went through!

I just tried it in 415.  Hooray!


Anton Sherwood   *\\*   [phone]   *\\*   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Anton Sherwood)
Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes?  I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate
Organization: Crackpots for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 00:16:50 GMT


Speaking of NNX and NXX, is there a letter for the set {0,1}?  I
haven't seen one used.  If (strangely) there isn't a convention, how
about B for Bit, so old-style area codes are NBX?


Anton Sherwood   *\\*   [phone]   *\\*   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 09:58:45 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Rattlesnake Stu)
Subject: Re: Trying to Convert WAV Files to 3-Bit ADPCM
Organization: Central Washington University


On Fri, 13 May 1994 16:19:15 -0500, Richard De A'Morelli <spectrum@kaiwan.
com> scribbled:

> I have been looking for quite some time for a shareware package that
> would convert WAV files to 3-bit ADPCM, which would be suitable not
> only for Zyxel modems, but other telecom specific voice cards as well,
> such as Dialogic, Pika AVA-4, New Voice, etc.  I am especially
> interested in a utility for the Pika AVA-4 card -- the only one I know
> of is a commercial package priced at about $500, which is far more for
> a voice editor package than I can afford. Any help would be most apprec-
> iated.

I finally got a "solution" to this, which I've been wanting as well.
(Note that this is not a perfect solution, but you can make it work.)
Use the shareware program Blaster Master to load the .WAV, then save
it as a .VOC file.  Use the VCNVT program (see the ZyXEL FTP site, I
think, or their BBS) to convert the .VOC to the 3-bit ADPCM format.
This worked for me. (Blaster Master is a neat program, you can combine
and otherwise manipulate files to come up with really outrageous
nonsense, as long as you have a good supply of Monty Python and Star
Trek .WAV files ... <grin>. You can FTP it from the SimTel archives, if
I remember correctly, but I don't recall what directory in the
SimTel/msdos tree.)


Stuart Whitmore          FAX:  [phone]      Data: Same as FAX
[e-mail]                            [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Winters)
Subject: Texas Gets Caller ID
Date: 17 May 1994 03:37:05 GMT
Organization: Real/Time Communications - Bob Gustwick and Associates


Texas finally has Caller ID.  It has been available in Austin, the
first area, for a couple of months.  It was held up for reasons laid
out in the previous postings and the state wire-tap law.

A card came in my Southwestern Bell phone bill asking if I wanted
per-line blocking.  It was stated that I needed a compelling reason to
have per-line blocking but did not have to state that reason to the
phone company. In reality this means anyone can have per-line blocking.

I read in the local newspaper that only 2% of local residents signed
up for per-line blocking.  I have never received a call yet by a blocked
number.

A service which was mandated in Texas was called Anonymous call
rejection.  This only costs 50 cents extra.  Anonymous call rejection
enables someone with or without Caller ID to block all blocked calls.
In other words if someone calls me and has pressed *67 or has per-line
blocking, they will receive a recording indicating that I am not
accepting blocked calls provided that I have the ACR service turned on.

My only problem so far has been the number of "out of area" calls I
receive from cellular and out of town numbers.  My understanding is
that within the next year, long distance carriers will be required to
send the Caller ID signal.

Caller ID is supposed to be available in Houston (713) and San Antonio
(210) later this year.  It will be available in the Dallas/Ft. Worth
area (214/817) early next year.


David Winters | [e-mail] [preferred e-mail address]
Austin, Texas | CIS: [e-mail] | AOL: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Cariffe)
Subject: Information Wanted on ITC Autonet
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 01:11:57 GMT


Does anyone have any info on ITC Autonet?  I have just interviewed
with this company and am interested to find out what the public has to
say.  They seem to be a pretty good company.  I found that all of the
employees I've talked to really like them.  They take a great deal of
concern in the customer, which is a BIG plus in this industry.

Any info would be appreciated.


Chris   [e-mail]  chrys@netcom
Denver, Colorado  303-321-6650

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 94 18:07 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> It sounds like you're about to get into the wonderful world of Unix.
> The addresses we have on the internet don't seem to want to let people
> telnet into our site.  This is because we have a network with only DOS
> machines on it.  I have heard that we are going to have to get a Unix
> box and a fully qualified domain name if we want to be fully on the 'net.

I have a network here with two Windows machines, a Unix machine, and a
couple of routers.  They're all really on the Internet -- ping
tom.iecc.com if you want to say hi to a Windows laptop on the net.
Ping xuxa.iecc.com and astrud.iecc.com to say hi to two antique 286
boxes routing packets through a wireless Ethernet, my link to the
outside.

You probably want to provide services such as FTP to outside users.
You can in fact do this with Windows machines (you can FTP to tom as
well) although Windows is not a terribly robust server platform.
Windows server software exists for many popular services such as
Gopher, finger, and WWW as well as for DNS, the system that manages
Internet host names.

If you want a robust server, you are indeed better off running Unix,
which works very nicely on a 386 or better PC.  It's cheaper than DOS,
too.

For an introduction to setting up an Internet node, I'd suggest "The
Internet Connection" by John Quarterman and Smoot Carl-Mitchell,
Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-54237-4.

For a general introduction to the Internet, I shamelessly recommend
"The Internet for Dummies", IDG, 1-56884-024-1, which now seems to be
the overall best selling Internet book.  I think it's one of the
finest books ever written in the English language, but since I wrote
it I may be biased.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 08:30:45 +0500
Subject: Re: NPA Readiness for 1995
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


In article <[e-mail]> Gregory P. Monti <gmonti@cap.
gwu.edu> writes:

> North America's Countdown to NPA Interchangeability in 1995

  Greg, I've added a date to all the non-ready NPAs, indicating when
Bellcore believes they WILL be ready (permissive dialing).  In some
cases, it is a date in the past ... (Mandatory dates before 5/1/94
are also indicated.)  I've used JULY to indicate "7/1/94 permissive",
since it is such a common date.  Note that ALL of these NPAs have
elected to use 1+10 for Toll calls (except CA 408, which says "no" for
another reason).


Al Varney

NPA     Stat    Toll    Ready   Notes
        Prov    calls     for
                within  1/95?
                NPA
                dialed
                as

203     CT      1+7     no     2/28/94 permissive
314     MO      1+7     no     JULY
316     KS      1+7     no     JULY
318     LA      1+7     no     9/4/93  perm. 1+10 (4/2/94 mandatory)
405     OK      1+7     no     JULY
408     CA      7       no      inter-NPA calls are 10D, must change to 1+10D
                           {Table indicates 1+10 Inter-NPA permitted
                            as of 10/11/93, mandatory 10/10/94 -- same
                            comment applies to 209, 619, 707, 805 & 916.
                            So this should be "yes"????}
409     TX      1+7     no     JULY
417     MO      1+7     no     JULY
501     AR      1+7     no     JULY
502     KY      1+7     no     9/4/93  perm. 1+10 (4/2/94 mandatory)
504     LA      1+7     no     9/4/93  perm. 1+10 (4/2/94 mandatory)
517     MI      1+7     no     5/1/94  permissive
606     KY      1+7     no     9/4/93  perm. 1+10 (4/2/94 mandatory)
616     MI      1+7     no     5/1/94  permissive
702     NV      1+7     no     JULY
804     VA      1+7     no     5/18/94 permissive
806     TX      1+7     no     JULY
808     HI      1+7     no     6/19/94 permissive
809     Caribbean       1+7    no
                           {These have all elected to go with 1+10 Toll,
                           with 1/9/94 as the MANDATORY date.  So this
                           should be "1+10 mostly" and "yes".  The islands
                           of St. Vincent and Turks & Caicos use "01+10D"
                           for Toll, and 115+10D for operator calls.
                           Turks & Caicos permit 5D local and Anguilla
                           and Montserrat permit 4D local .... }
816     MO      1+7     no     JULY
906     MI      1+7     no     2/1/94  permissive
907     AK      1+7     no  {Table says the permissive date is NA ??
                             Mandatory 1+10 date is 1/1/95}
913     KS      1+7     no     JULY
915     TX      1+7     no     JULY
918     OK      1+7     no     JULY

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #231
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa14191;
          18 May 94 2:44 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10360; Tue, 17 May 94 23:16:07 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10343; Tue, 17 May 94 23:16:04 CDT
Date: Tue, 17 May 94 23:16:04 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #233

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 May 94 23:16:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 233

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID ( Dave Thompson)
    Re: Nationwide CID, CLASS, etc. (Mike D. Schomburg)
    Re: Wireless Data Services (Pete Farmer)
    Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip (Terry Gilson)
    Re: Inteljak Wireless Phone Jak System (Marcial Dumlao)
    Re: 'NNX' Area Codes?  I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Fred Goldstein)
    Re: SONET Management Standards? (Don Berryman)
    Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? (Don Berryman)
    Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? (K. M. Peterson)
    Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 Codes (Will Martin)
    Re: New Area Codes Assigned (Scott D. Fybush)
    Re: Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming (Alan Leon Varney)
    Re: GTE Analog Pocket Phone (Steven H. Lichter)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Thompson, Dave <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID
Date: Tue, 17 May 94 20:11:00 PDT


In Telecom 14.224 Fri 13 May, [e-mail] (Robert
Berger) replies to:

(telecom14.221.8) [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson):

>> Personally, I agree with the basic service being per-call blocking.
>> If you want per-call blocking on YOUR phone that's fine. I don't
>> see why they can't let the customer have his/her choice.

> I don't want any business I deal with to have my home phone number.
> They WILL sell it to telemarketers, and there's no way I can prove who
> did it.

> IF they can't offer per-line blocking then they should drop [CallerID].

I also find free per-call a fair balance, at least for myself, as I am
*usually* willing to give my number when I call, but there seem to be
quite a few who strongly oppose this -- although net users are not a
very random sample -- so I think per-line should be available to those
who request it and pay a nominal premium (as with unlisted number).

In the cited article Padgett went on to say "I doubt that additional
features (just like unlisted numbers) will be available for those who
need them." but from context I think he meant "I don't doubt"; and
although he didn't say "chargeable" most options are.  One proposal
has been to include per-line with the fee for unlisted, or maybe a
discount for unlisted + per-line, as with >1 Custom Calling option.
If so many subscribers get per-line as to make CallerID "worthless",
which I don't expect, I would take that as a referendum reversing the
FCC decision; not all rules are made officially.

I find the arguments *for* requiring per-call convincing anyway, and
well-presented in the Report and Order, but then para 43 jumps from "a
federal per line blocking requirement ... is not the best policy
choice ...." to "Thus, carriers *may not offer* per line blocking ...
on interstate calls."  I think this is the least-supported finding.
And if the originating LEC can't determine in- or out-of-state
termination of inter-LATA calls and given a single-bit privacy
indicator, it apparently prevents per-line for in-state inter-LATA, an
unacknowledged encroachment on state jurisdictions?

However, Robert, if you can successfully do business by phone without
giving *anyone* your number, I'm impressed.  *I* probably wouldn't
accept your calls.  And as has been discussed often, you can't protect
your number from any 800/900 user *unless* restrictions on use of ANI
data like those in the order take effect.

> Emergencies are no excuse; 911's have had number ID for years.

Actually I believe E911 (and B911?) requires special trunks and CPE,
and as the order discussed at some length (paras 32, 35, 37, 43)
although citing only Coast Guard and poison centers, there can well be
emergency services that can only afford/justify POTS connections.
But if you agree to this exception it's easily implemented:
 - originating carrier sets PI, and may be allowed to do so per-line;
 - all carriers still must transport calling number and PI (free);
 - terminating carrier is allowed to override PI on delivery to an
emergency service -- although carriers or FCC/PUCs must then decide
who deserves this, almost the kind of question they seemed unwilling
to handle in paras 39-40 (per-line blocking for "special needs"); on
the other hand, they don't *seem* to have much trouble now deciding
who is a valid law-enforcement agency?

Arguably there is still a privacy violation if you call something
without realizing it is a "caller-id override" emergency service.
Ideally if distinctive and standard codes could be established, something
like 999-xxxx or 811-xxxx maybe, it would solve this *and* be easier to
publicize, teach, and use away from home, just as basic 911 was an
improvement over 7D for police etc.  On the other hand if 911 centers
grow to handle more and more of these other functions, as they seem to
be gradually doing -- and set up *effective* plans to deal with power
outages, equipment malfunctions, and telco network trouble, fer G*d's
sake -- the question is moot; that's even more obvious and convenient.

There has also been mention of blocking from women's shelters, recently
by [e-mail] (Carl B. Page), 6 May, in 14.205.  I assume this is
only an issue when the women call their batterers; ordinary business
e.g. ordering pizza isn't especially private.  I don't understand why
they want to hide that they're calling from *a* shelter; I should
think that adds a sense of official protection.  In fact unless this
is part of a confidence-(re)building strategy I would wonder if the
woman should talk at all to the abuser.  What I *would* want is maybe
to block harassing callbacks, by outgoing-only service or by listing
under some headquarters office or the police, as they do need to get
calls (unsolicited or referred?)  from potential clients; and more
important to keep their *location* secret to prevent stalking/following,
kidnapping, etc.

Although I have not seen mention in these discussions, I consider
shelters for children to be in the same situation, and know one,
Covenant House, that has widely publicized their 800 number for years.
Am I missing something?  And before someone ties this to a recent
thread, yes, harassing calls are punishable anyway, *if traced*; so is
battering; but I agree prevention is cheaper, faster, and pleasanter,
I just don't think per-line blocking is the only way.

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 94 07:22:39 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike D. Schomburg)
Subject: Re: Nationwide CID, CLASS, etc.


In Telecom Digest V14#229, Jim Derdzinski <[e-mail]>
said:

> I have a couple of questions about CLASS services.
> I know that the FCC has issued a ruling making is possible for
> long-distance numbers to work with the Caller ID service that the
> various LEC's are now offering.  Will the long-distance number
> identification work with the other CLASS services like Automatic
> Callback, Call Screening, Repeat Dialing, Call Tracing, etc?

Delivery of the calling number is accomplished by a thing known as
Signaling System #7 (SS7), a sort of packet network (functionally)
independent of the "bearer" channels for voice, data, etc. While the
SS7 connectivity required to provide interLATA caller ID is also
necessary to support the CLASS services mentioned above, it is not yet
sufficient. Various standards bodies are now working on the
enhancements to the SS7 protocol which will bring about interLATA
CLASS (over and above caller ID).

In a nutshell, there are two broad sections of SS7: the Integrated
Services Digital Network User Part (ISUP) which supports call set-up
and tear-down, and the Transaction Capabilities Application Part
(TCAP) which supports messages not directly related to call set-up
(such as the invocation of CLASS features). SS7 needs to be modified
to deal with the presence of multiple signaling networks which may be
encountered across interLATA networks. TCAP messages have no trouble
invoking CLASS services between SS7-capable exchanges within a single
LEC's network, but the situation becomes much more complex when one or
more IXCs are interposed, and the far-end LEC may or may not be
equipped to handle the particular feature being activated.

The mechanism proposed (by Bellcore, I believe) to solve this
signaling problem is called Intermediate Signaling Network
Identification (ISNI) and will most likely involve a coordinated
implementation by LECs and IXCs. As far as I know, there has not been
any scheduling or industry coordinating activity yet.

> Another question I have concerns an oddity I have encountered here (in
> the land of Ameritech).  It seems that when an older CO is finally
> upgraded to work with CID, the calling numbers originating from it
> will display, but Distinctive Ringing, Automatic Callback and the like
> will not work with these numbers.  Is there some kind of update that
> has to done to the equipment to register new CO's and such?  (This, I
> guess, may be related to the above.)

This probably is simply a delay on Ameritech's part before turning up
the full feature set. Normally, if they can support caller ID, they
can support the rest. Possibly they chose not to include the software
necessary for the other features.

While I've got the channel open, Pat, I would like to mention that I
disagree with your contention that it is absolutely necessary to staff
every office 24x7x365. I spent six years managing Network Operations
at a fairly large (ok, not really large) LEC, and I believe that with
proper management, an operations center can guarantee good service
(and no COs burning down).

The concerns you have stated are quite valid, and obviously many
accidents have in fact happened. What I mean by proper management is
that the concerns of (so-called) peon employees must be heard and
acted upon. As a manager, I always tried to be sympathetic to ALL
employees' ideas, and believe me they are aware of the flaws and gaps
in the best plans that management concocts.  If you integrate the
organization from the (so-to-speak) bottom up, you gain powerful
allies who will look out for you, instead of giving you the
well-deserved reward to your arrogance. I'm sure you have run into
telephone workers who are highly skilled and care deeply about
providing high-quality service.

As has been pointed out many times here in the Digest, when you have a
monopoly there is no real need for management to stress quality. What
recourse does the customer have?


Mike Schomburg   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Pete Farmer)
Subject: Re: Wireless Data Services
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 10:40:41 -0800
Organization: Tetherless Access Ltd.


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

> Just out of curiousity, what does 'Tetherless Access Ltd.' do?  (If
> that's an inappropriate question, Pat, my apologies.)

Tetherless Access Ltd. (TAL) is a Silicon Valley start-up developing
products/services using spread-spectrum packet radio technology to
deliver full-time, high-speed (64 Kbps+) Internet connections over
distances of up to 20 miles.  Our economics are very favorable when
compared to leased-line or frame-relay solutions.

Our product will hit the streets for full-scale commercial trials
later in 1994.

If that's an inappropriate answer, Pat, my apologies!  ;-)


Peter J. Farmer            Internet: [e-mail]
VP, Marketing              Voice:    415-321-5968
Tetherless Access Ltd.     Fax:      [phone]
Fremont, CA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not at all inappropriate. And please
tell us more as the day approaches when you take it public.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Terry Gilson)
Subject: Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip
Date: 17 May 1994 04:59:23 GMT
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


On May 13, 1994 Carl Oppedahl wrote:

> One hopes that some day in the US there will be more than two
> providers for portable phone service, to bring the price down.

In every market area there are presumably two RCC's, however, at least
in California, there are more than two providers to get your service
from.

Cellular resellers buy airtime at wholesale rates from the carriers.
They then sell it, usually at discounted rates, to a user who then has
a choice between the two carriers and a wider choice of rate plans.

In California, resellers file their rates in the form of a tariff with
the Public Utilities Commission. They bill their users directly. The
carrier is basically guaranteed payment since the reseller pays the
carriers whether the customer pays their bill to the reseller or not.
Resellers offer all the services of the carrier (with the possible
exception of a 24 hour 611 answering service for billing questions)
plus a few services of their own.

Since in most MSA's and many RSA's, cellular pricing is controlled by
a "Duopoly", both carriers offering near-identical rates. Resellers
offer a breath of fresh air to users looking for an alternative.

Even though the reseller *should* be considered by the carrier as one
of their best customers (even though it is at a lower rate, it *is*
guaranteed payment), they sometimes regard them as an unwelcome
competitor due to the reseller's pricing advantages.

At least in some areas of the U.S. there are more than two providers
of cellular service.


Terry Gilson         [e-mail]
DCN Cellular         [e-mail]
Westlake Village CA  [e-mail]
805-379-3333     805-379-9779 F

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

From: [e-mail] (Marcial Dumlao)
Subject: Re: Inteljak Wireless Phone Jak System
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 07:20:39 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lord of
Love!) writes:

> I bought this thing and it was completely useless!  Save your money
> and aggravation by buying a good cordless phone.

> [e-mail]

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Care to elaborate on the main problems
> you were having?   PAT]

I bought a wireless phonejak and it's okay if no other noise pro-
ducing appliance (i.e., blender, central heater, etc) is on.  I'm
using it to connect my modem and have two surge protectors connected
to it before connecting to the house circuit.  You will get static
(noise) when a major appliance is turned on, so if you do decide to
get one, plan on working late night when nothing else is on.  Phones
work but again, you'll pickup alot of noise when something is energized.


Marcial B. Dumlao   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Except that even late at night, in the
winter for example the furnace will be operating, or in the summer the
air conditioning will be on.  Apparently there is never an escape from
the noise sources.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein)
Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes?  I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate
Date: 17 May 1994 21:41:20 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk])


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Anton
Sherwood) writes:

> Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 00:16:50 GMT
> From: [e-mail] (Anton Sherwood)
> Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes?  I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate
> Organization: Crackpots for a Better Tomorrow

> Speaking of NNX and NXX, is there a letter for the set {0,1}?  I
> haven't seen one used.  If (strangely) there isn't a convention, how
> about B for Bit, so old-style area codes are NBX?

Sometimes the set 0, 1 is represented as "Y", thus an old-style number
was NYX-NNX-XXXX, and a new-style number is NXX-NXX-XXXX.  Also "R"
means "2-8", and is used in private networks where the ETN topology
reserves 9; thus some on-net dialing is RNX-XXXX.


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
k1io             or [e-mail]   voice:[phone]

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

From: Don Berryman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: SONET Management Standards?
Date: Tue, 17 May 94 14:36:20 CDT


> Can some knowledgeable soul throw light on the following questions:

I'll try ( I couldn't find a knowledgeable soul) --

> - What protocol stack is specified by the SONET standard for
> Operation, Administration, Maintainence & Provisioning? [I suspect the
> answer is full blown CMIP, ACSE, ROSE as in Bellcore TR-303]

Yes a full blown CMIP, ACSE, ROSE but with a full 7 layer protocol
stack (Not a short stack with non-standard convergence function as
defined in Bellcore TR-303). Bellcore TA-NWT-000253 Issue 8 has
Bellcore's latest view (adapted from the SSSI).

The latest draft of ANSI T1.105.04-199x "American National Standard
for Telecommunications Synchronous Optical Network (SONET): Data
Communication Channel Protocols and Architectures" Defines the
following 7 layer protocol stack:

    ---------------------------
    CMISE-ISO  9595/9596
    ROSE: X.219/X.229
    ACSE-X.217/X.227
    ---------------------------
    X.216/X.226 - ASN.1 Basic Encoding Rules: X.209
    ---------------------------
    X.215/X.225
    ---------------------------
    TP4: ISO 8073/8073 ADD 2
    ---------------------------
    CNLP:ISO 8473/ISO 9542
    ---------------------------
    LAPD: ITU Q.921
    ---------------------------
    DCC
    s---------------------------

The SONET Interoperability Forum (SIF) is actively working on
interoperability issues for SONET.


Don Berryman   [e-mail] [phone]
ADC Telecommunications, Inc.  Minneapolis, MN 55435

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

From: Don Berryman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator?
Date: Tue, 17 May 94 16:00:05 CDT


> Does anyone know what an SME or synchronous modem eliminator does??

A synchronous modem eliminator allows two local synchronous DTEs to be
connected to each other without modems by swapping signals and providing
a clock signal.

This is basically the same logical function as a null modem cable in
the async world.


Don Berryman   [e-mail] [phone]
ADC Telecommunications, Inc.  Minneapolis, MN 55435

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

From: [e-mail] (K. M. Peterson)
Subject: Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator?
Date: 17 May 1994 22:01:25 GMT
Organization: KMPeterson/Boston


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Victoria Matho) writes:

> Does anyone know what an SME or synchronous modem eliminator does??

An SME is used in connecting two "DTE"s (computers) that use a
synchronous communications method like SDLC or BSC.

Synchronization between that type of equipment is generally handled by
the modem generating a "clock pulse".  The SME allows you to connect
together two computers without using a modem.  If you're used to using
asynchronous communications (like terminal or PC to simple modem),
you'd just use a "null modem cable" to connect them, because they
don't require clocking.  But synchronous equipment needs an external
clock to keep them in phase, and the clock in the SME takes care of
that.

Clear 'nuff?


K. M. Peterson   email: [e-mail]
phone: [phone] voice
       [phone] fax

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 94 8:47:26 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 codes


> From: Gregory P. Monti <[e-mail]>
> Bellcore will need to negotiate with (and adjudicate conflicts among)
> the 126 carriers who have requested 437 of the possible 792 NXX codes
> within the 500 NPA.  Bellcore would probably start assignments within
> a few months.

This makes me wonder about the "792 NXX codes". Since these numbers
will ALWAYS be dialled with the preceeding "500", why should the
exchange codes be limited to being NXX? They could easily be XXX
format, giving 1000 (000 thru 999) possible "A/C 500" exchanges.

As I thought of that, it also caused me to wonder the same thing about
800 numbers. They, too, are always dialed with the leading "800", and
so that number-space could be a full XXX-XXXX range too. The only
thing stopping it is the expectation of the users and how the software
is written. Are there 800-XXX exchanges in use now?


Will

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott D Fybush)
Subject: Re: New Area Codes Assigned
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 01:51:05 GMT


[e-mail] (Tom Ward) writes:

> Other new NXX NPA's assigned but not listed in this handbook are:

>217    630    Illinois
 ^^^

Is this new?  All the postings thus far about the new 630 NPA have
suggested that it will be a split or overlay from 708, not 217.  Is
217 that crowded already?  I know 708 is.


Scott Fybush - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 16:43:29 +0500
Subject: Re: Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


In article <[e-mail]> Gregory P. Monti <gmonti@cap.
gwu.edu> writes:

> The May 13 issue of the newsletter {Communications Daily} reports that
> Bellcore will hold seminars on the changes to the North American
> Numbering Plan over the next six months.  They will be in Washington
> June 16-17, Chicago Aug. 4-5, Dallas Sept. 15-16, and San Francisco
> Nov. 10-11.

> The story quotes North American Numbering Plan Administration Director
> Ronald Conners as saying that, "telephone company switches and
> customers' PBXs may need software or hardware upgrades or, in some
> cases, may have to be replaced."  The story doesn't mention costs, but
> gives a number for information: 800 TEACH-ME (800 832-2463).

   The Bellcore Digest from April 94 indicates the seminar fees are
$765, including one lunch and materials.  They appear to be 1-1/2 day
seminars.  FAX requests for seminar information can be made to:

 [phone]    Send name, mail address, telephone and title.
               You can also request contact by a representative.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: GTE Analog Pocket Phone
Date: 17 May 1994 22:43:39 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


That sounds a lot like the PCS systems being tested by GTE and other
companies around the US. GTE, Amertech, ATT, OKI and Motorola have
been testing. From what I have read it is as a lot like the cellular
phone of today and in the tests it does become a Cellular phone away
from its base. What I believe is planned is a lot of cells that are
closer then the ones today. There is a real operating system in Texas
becasue of the distance from anything. There have been several articles
here and in print on it.


Steven H. Lichter

Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS
[phone] 12/24/96/14.4 V32/V42bis

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #233
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16794;
          18 May 94 5:58 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14344; Wed, 18 May 94 02:43:10 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14335; Wed, 18 May 94 02:43:08 CDT
Date: Wed, 18 May 94 02:43:08 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #234

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 18 May 94 02:43:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 234

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question (K. M. Peterson)
    Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question (Fred Goldstein)
    Re: Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming (Paul A. Lee)
    Re: Telecoms Training (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: Cellular Privacy (Sam Spens Clason)
    Re: GSM and Airbags (Kaita Seikku)
    Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential (Dale R. Worley)
    Re: "Private" Message on CID Box (James Taranto)
    Re: Loop to Ground Start converters (Jay Hennigan)
    Re: Palestinian Country Code (Dik T. Winter)
    Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (David Josephson)
    Re: 800 Number Billback (Jonathan Loo)
    Re: 800 Number Billback (John R. Levine)
    Re: Reach Out and Pay Someone (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (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 including Compuserve and GEnie.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 00:39:59 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
EDU (Ken Shirriff) writes:

> It used to be that phone numbers had the syntax 123-456-7890 or (123)
> 456-7890. Now I see lots of numbers of the form [phone]. When
> did this new trend occur, and what does the "+" signify?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The +1 indicates the country code for the
> USA and Canada along with countries using the 809 area code. By coincidence
> '1' is also the access code we dial when placing a long distance number,
> but in this instance it represents the country code.   PAT]

Pat, you are correct as far as you went, but you only answered part of
the question.  The "+" in this context means "dial the international
access code here".  01 or 011 here in country 1, 00 in some other countries.


Rich Greenberg            Work: ETi Solutions, Oceanside & L.A. CA 310-348-7677
N6LRT   TinselTown, USA   Play: [e-mail]                  310-649-0238

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

From: [e-mail] (K. M. Peterson)
Subject: Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question
Date: 17 May 1994 22:04:25 GMT
Organization: KMPeterson/Boston


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
EDU (Ken Shirriff) writes:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The +1 indicates the country code for the
> USA and Canada along with countries using the 809 area code. By coincidence
> '1' is also the access code we dial when placing a long distance number,
> but in this instance it represents the country code.   PAT]

Also, as I understand the recommendation (E.123), the "+" is the only
punctuation permitted ... so, the number should really be +1 213 456
7890 (no hyphen).


K. M. Peterson   email: [e-mail]
phone: [phone] voice
       [phone] fax

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk])
Subject: Re: Telephone Number Syntax Question
Date: 17 May 1994 21:39:37 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk])


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
EDU (Ken Shirriff) writes:

> It used to be that phone numbers had the syntax 123-456-7890 or (123)
> 456-7890. Now I see lots of numbers of the form [phone]. When
> did this new trend occur, and what does the "+" signify?

It signifies "when dialing from another country, insert your local
international direct dialing prefix, followed by this country code".
Thus +1 when dialed from most European countries means "001", while
from the US it means "1" (generally), and from some countries it could
be practically anything, followed by a 1.  Likewise +44 for calls to
the UK, which from the US or Canada means "01144".


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
k1io             or [e-mail]   voice:[phone]

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 12:29:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Bellcore NANP Seminars Coming
From: Paul A. Lee  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


Regarding the Bellcore NANP Information Series Seminars mentioned in
TELECOM Digest V 14 #229: For those whose interest may be determined
by the cost of the seminar, I quote from the Bellcore TEC brochure
describing the seminar series:

  "The $765.00 fee includes all seminar materials, lunch on Day 1, and
   refreshments."

Based on the locations and hotels cited in the brochure, I would
expect a room charge of $100-$150 per night, in addition to the
seminar and other costs.


Paul A. Lee                           Voice  414 357-1409
Telecommunications Analyst              FAX  [phone]
Woolworth Corporation            CompuServe  70353,566
   INTERNET  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Ptasnik)
Subject: Re: Telecoms Training
Date: 17 May 1994 18:45:44 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


[e-mail] (Andrew Hartridge) writes:

> We are just about to expand into a new building and I find myself
> faced with the problem of hooking up 1000 phone sets and many data
> ports.  I have not had any experience with doing a new installation.
> I've always just had to make do with what I have inherited.

Get some help.  This does not sound like a project for a do-it-yourself'er .

> Question: Are there any training organizations out there, or reference
> materials on 'How to set up and configure telecomms systems' ... e.g.
> pros and cons of different wiring closet configurations?

Call 1-800 LIBRARY and ask for the current Teleconnect book catalog.
It is chock full of just the kind of thing you will need, should you
decide to proceed on your own.


Dave Ptasnik     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Sam Spens Clason)
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy
Date: 17 May 1994 18:14:50 GMT
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden


In article <[e-mail]>, Mike Borsetti, Cellular
One/San Francisco <[e-mail]> writes:

> Additionally, the TDMA digital standard supports encription, which
> will be available sometime in the near future.  Today's phones will
> only need a simple reprogramming to take advantage of encryption.

GSM has always been encrypted, setting up a call is based on encryption.


Sam Spens Clason, <A HREF="http://www.nada.kth.se/~d92-sam/">Web</A>

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

From: [e-mail] (Kaita Seikku)
Subject: Re: GSM and Airbags
Date: 17 May 1994 12:46:04 GMT
Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Computing Centre


David Breneman (daveb@jaws) wrote:

> This story is indeed bogus.  The only way ABS could "disable" the
> brakes would be if it took out a wrench and unbolted the pedal.  The
> infamous unintended accelleration legend is entirely the result of

[ bull cut ]

C'mon, you should know better: when ever there's software, ther's a
chance ... (which doesn't imply that this would have ever happened).


Seikku

internet : [e-mail]  answering machine->pager : [phone]
real life: Seikku P. Kaita                 phone (or FAX) : [phone]
visit at : Saastajankuja 4b32 TAMPERE         On The Air  : OH3NYB
            ^^  ^ ^  ..these four a's should have double dots above them,
           since they are front vowels (as in word 'that'). Isn't it a pity
           that in English the word GHOTI can be pronounced like word FISH.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale R. Worley)
Subject: Re: Radio Frequency Interference on Residential Line
Date: 17 May 94 19:51:59
Organization: National Institute for Lameness, Cambridge, MA, USA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bennett Z.
Kobb) writes:

> The FCC has been very clear on its position about telephone interference.

> The agency says that "filters cannot be relied upon to eliminate tele-
> phone interference."

Though I've had luck trying to get rid of interference on my line by
using a filter.  However, it was a strange sort of interference: It
was only present when my modem was off-hook.  It turns out that the
problem was a strong local radio station was coupling RF into the
line, which went into the modem (when it was off-hook), was *rectified
into audio*, and sent back out the line.  Really ugly.

People have asked me about this before, and only now have I found the
information I wanted to tell them: The filter I used was from K-COM.
They have 1-line (RJ-11, $14.95) and 2-line (RJ-12, I think, 19.95)
models.  Their phone number is 216-325-2110.


Dale Worley    Dept. of Math., MIT    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (James Taranto)
Subject: Re: "Private" Message on CID Box
Date: 18 May 1994 01:16:37 GMT
Organization: The Bad Taranto


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

> Some of the calls I receive from areas that don't yet have Caller ID
> service are picked up by my CID boxes as "private" (blocked) rather
> that "out-of-area", even though the calling parties haven't blocked
> thier numbers. This will be a problem when I install a blocked call
> rejecting CID box.  Have others found this to happen? Solutions?

 From what I've been able to tell, calls form central offices that are
Caller ID-ready but where Caller ID has not yet been activated come up
"private."  You might ask someone calling you from one of these areas
to try dialing *67 first and see if his number comes up.  If it still
comes up "private," then there is probably no fix except to wait until
Caller ID is online throughout your area -- but even then, when Caller
ID goes nationwide, there will probably be central offices making the
transition for a long time to come, so the blocking box might prove
impracticable.


Cheers,

James Taranto  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jay Hennigan)
Subject: Re: Loop to Ground Start Converters
Date: 17 May 1994 15:50:42 -0700
Organization: Regional Access Information Network (RAIN)


Our Illustrious Editor noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It has never been clear to me why, if a
> person or company wants mostly ground-start lines with an occassional
> line operating on a loop-start basis they simply do not order those
> lines from telco in that fashion rather than going to the trouble of
> purchasing equipment specifically to convert one to the other. After
> all, isn't the default from telco loop-start lines? They certainly do
> not charge any extra to send them from the CO that way.   PAT]

A common use for such items is power-failure phones.  A company will
have ground start lines installed for a PBX, but wants a backup phone
to work in case the PBX fails.  Emergency phones, elevator phones and
alarm dialers designed for loop-start only need such a converter when
used in an environment where the only phone service is ground-start
and a station off of the PBX is not practical or desirable.


Jay

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

From: [e-mail] (Dik T. Winter)
Subject: Re: Palestinian Country Code
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 22:55:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bob
Goudreau) writes:

> (I can't find any listing for Gaza in the current Israel listing.)

Gaza is 51.

dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj  amsterdam, nederland, [phone]
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn  amsterdam, nederland; e-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator?
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 23:37:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Victoria Matho <vmatho@mason1.
gmu.edu> wrote:

> Does anyone know what an SME or synchronous modem eliminator does??

I can't resist answering the question -exactly- as posed!  so:

Yes, I do.

Now, for a -serious- explaination,

A 'sync' data circuit is different from a standard 'async' serial
circuit, in two ways -- 1) no start/stop 'framing bits', and 2) it
doesn't operate at any specific 'baud rate' -- instead, a 'clock'
signal is present on another wire, defining when the 'data' wire is to
be sampled/driven.  Now, the question rises, "where does this 'clock'
signal come from.  'sync' devices may use "internal" (meaning -they-
provide the clock) or "external" (meaning that it comes from an
outside-the-box source) clocking.  A normal serial circuit consists of
a DTE at one end, and a DCE at the other.

By convention, the DCE is the 'clock' source (i.e. DCE uses "internal"
clocking, and the DTE uses 'external' clocking [from the DCE]).
Side-note, there are -two- separate clocks, one for the data going in
each direction. The DCE provides -both- signals.  These contortions
are necessary for those situations where the circuit is time-division-
multiplexed into a higher-speed digital circuit -- when the data (each
individual bit, that is) is assured of arriving at -exactly- the right
time, it can be simply 'interleaved' into the composite data-stream,
without need for buffering.  Simplifies the h/w design considerably.

SO, to connect to -sync- DTE together, you need, not only a 'null
modem' (to invert the TX/RX and signaling leads), but -something- to
supply the 'clock' to -both- DTE.  *That* is a SME's function --
null-modem plus clock generator.


Robert Bonomi

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

From: [e-mail] (David Josephson)
Subject: Re: New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (Bay Area)
Organization: a2i network
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 23:50:50 GMT


In <[e-mail]> Henry Mensch <[e-mail]>
writes:

> Moral of the story: to use GTE's new gimmicky directory assistance dial 411
> or 555 1212 ... to get the real stuff dial *6543. Your mileage may vary,
> especially outside the Bay Area.

And Pat wrote,

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Henry, a question and a comment: exactly
> what does this *6543 hook get you into?  You said 'new, gimmicky directory
> assistance' which leads me to wonder, did not GTE offer directory assist-
> ance like any other telco until recently, i.e. 'new'?. Is the cellular
> division of the company offering a new service and intercepting calls to
> 411 or 555-1212 which formerly had gone to a full directory bureau and
> providing some limited sub-set of the directory?

Note that GTE Mobilnet has almost no connection with a GTE operating
co. except the same corporate parent. Indeed they are intercepting
calls to 411, offering, for sixty cents plus airtime, to flip through
a paper phonebook and then connect you to the number without your
having to dial it yourself. The oprs were so lame that they needed a
supervisor to find the number for a newsstand at a hotel. Formerly 411
was just routed to normal telco 411 from a trunk in the subscriber's
home area code; the DA opr had no idea it was a cell call. *6543 seems
to do that, still, and probably carries the same 25 cent surcharge
that it did before.


David Josephson - Josephson Engineering - San Jose, CA
<[e-mail]>

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 14:20:15 -0400
From: Jonathan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback


Pat Townson wrote:

> The 'way they can charge you for calling an 800 number' is the same
> way AT&T can charge for it. For example you can call AT&T's 800 number
> to put through a collect call to someone or to charge a call to your
> credit card. Merely because you originated it via an 800 number does
> not mean charges cannot be incurred for the call as a result. In the
> case of the Information Providers who use an 800 number in this way,
> *someone* in your firm called the 800 number and gave the answering
> operator permission to place the charges on your line.

> Although you can request a block on the line against future charges of
> this sort, you cannot legally refuse to pay the charges already incurred
> since tariffs plainly state you are responsible for the use of your
> instruments.

How does AT&T charge for 800 calls?  Either they charge it to a credit
card or to somebody who accepts the charges, but if you call 800
CALL-ATT then they do not normally allow you to charge the call to the
number that you are on.  They can charge collect and third-number
calls because they are a telephone company.  Most information
providers are not operator services providers, and not even AT&T
charges calls placed through its 800 number, to the originating
number.

Also, I do not understand that "you cannot legally refuse to pay the
charges already incurred since tariffs plainly state your are
responsible for the use of your instruments."  Where in the tariffs
does it state that there can be a charge ON YOUR TELEPHONE BILL for
making calls TO an 800 number?  I thought that the very idea of an 800
number is for calls to that number to be toll-free.


Jonathan D. Loo


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are not being charged for the call
to the 800 number. That part is free to you the caller with the recipient
paying for the carriage. You are being charged for the return collect
call the Information Provider makes to you, which the AOS operator asked
if you would accept the charges for. Admittedly sometimes they do not
bother to call back but simply continue the conversation with you on the
same connection, but none the less the AOS operator at some point asked
if you would accept the charges for the call; when accepted, it then is
like any other collect call.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 94 11:14 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'way they can charge you for calling
> an 800 number' is the same way AT&T can charge for it. ...
> In the case of the Information Providers who use an 800
> number in this way, *someone* in your firm called the 800 number and
> gave the answering operator permission to place the charges on your line.

Aw, come on.  Dollars to donuts these crooks put through a charge on
every call that comes in to their 800 number, permission or no permission,
and they never, ever make an actual collect callback.  (Consider Kath
Mulholland's frequent messages about these charges on trunks at UNH
that can't even receive incoming calls.)

Also, as was hashed out in Telecom a while ago, there's no reason to
believe that the person making an 800 call, or any other kind of call,
has the authority to charge anything at all other than that direct
dialed outgoing call to the ANI number.  Consider PBX trunks, for example.

Any business that bills based on 800 ANI is basically committing
fraud, and the sooner they're put out of business the better.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I am not sure I disagree with you
John. They are sleaze from the beginning ... rotten to the core. But,
they do (via their AOS) have the right to place collect calls at the
rate charged for same by the AOS, and they do claim they can back up
their authority for the collect call by documenting that someone at
the 'called number' (although as pointed out they rarely return the
call, they merely continue the conversation on the existing connection)
accepted the charge and authorized the billing. Often times as Kath
has pointed out, the person authorizing the charge had no authority to
do so. This then gets down to the legal question of whether or not a
company which normally requires purchase orders for all purchases is
obligated to pay for a purchase made without authority (or purchase
order) by an employee. Maybe they do, and maybe they don't. Under
telco tariffs and tradition, verbal authorization for a collect call
is the norm, and the AOS people -- unfortunatly I might add -- have
full rights in this regard. I agree they should be put out of business
however.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 16:03:26 EDT
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Reach Out and Pay Someone
Organization: Penn State University


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says:

> AMERITECH GIVING MONEY TO PAY PHONE, CALLING CARD USERS

> CHICAGO, May 10 /PRNewswire/ --

> Ameritech representatives will be incognito at hundreds of its
                                    ^^^^^^^^^
> publicly accessible pay phones on certain dates through the end of
> July, on the prowl for the first person to make a coin call during
> predetermined time periods.  The lucky caller will be asked to scratch
> off an instant-win ticket that will tell them how much they won.  Any
> of Ameritech's publicly accessible pay phones in the Midwest could be
> selected.

So you won't be able to tell them apart from the Shoulder Surfers?
I'm not sure I'd want to interact with any one hanging out by a public
phone.  Thank you very little.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 18 May 94 00:08:16 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number


Many years ago (and I wrote to the Digest then) my office and others
had extensions of the form 66ab, and got a rash of calls intended for
extensions of the form 6abc.  A call intended for me from an AT&T
office went to the wrong number for that reason.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I have also pointed out in the past,
years ago when I worked at the credit card billing office my extension
on the centrex system was 7265.  The bar and grill downstairs where many
employees went for lunch (or to idle away the afternoon hiding from their
supervisor) had the phone number 726-5xxx. I could set my watch by it:
everyday at 11:30 -- the start of the first lunch hour -- my phone would
ring. I would answer; a voice on the other end would say 'damn' (or worse
or more crude, depending on who) and click off. They were calling down-
stairs to get their lunch order started and had forgotten to dial '9'
for an outside line. Then at 12:30, the start of the second lunch hour,
the process would be repeated with one or two more calls like that.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #234
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17088;
          18 May 94 6:41 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14825; Wed, 18 May 94 03:28:09 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14816; Wed, 18 May 94 03:28:07 CDT
Date: Wed, 18 May 94 03:28:07 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #235


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 18 May 94 03:28:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 235

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Bell Canada Equal Access Update (Bell News via Dave Leibold)
    The Future of Telephony (Part 2) ([e-mail])
    Information Request on Global Products (Garland Sharratt)
    AP Reporter in Eastern Europe Needs Assistance (Frank Bajak)
    European Phone Line Specs (Dexter Wm. Francis)
    How to Contact Telegroup of Fairfield? (Joseph Doo)
    Re: Cable Dates in History (B. Z. Lederman)
    Re: Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine (Paul A. Lee)
    Re: Cellular Privacy? (Timothy L. Kay)
    A Telephone Exchange Open Day (Arthur Marsh)
    Re: Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 1 (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 including Compuserve and GEnie.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 17 May 94 00:31:06 -0500
Subject: Bell Canada Equal Access Update
Organization: FidoNet: The Super Continental - North York, Canada


[from Bell News, 16 May 94]

We'll roll out Equal Access orders over six weeks.

Taking advantage of an innovative approach offered by the CRTC, Bell
and our competitors have agreed in principle to a plan to phase-in the
introduction of equal access orders over a period of six weeks,
beginning July 1, 1994.

Under equal access, customers can select an alternate long distance
company and dial "1" + the area code + the telephone number" to make a
long distance call on that network - just as they presently do with
Bell.

The conversion to equal access is a massive undertaking for Bell from
network, systems and human resources perspectives.

So while Bell has met its commitment to having the technical capability
in place to offer equal access in the vast majority of our digial
switches for July 1, taking a phased-in approach was crucial in order
to protect the integrity of the network and ensure that there would be
no service disruptions for customers.

In late March and early April, Bell approached carriers and resellers
who were seeking equal access and proposed a roll-out plan that would
see its competitors' initial primary interexchange carrier (PIC) orders
processed in an incremental manner over a 13-week period (approximately
110,000 PIC orders per week).

In response to objections voiced by some competitors, the CRTC
initiated a new "staff review" procedure -- basically a meeting,
mediated by commission staff, that gathered representatives from all
the parties in "an informal and efficient process to identify the
issues requiring resolution, to establish the pertinent facts and to
facilitate resolution of the outstanding issues."

The two day session, held on April 25 and 26 in Hull Quebec, involved
a "lively exchange of views" according to Barry Dixon, vice-president,
Carrier Services, who headed up Bell's delegation.  Other members of
the team were Jennifer Moore, Phil Rogers and Bill McIntyre, and
Stentor representatives John Elliot, Jean-Francois Leger and Ernie
Goldberg.

At the end of the session, commission staff issued a non-binding
opinion regarding the appropriate resolution of the issues under
debate.

Bell has since confirmed our willingness to implement the staff
recommendations.

Competitors agreed to provide Bell with detailed forecasts of their
requirements by May 11, and to closely adhere to consumer protection
requirements for obtaining proper authorization from customers wishing
to be changed to a competitor.

In return, Bell will increase our processing of PIC orders to an
average of 200,000 per week, which will shorten the roll-out period
from three months to six weeks. We will also attempt to increase this
capacity if the processing goes smoothly.

There was general agreement that resolution of PIC disputes and
problem situations between competitors would be streamlined until
after the initial implementation period.

In a more controversial part of the opinion, staff recommended that
Bell -- unlike the other carriers and resellers -- not receive
notification that customers have switched to other carriers, until
after the initial PIC processing period is completed. This period is
defined as the earlier of six weeks or the time it takes to process
the PIC changes taken prior to July 1 (estimated at 1.2 million).

Since these notification reports are a primary tool for quickly
identifying and rectifying unauthorized PIC changes, the measure will
hamper Bell's ability to monitor whether safeguards to protect
customers from being moved against their consent are working. It will
also prevent Bell from getting a fast start on implementing planned
win-back activities - by approaching customers who have moved to a
competitor to attempt to "win" them back.

Other features of Bell's implementation plan include:

* pre-processing a total of 10,000 PIC change orders beginning on
June 24 in Bell Ontario and June 27 in Bell Quebec; these orders will
actually take effect on July 1.

* processing 1,000 PIC orders per day for all carriers and resellers
(including Bell), plus a proportionate share of the remaining
processing capacity, based on the actual number of PIC orders each
company has in the system.

Bell will work closely with each of the companies involved in order to
monitor and manage the implementation process to the benefit of all
parties.

Adjustments to speed up the roll-out will be considered as all parties
gain experience with the process.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: The Future of Telephony (Part 2)
Date: Tue, 17 May 94 22:38:06 PDT


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Part one of this article appeared awhile
ago in the Digest.  PAT]

Here are some more straight-line projections into the future:

ADVERTISING -- the cheapest long-distance phone rates will be for a
service in which each call is preceded by a 15-second commercial
before the connection is attempted.  Every five minutes, the
commercial reappears and is audible on both ends.  Until Congress
acts, the main use of this advertising medium will be cigarette
companies.

AROMAPHONE -- a hybrid integrated circuit will allow even the cheapest
phones to have smell input/output.  On the receive end, there's an
array of 1024 by 1024 resistive heating elements which are overprinted
with over one million polymer buttons impregnated with molecules for
all known smells.  When a button is heated, it releases some molecules.
On the transmit end, an integrated circuit gas chromatograph and array
of lasers for measuring optical absorbance detects atmospheric
molecules, and a neural network associative memory recognizes the
button or combination of buttons that would approximate the smell.
The sensor is used during receiving to sense when a button is failing
to emit enough smell.  Common smells would have more than one button,
and the aromaphone would skip to the next button when one was used up.
Sooner or later the aromaphone cartridge will need to be replaced.

AIRPLANE PHONES -- the complete ban of smoking on airplanes and the
emerging technology of the aromaphone will converge in an airplane
phone which can make aromacalls to a service which sends tobacco smoke
data to the aromaphone.  Airline aromaphones will differ from the
consumer model in that their cartridges contain mostly nicotine and
tobacco flavor component buttons.  And rather than gently wafting the
aroma toward the user using a piezoelectric fan, the airline version
has a disposable mouthpiece which is sucked on.

ADAPTIVE SPEED DIALING -- many people have very regular calling
habits, such as the wife who always calls her husband at the beginning
of his lunch hour.  With adaptive speed dialing, the phone learns to
recognize this and automatically calls him when the phone is picked up
at that time of day.  People will have to learn to be quick to hit the
switch hook if they break their usual dialing habits, to prevent the
call from going through.

QUADRAPHONIC SOUND -- a brief flurry of interest will be created in
quadraphonic sound, when an inventor promotes a set-up to turn a room
into a room-size phone with four microphones and four speakers.  The
way he'll get the rubes to put up $1000 for a phone is through a very
slick demo in which you listen to a ping-pong game through the phone.
The popularity will decline suddenly once it becomes generally known
that ping-pong games are about the only thing that gives a good
impression of three-dimensionality.  The devices will be available
cheaply at garage sales for a few years, then prices will rise as
everybody starts talking about what a great investment they are as a
collectible (rumor started by collectors who hoard them).

PAYPHONES -- to combat ever-increasing amounts of theft from payphone
coinboxes and long-distance fraud, the "Fortress" phone will be
superseded by the "Terminator" phone.  The latter is equipped with
numerous non-lethal defense options, including repellent gas,
incapacitating gas, spray-on handcuffs and legcuffs, and a transponder
embedded in a sticky semi-solid which can be attached to the top of
the head by a little robot arm which pops out of the ceiling of the
phone booth.  Security managers at central locations will use the
phone's slow-scan video to view the scene and decide which systems to
activate.  (Laws against "spring traps" prohibit automatic activation
of these systems.)

SETI -- The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) while
performing an equipment calibration check will broadcast a copy of the
David Rhodes chain letter toward a nearby star.  Several years later,
the first contact with Earth will be made by the Galactic Police
demanding that David Rhodes be turned over for trial.

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 16:58:00 -0400
From: garland (b.g.) sharratt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Request on Global Products


This is a request for any information, references, etc., you might
have on the subject of the GLOBAL PRODUCT, i.e., a product that is
sold in a more or less standardized form throughout the world.  I am
making this request in support of my University of Ottawa MBA research
project (thesis) on the subject of "Global Products in
Telecommunications".

The question to be studied is whether or not there is the opportunity,
for any given product type, in the telecommunications market for a
single global product that could be marketed world-wide, as opposed to
different products by region.  The focus is more on product design
than on promotion.

The research will determine what has been the success of other
companies trying to do the same thing, and will investigate when this
is strategically the right thing to do, and when geographic markets
must be separately addressed.

Some of the issues to be investigated are:

    * How to convince customers to buy a global (more-common,
      less-customized) product, instead of insisting on a completely
      custom solution?  (Show them it is lower priced and higher
      quality?)
    * What kind of product is suitable as a global product?
    * What kind of company can be successful with a global product?
    * What business environment factors encourage or discourage the
      adoption of a global product?

Although the main focus of my paper will be telecommunications, I am
researching the global product issue generally over all technology
fields.  Any assistance would be appreciated.


Thanks,

Garland Sharratt    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 17:55:28 EDT
From: Frank Bajak <[e-mail]>
Subject: AP Reporter in Eastern Europe Needs Assistance


Patrick,

    I've now settled in to Berlin and have embarked on a series on
how telecommunications is changing the way folks are living in eastern
Europe ... not just on how the big U.S. and European telecom giants
are moving in, but certainly giving that subject its due.

    The question is: where to start researching this monster. Any
ideas on databases available through the Internet or otherwise or
publications, preferably electronic but I can live with the others,
would be much appreciated.

    I'm looking for big picture comprehensive studies as well as
looks at specific projects.

    In addition to raw data I am also interested in hearing from
folks who are directly involved in building the telecommunications web
in eastern Europe, by which I mean from eastern Germany down through
the Balkans and east to the Urals.


Frank Bajak        [e-mail]
Associated Press    Alt-Moabit 96-C
Correspondent        10559 Berlin
(49-30)-399-925-21      fax: [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suspect you will be hearing from our
readers very soon as your note begins circulating around the net.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dexter Wm. Francis)
Subject: European Phone Line Specs
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 22:08:38 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer


The ARRL Handbook has a section that details the available range of
voltage and current on U.S. phone lines.  Does anyone know what the
numbers are for phone systems in Europe?


df

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Doo)
Subject: How to Contact Telegroup of Fairfield?
Date: 18 May 1994 06:39:20 GMT
Organization: Technet, Singapore


Is there a rep from Telegroup of Fairfield on this group?

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

From: B. Z. Lederman <lederman@intransit_tsc.vntsc.dot.gov>
Subject: Re: Cable Dates
Date: 17 May 94 16:28:13 EST
Reply-To: lederman@intransit_tsc.vntsc.dot.gov
Organization: INTRANSIT (VNTSC)


In article <[e-mail]>, Stewart Fist <100033.2145@
CompuServe.COM> writes:

> You'll probably get a couple of different replies to this query,
> because of the three attempts.  I've got a database on this trivia, so
> let me straighten it out now.  This is the main sequence of events:

    The information was interesting and useful.  But something I've
never seen clearly posted anywhere is when these early cables went OUT
of service, and why.

    I know the first one (that ran for 21 days) was burned out through
mis-use.  The rise time on the cable was very slow (it was basically a
large capacitor), and someone who didn't understand electrical
principles very well thought the signal would rise faster if it was
driven with a higher voltage.  It didn't.

    But I don't know when or why the other cables went out of service.
Does anyone?


B. Z. Lederman

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 15:00:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


I would add another course of action to Pat's suggestion of how Rodney
Weaver can deal with the automated annoyance calls. Since South
Central Bell seems to be lending only half-hearted (or half of some
_other_ anatomical entity) help in alleviating the problem, perhaps
Rodney needs to rattle a sabre at *them*, too.

I recommend sending appropriately covered copies of all correspondence,
call logs, and other documentation to the state public utilities
commission (PUC) or public service commission (PSC). If the commission
itself isn't listed in phone directories, then the state bureau of
consumer protection or consumer affairs, or a state government
information office, should be able to provide an address or phone
number. Make sure to note on letters to the telco that the agency that
regulates them is being apprised of the situation, and of the telco's
inability to provide effective assistance in solving the problem.

*That* might break the impasse, even if the commission never gets
involved.  Utilities tend to get busy when the agency that regulates
them starts taking an interest.


Paul A. Lee                           Voice  414 357-1409
Telecommunications Analyst              FAX  [phone]
Woolworth Corporation            CompuServe  70353,566
INTERNET  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Indeed, it used to be the rule in many
or most telco business offices that who got attended to first and who
had to wait was a result of who made the most noise.  Many/most telco
business offices had a teletype machine (now-a-days I suppose it is a
fax machine) to the state PUC.  People who went to the PUC with their
problems then as now found that all that really happens is the clerk
at the PUC who listens to your tale of woe simply sends it over to the
telco, admittedly to a somewhat higher ranking person than the average
service rep, for resolution. Customers who write to the president or
chairman of the telco usually get shunted to highly placed flunkies who
in turn teletype or fax the problem to the business office people.
Usually whatever telco says, the PUC accepts and that is the end of
the matter. None the less it is faster sometimes. The rule at Illinois
Bell for many years was first handle the commission complaints, then take
care of the management complaints. After that, deal with the walk-in
customers in the business office, and last, as time permits deal with
the subscribers who call on the phone! So the complaining subscriber
on the phone might have to make four or five calls to get his problem
resolved, but the Commission and/or management rarely had to ask more
than one or two times  :).  Seriously, that was the pecking order.  The
Commission did not/still does not resolve anything; they simply
request that telco get the problem straightened out. When a message
came on the dedicated teletype line from the PUC, someone always
attended to it right away, at least most of the time.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy L. Kay)
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 21:14:54 GMT


I worked for Radio Shack when I was a kid.  At that time, HBO was
broadcasting via microwaves, and many people were building non-
sanctioned receivers.  (I say non-sanctioned rather than illegal
because, as far as I know, the legality of the home-built receivers
was never tested in court.)

Most people were building their receivers using one of a very few
easily-available plans.  You could even get a professionally designed
(empty) printed circuit board for about $20.  So it was easy for me to
tell that a customer was building an HBO receiver when he asked for a
tell-tale list of parts.  I started preparing HBO bag-o'-parts ahead
of time so that I could get the customers on their way more quickly.
One item Radio Shack didn't have was microwave diodes.  I had to refer
them to another supplier for those.

One day, a memo came from Radio Shack corporate headquarters instructing
employees to have nothing to do with the construction of HBO receivers.
That memo was targeted directly at employees like me.  I will plead
the Fifth at this point.

Oh, by the way, with the next stock shipment, a new inventory item
arrived.  Yes, microwave diodes.


Timothy L. Kay


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Radio Shack/Tandy has always been in the
closet it seems regards illegal stuff. They are happy to sell it but
never want their employees to talk about it or encourage it.   PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 01:46:52
From: [e-mail] (Arthur Marsh)
Subject: A Telephone Exchange Open Day


In the lead-up to the ballot in South Australia on whether Telstra or
Optus will be a subscriber's preferred long distance carrier, Telstra
had an open day last Saturday, May 14 1994 at one of their most recent
constructions, the Flinders Street Adelaide Communications Centre.

Besides a brief visit by Telstra's CEO, Frank Blount (ex-AT&T), which
I missed, there was much of interest to be seen.

The five story building (which cost AUD$42 million excluding equipment)
features dual mains electricity supply, 3 * 2 Megawatt General Motors
V16 diesel-powered generators with the capability of providing five days
of full power without refueling and generally over-engineered construction.

On display were working Ericsson AXE, Alcatel System 12 and Nortel DMS-100
switch units. Also there was a demonstration of ADSL giving full motion
video using 2 Mbit/s modulation over 4 kilometres of twisted pair cable,
and fibre-to-the-pillar/coax to the home.

One technician also demonstrated optical fibre splicing and the use of
an optical reflectometer.

There was also a demonstration of morse code, but no mechanical exchange
equipment in sight.

I was pleased to see a live display of current technology, which has
been all-too-rare in the past pre-competitive era.


 * Origin: Camelot Swamp MJCNA, Hawthorndene, Sth Australia (8:7000/8)
# Camelot Swamp bbs, data: [phone] reply to [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 17 May 94 17:46:58 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 1


From: Darren Ingram <[e-mail]>

> We would like to offer TELECOM Digest readers a special price on
> subscription to Telecomworldwire. The UK price is gbp700 per year for
> fax. ...

> WASHINGTON, USA/RIYADHI, SAUDI ARABIA- AT&T Corp has won a six-year
> US$4 billion contract to provide state-of-the-art digital switching
> and fibre-optic networks to Saudi Arabia, and within hours of the news
> being confirmed the contract was dogged with controversy. ...

> Ericsson said that it was surprised at the scope of the bid and the
> way in which it had been handled, and Northern Telecom said that it
> half expected the move as negotiations between AT&T and the Saudis
> were advanced when AT&T ended its exclusive supplier agreement with
> Bell Canada Ltd -- a NT offshoot -- earlier this year.

If this is the quality of detail that readers may expect, I would
suggest saving the 700 Pounds for something else.

See if you can find three errors of fact in the last sentence quoted.


Tony H.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Readers who wish to do so may send me
the 700 Pounds instead. I might be encouraged to make even further
improvements in this Digest as a result. In fact, I shall make a
special subscription offer to the readers of Telecomworldwire and
send them a *free* subscription to this Digest. How's that for a
deal!  :)  Remember, TELECOM Digest is supported by the generous
contributions of its friends and corporate sponsors, the primary one
of whom is the International Telecommunication Union. But the ITU
can't do it all ... you need to help.  Thanks very much.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #235
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29729;
          19 May 94 15:12 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18407; Thu, 19 May 94 11:19:05 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18398; Thu, 19 May 94 11:19:03 CDT
Date: Thu, 19 May 94 11:19:03 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #236

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 19 May 94 11:19:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 236

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Problems With Call Return (Monty Solomon)
    Anyone Use AT&T Message Service? ([e-mail])
    Help with Northern Telecom Meridian System (Lance Ware)
    "Free Trade" Rules (Dale Wharton)
    Wanted: Hand-held Challenge/Response Units (Paul Gillingwater)
    CRTC Now Regulates Canadian Independent Telcos (Dave Leibold)
    Proposed Upgrading of Canada Direct Service (Dave Leibold)
    Enormous Sprint Rate Increase! (John McHarry)
    Ruling on 800 Numbers From Payphones (Stephen Goodman)
    How Can I Ring Up Myself? (Joseph Herl)
    Free Long Distance via Cellular via Cellular One (Shawn Gordhamer)
    Wanted: Business Phone System (Drew Benson)
    Help: Need TyIN 2000 Developer's Kit From National Semiconductor (T Duong)
    New DLD Digest FAQ Available (Van Hefner)
    Info on Info Superhighway Wanted (Yanghee Choi)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Organization: BMUG Boston
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 06:06:33 EST
Subject: Problems With Call Return


Forwarded to the Digest, FYI:

 Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 15:58:07
 From: Russ Greene,Planet BMUG <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Problems With Call Return

Below is a letter I'm sending to Pac Bell and the Public Utilities
Commission regarding my dissatisfaction with Call Return.

Feedback, comments and discussion are invited.

Attn: Manager
Pacific Bell
P.O. Box 31024
Walnut Creek, CA 94598

May 15, 1994

Dear Madam or Sir:

I'm writing to express my concern and dissatisfaction with the current
implementation of Call Return. Furthermore, I urge the discontinuance
of Call Return service. It is a bad idea.

My situation dictates that I make numerous calls to people who have
answered an ad that I run: people I do not know: When I reach
someone's answering machine I often choose to leave no message.
Sometimes I may reach a wrong number. Many times I get rude phone
calls from people who are utilizing Call Return. These calls come at
all hours of the day and night; sometimes moments after my call,
sometimes days later.

Here is an actual example of one of the problems I've had. I made a
phone call to someone on a Monday. Upon getting her answering machine
I elected to hang up. On Tuesday, more than 24 hours later, I received
a phone call from someone saying "Who is this?". I said "Whom do you
wish to speak with?". She said "You paged me. Who are you and what do
you want?" I said "I'm sorry, you must have the wrong number, I didn't
page anyone." (Remember, this is a day after I originally called this
woman. There was no way for me to make a connection in my mind between
the call I made on Monday and the call I received on Tuesday.)  She
said "Well somebody from your number called me. I just used Call
Return."

Eventually, after a heated discussion, I was able to convince this
woman that I wasn't going to give out my name and number to someone
who refused to identify herself, and that, were the tables turned, she
wouldn't want to do so either. I also educated her to the reality that
since she initiated the call it was appropriate for her to identify
herself to me first. When she did I was able to figure out who she was
by running her name through my data base file on my computer, a luxury
not everybody has at their fingertips. Everything worked out in the
end, this time, but it was a very uncomfortable process to get there
because she did not have the education or level of courtesy to deal
effectively with Call Return. In many cases things don't turn out as
well as they did in this example.

The lack of awareness and common courtesy, as exemplified by this
woman, is part of the problem. She was ill equipped, as so many people
are in our society today, to utilize Call Return in an effective and
courteous manner. If used properly the difficulties with Call Return
would be fewer. Even so, people utilizing Call Return are placed in
the awkward position of making phone calls to unknown numbers and
parties. This is wrong. If you don't know who you are calling and the
number you are dialing you don't belong on the phone. Period! It
follows then, that Call Return is a bad idea.

With the wide availability of answering machines and electronic voice
mail systems there really is no need for Call Return. Call Return, at
best, is another tool for telephone companies to profit from. In
reality, since it puts people in the position of calling unknown
numbers and parties and demands more skills in the communications
arena than many people have, it is more of a disservice to the general
public than anything else.

Please, see that this service is terminated. Short of discontinuing
Call Return as an available service, if free, universal, Call Return
Blocking was available I would be satisfied that the public would be
served.

BMUG Boston 617-721-5840, East Coast BBS of The World's Largest Mac User Group


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The fact that she used it in an extreme way
does not make Call Return a bad idea. And there is something to be said about
the writer's discourtesy in reaching an answering machine and simply hanging
up without speaking, if even only to say that he did not wish to leave a
message and would call again later. Ordinarily, Call Return is a good idea
since it allows a person who has just missed (typically within seconds or
minutes) receiving a call due to being somewhere else. However in this case
the fact that the answering machine contained a blank spot -- however
discourteous that may have been of the caller -- should have told her the
caller did not wish to speak with her at that time.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark)
Subject: Anyone Use AT&T Message Service?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: MCIL
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 11:24:16 GMT


Has anyone used the AT&T Message Service yet ?

I am currently living outside of the USA and usually use AT&T
USA-DIRECT to call the US.  Well, a few weeks ago, I called, using my
calling card, and got a busy signal.  After a few seconds, I hear a
[computer generated] voice asking me if I want to record a message and
have it sent at a later time followed by the prices. (I think it was
$1.75 or $1.25, something like that per minute) All I had to do was
press '#123' and I was prompted for a message and then was prompted at
the end for an OK message. (i.e. press 1 or 0 or something like that)

Well, it worked great ... has anyone else used this service?  I assume
it has been available in the USA for a while already.

Comments ?

Mark

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

From: [e-mail] (Lance Ware)
Subject: Help With Northern Telecom Meridian System
Organization: VOXEL
Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 23:30:38 GMT


I am hoping to tap into some of the wisdom of the net for assistance
with our Meridian phone system. Specifically, I want to integrate our
800 number into our system. Currently the line terminates at one
phone, and goes unanswered if the desk where the phone sits is vacant.

I am not sure how to do this, and PacBell's support is not very
helpful.  The 800 line has no incoming information, like the DIDs
that we have, and my manual doesn't seem to cover anything but the
basic installations.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.


Lance Ware   IS Manager & VOXEL Guru  VOXEL

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 08:26:29 EDT
From: Dale Wharton <[e-mail]>
Subject: "Free trade" Rules


This item appeared on a political economics network.

Dale Wharton   [e-mail]    M O N T R E A L    Te souviens-tu?

                                                Date: Tue, 17 May 1994
NAFTA AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS   by Sid Shniad, Burnaby BC <[e-mail]>

In the runup to the passage of the North American Free Trade
Agreement, the Telecommunications Workers Union warned members and the
general public that the deal posed a threat to the Canadian
telecommunications industry.  An article in the May 16 issue of the
Canadian Communications Network Letter that focuses on the issue of
NAFTA and telecommunications indicates that our fears were well
founded.

The Newsletter quotes Muriel Bradford, the newly-appointed assistant
vice president of corporate affairs at Teleglobe Canada.  Prior to
being hired by Teleglobe, Bradford worked at the Department of
External Affairs and participated in the negotiations leading up to
the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, and the Uruguay Round of
GATT.

In Bradford's view, telecommunications policy today is being driven by
an increasing preoccupation with trade liberalization.  She feels that
as a consequence of liberalization, government bodies like the
Canadian CRTC and the US Federal Communications Commission will have
less and less control over telecommunications activities within their
domestic jurisdictions.

Speaking at the Canadian Telecommunications Superconference in Toronto
in early May, Bradford observed that "Domestic economic policymakers
and regulators will be left with fewer options than ever before, and
domestic carriers will no longer be able to expand and upgrade their
networks secure in the knowledge that their national markets will
remain shielded from foreign competitors."

This development doesn't seem to bother Bradford, who sees it as
providing her new employer with an opportunity to gain market share in
larger foreign markets, thereby allowing Teleglobe to move from
seventh place to third place among intercontinental carriers by the
end of the century.  For the rest of us, the prospect of government
helplessness and all-out international competition in the
communications industry does not appear so attractive.

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

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for passing this along. Sid used to
send things here to the Digest occassionally, but I have not heard from him
lately. I think he grew angry at what he felt was the anti-union stance
of many readers here.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Gillingwater)
Subject: WANTED: Hand-Held Challenge/Response Units
Date: 18 May 1994 21:36:50 GMT
Organization: EUnet EDV-Dienstleistungsgesellschaft m.b.H


I'm looking for suppliers of hand-held challenge/response cipher key
systems.  These will be used to improve security for a sensitive
on-line (dial-up and Internet) access.

I envisage they'll work as follows:

1.    User connects via public network to our system;
2.    Our system lets them log in as normal, but they then
    are "challenged" with a long code.
3.    The user must enter the code into the hand-held unit,
    which provides the "response" using RSA or similar.
4.    The user then enters the "response", which is validated
    against the expected value.  This may involve the use
    of a public/private key system also, for encryption
    of transmitted material.

I'm very hopeful that units such as I've just described exist -- if not,
perhaps someone wants to make them?  (e.g. based on HP-100LX).

Please reply in e-mail.  Commercial replies welcome (i.e. if you wanna
sell me something, go ahead.)  NB I'm posting from a guest account, so
don't bother anyone else here.


[e-mail] (Paul Gillingwater) :: Home Office in Vienna, Austria

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 19 May 94 00:30:46 -0500
Subject: CRTC now regulates Canadian independent telcos
Organization: FidoNet: The Super Continental - North York, Canada


[from Bell News, 16 May 94]

CRTC to regulate independent telcos

Only the federal government -- not provincial governments -- has the
authority to regulate the 50-some independent telephone companies in
Canada.

So decreed the Supreme Court of Canada which ruled that Telephone
Guevremont Inc. -- a Quebec-based independent telephone company --
should be regulated by the federal Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission (CRTC).

The court's decision, handed down April 26, affects all other
independent telephone companies, including those that are members of
the Canadian Independent Telephone Association. Prior to the decision,
these companies were regulated by provincial agencies.

In its decision, the Supreme Court said that, as Telephone Guevremont
provides interprovincial and international communications services to
its customers, it should fall under the CRTC's jurisdiction.

The decision settles a dispute between Telephone Guevremont and the
Regie des telecommunications, the provincial regulator of Telephone
Guevremont and several other independent telephone companies
operating throughout Quebec.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 19 May 94 00:40:46 -0500
Subject: Proposed Upgrading of Canada Direct Service
Organization: FidoNet: The Super Continental - North York, Canada


[from Bell News, 16 May 94]

New Canada Direct feature to make calling from one foreign country to
another cheaper, easier

Our mission to be a world leader in helping people communicate will
take another leap forward if the CRTC gives the green light to enhance
the Canada Direct[tm] service we offer.

We want to give our customers the opportunity to use their calling
cards to call from one foreign country to another and to make long
distance calls within foreign countries.

The Canada Direct service has been available since 1989 for customers
to call back to Canada from over 90 overseas destinations.

The country-to-country calling enhancement to Canada Direct that we
and our Stentor partners are proposing is a convenient way for Calling
Card[tm] customers to make international calls from one foreign
country to another or within a foreign country.

The new country-to-country calling feature of Canada Direct initially
will be offered from over 50 countries where Canadians do the most
international business. However, the service will not be offered from
the United States.

Ideally, we'd like to offer foreign country calling to all the
countries where the Stentor owners currently terminate overseas calls
direct dialled today.

However, Stentor and Teleglobe will respect the wishes of foreign
telephone administrations and will not originate or terminate calls in
countries whose foreign administrations have not given us approval to
offer the enhancement. Teleglobe will continue to negotiate with
foreign administrations to add more countries to the service.

A special long distance rate structure has been developed for the
country-to- country calling enhancement that is, in most cases, lower
than those rates for similar services offered by the major U.S.
carriers.

If the enhancement is approved by the CRTC, it will be introduced to
our customers starting June 20.

[sub-article]

"If we'd only known!"

About this Canada Direct enhancement we're asking the CRTC to approve
 -- is it a "nice to have" or a "need to have"?

Read what an article in Ottawa's The Citizen Valley had to say about
calling Canada from one foreign country.

Marjorie Evers of Nepean says she almost choked when she saw the size
of the bill for a call her daughter Tamara, 18, made from Puerto
Vallarta, Mexico.

"We told her to call so we'd know she was safe," says Marjorie. "It
wasn't easy."

The Mexican operator insisted the call be billed to a third party.
Tamara has an uncle in Florida, and the call for approval, and the
bill, went to him. He passed it along to Nepean.

The 14-minute call cost $130 Canadian.

"And we're still waiting for the bills for four more calls." In the
remaining four, Marjorie accepted the charges.

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

Date: Wed, 18 May 94 10:21:48 EDT
From: [e-mail] (McHarry)
Subject: Enormous Sprint Rate Increase!


Sorry about the tabloidiac header, this concerns Sprint local service
in downstate Illinois.  Sprint very recently obtained an effective
rate increase of almost 100%, according to my parents' local paper.
What they have done is to get a 5c per call charge added on to the
basic service charge, which may have increased somewhat also.  The
area has been flat rate for at least 40 years. I wonder how they could
justify such a massive increase to the Illinois Commerce Commission.
Have they been operating at a loss for years?  Curious.


John McHarry ([e-mail] or [e-mail])

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

Date: Wed, 18 May 94 11:20 EST
From: Stephen Goodman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ruling on 800 Numbers From Payphones


Greetings all:

I seem to recall about three years ago there was a ruling from Judge
Greene regarding blocking 800 numbers on payphones.  It seems alot of
independent payphone vendors were blocking 800 number dialing on their
equipment thereby preventing people from using the long-distance
calling cards which used 800 numbers for access.  Does anyone know if
there is a document anywhere on the ruling?

(The ruling was made prior to October 1992.  I found an FCC document:
CC Docket 92-77 10/8/92 which ordered AT&T to provide 800 access on
their proprietary cards when I was doing my research.)

Thanks!!


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Herl)
Subject: How Can I Ring Up Myself?
Date: 18 May 1994 15:50:59 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


Our family is moving to a new house next week, and we will have the
same telephone number at both places for several days.  How can I call
between them?

Our phone company (Ameritech) representative doesn't think this is
possible, but I remember that it used to be possible years ago to
"call another party on the line," and this is similar.  We used to
dial a code number, hang the phone up and wait for it to ring, then
pick up the phone and talk when it stopped ringing.  Does anyone know
whether this is still possible?


Joseph Herl    Internet: [e-mail]   School of Music
University of Illinois      Telephone: [phone]
Urbana, Illinois 61801 USA  Home phone: [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's a great service that Illinois Bell
provides, allowing a number to ring at multiple locations for simply the
cost of two local services. Several years ago when I moved from one place
to another I used that arrangement to keep my phone service intact during
the move. After about a week, I had the old location discontinued. At
least in the Chicago 312/708 area, ringbacks are accomplished thus:

Dial 1-57x-last four digits. The 'x' is a digit 1-9. It varies from one
exchange to another so you have to test to see which works. For example,
if your phone number was 555-1212 then a ring back would be generated by
dialing 1-57x-1212. If you select the wrong 'x', then the result will be
a fast busy signal. If you select the correct 'x', then the result will
be a fresh dial tone. On hearing that new dial tone, quickly click the
hook once and note that the dial tone changed to a high pitch tone. Then
dial '6', and hang up. The phone will commence ringing and will ring for
up to three or four minutes in the normal way before timing out. You can
tell the other end has answered when the ringing stops. But when you then
lift the receiver again, the high pitched tone remains on the line. It
won't go away, so you have to talk over it. Obviously short to the point
calls are recommended.  Once you hang up, the line returns to normal in
a few seconds.  As a final example, if your number was 234-5678 then you
would dial 1-572-5678, but the '2' might be something else depending on
which exchange you are in. This works all over 312/708 but I do not know
about 217, which is the area for Champaign-Urbana.  This is *not* an
approved or tariffed service. It is for telco testing/repair purposes
only so do not abuse it or count on it being there.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Free Long Distance via Cellular via Cellular One
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 17:58:37 GMT


If a person has a cellular phone in Rochester, MN (507) and forwards
calls to another Rochester number, a person in Minneapolis (612) can
call the Cellular One roamer number, enter the Rochester cellular
number, and be forwarded to the Rochester number.  There are no fees
for using call forwarding, and there is no airtime charges.  The
"roaming coordinator" said that there would be no charges billed, and
this is not a "normal" thing to do.


Shawn Gordhamer   [e-mail]   Rochester, Minnesota  USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Drew Benson)
Subject: Wanted: Business phone system
Date: 18 May 1994 13:23:48 -0400
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Greetings,

        I'm looking for an inexpensive phone system designed for
small-scale kinds of things.  Not more than eight outgoing lines.  I'm
open to suggestions of brands, features, etc. I don't care whether
it's new or used either.  Features and price are what matter.


Thanks,

Drew Benson ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Tai Duong)
Subject: Help: Need TyIN 2000 Developer's Kit from Nat. Semiconductor
Date: 18 May 1994 14:44:58 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor


Hello everyone.  I need the Developer's Kit for National Semiconductor's
TyIN 2000 voice/modem/fax card.  They gave many "Beta" copies out for free
but I missed the boat.  I'll be willing to pay you for a copy for what
ever it is worth.  I don't think they have restrictions on them since
they were free and is basically a small manual.

For those who don't know what it is, the kit is mainly a manual that
gives specs on writing software to work with the card.  It also has
some simple examples.  I need to get my hands on some specs.  I want
to write a TSR that will automatically record a phone conversation as
soon as you pick up the phone for any incoming or outgoing calls.
Also, I want to write a simple executable to play and fast forward the
phone conversation.  I'll make the program freeware if anyone is
interested.

By the way, the TyIN 2000 is an excellent card.  It costs $89 right
now and has NSC's software to do voicemail and fax.  I found the voice
quality recordings excellent.  I would recommend it to everyone.  The
only thing I don't like is that Nat. Semi. Conductor is a bit secretive
on their cards specs since I am having a hell of a time getting some so
I can write these two programs.

Appreciate any help anyone can give me.


Tai Duong ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 18 May 94 23:40:30 EDT
Subject: New DLD Digest FAQ Available


We have just released a new version of the Discount Long Distance
Digest Frequently Asked Questions file. Included in the FAQ is an
index of all subjects covered in previous issues, a short history of
the reselling industry, a resellers telecom Glossary, a brief listing
of major resellers, reseller/telecom books and magazines, a breakdown
of the latest carrier DDD rates and calling plans, and an appendix of
agencies and companies involved in various aspects of reselling.
Subscription information on Discount Long Distance Digest is also
included. To receive a copy of our FAQ File e-mail us at: [e-mail].

Be sure to include the phrase: 'Request-FAQ' in the Subject: Field.

Discount Long Distance Digest is a weekly moderated mailing list and
newsletter delivered free to any e-mail recipient with internet
access. We cover mostly issues pertaining to the resale of long
distance telephone service. We also give specific information on
resellers for people looking to get into the reselling industry,
including commission schedules, rates, underlying carriers, marketing
strategy, and requirements for becoming an agent. We also cover other
business oppertunities in the telecom industry such as pre-paid
calling cards, payphones, Operator Assisted Services, international
callback services, aggregation, and telephone bill auditing.


Van Hefner   Moderator   Discount Long Distance Digest

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

From: [e-mail] (Yanghee Choi)
Subject: Info on Info Superhighway Wanted
Organization: SNU
Date: Thu, 19 May 94 06:42:28 GMT


Please send me any info (or info sources) on information superhighway
related documents/files/announcements/seminars/servers. I'll post what
I'll collect. Please send the info to [e-mail]


Yanghee


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, that is a rather tall order. The
documents on the 'info highway' go on and on. In a way, it is almost
like asking 'send me what information you have on the Telephone Company'.
Everyone is running seminars on it these days it seems, and the speeches
being made and testimony being given before government agencies and
others has filled many an issue of this Digest among other things. Maybe
you should try to narrow your request somewhat.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #236
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00200;
          19 May 94 15:52 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19684; Thu, 19 May 94 12:08:52 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19675; Thu, 19 May 94 12:08:50 CDT
Date: Thu, 19 May 94 12:08:50 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #237

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 19 May 94 12:08:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 237

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Graphic BBS, Gif to RIP (Adan Klein)
    Cellular Phone Timers (Tony Harminc)
    Query re: Voice Dictation (Mike McCrohan)
    Information Wanted on 900 Numbers: Providers and Costs (Lance Ware)
    Distinctive Ring Line Effects? (Stu Whitmore)
    Frame Relay SVC Specs Wanted (John Lawitzke)
    Seeking Beta Site for Telecom Management Software (Donald E. Kimberlin)
    Internet Address For Computer-Privacy (Al Cohan)
    Using CDMA for LAN's? ([e-mail])
    CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and The Same? (A. Padgett Peterson)
    CO Switch Types by Exchange Code (Michael Stanford)
    Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 Codes (Mike King)
    Re: SRI Ends Two Bobs (Garnet Harris)
    Re: Money Saving Cellular Tip (CO/NY NYNEX Rates) (Doug Reuben)
    Re: Palestinian Country Code (Josh Backon)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Adan Klein)
Subject: Graphic BBS, Gif to RIP
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 08:02:57 GMT


   I am trying to find a graphical software program that can convert
Gif graphic files to RIP (Remote Image Processing).  RIP is a much
better graphical interface rather then ansi.  Basically, what I need a
is any software program that can convert a GIF to .RIP file so I can
edit it.  I am desparate to find such a thing.  If someone could
please tell me where one might be, that would be so great.  If you do
not understand what RIP is, then reply, and maybe you have seen one
somewhere.  Please anyone that might know write me some email right
away, I am desparate.

    Please reply by email.


ramzeys

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

Date: Wed, 18 May 94 15:01:52 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Phone Timers


I've finally got into the cellphone racket, and now know the practical
answer to a theoretical question that I've been wondering about for a
while. Typical cellphones have at least one call timer -- often two or
more.  These are touted as a way of tracking your airtime -- either
for billing clients or to keep track of how your monthly allocation of
'free' minutes is doing, and when you are going to start paying for
each one.

But not all airtime is chargeable.  There are various kinds of free
calls (typically *nnn codes), and more importantly, there is no charge
for busy and unanswered calls.  So if the timers are to reflect reality,
the phone has to be told by the network when charging starts and ends
 -- a supervision signal, if you will.

I've never seen signs of such a facility in the AMPS documentation,
and now experience says the same thing: the timers start when you
press SEND and stop when you press END.  (This is on a Nokia 101
handheld.)  How disappointing.  How useless.


Tony Harminc


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is apparently, at present no way to
start or stop the timer(s) with supervision. I believe the timers are
wired through the SEND button and that is about it. None the less, the
timers do provide some guidance in what to expect for your monthly bill.
If you are like most users, you can take the amount of time shown and
deduct 10-15 percent of that amount to get a realistic idea of the number
of actual minutes used. From that, you then subtract your 'free minutes'
allotment and you will get a close, if not exact idea what your bill will
be for the month.  Of course since the billing arrives a week or more
into the new service period, you also have to know on what day the billing
actually ends if you want to flush the timers and start them over.   PAT]

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

From: Mike McCrohan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Query re: Voice Dictation
Date: 19 May 1994 00:19:59 GMT
Organization: Ireland On-Line


I am looking for information on Voice Dictation/ Voice Transcription
systems. Digital Voice Inc., Dictaphone, and Lanier are the vendors in
question.

If anyone uses any of these boxes, I'd appreciate it if they mailed me
as I have some questions I'm trying to get answered.

Additionally, if anyone had the Email addresses of any or all of these
vendors, I'd appreciate that too.

Thanks in advance,


Mike McCrohan, Cloon, Claregalway, Co Galway, Ireland
[phone]                  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lance Ware)
Subject: Information Wanted on 900 Numbers: Providers and Costs
Organization: VOXEL
Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 22:59:56 GMT


I would like to get some information on what providers are out there,
what plans are available, etc ...

Please send email.


Lance Ware    IS Manager & VOXEL Guru   VOXEL

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 00:05:13 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Rattlesnake Stu)
Subject: Distinctive Ring Line Effects?
Organization: Central Washington University


I have a two part question:

1.  I recently had distinctive ringing enabled on a phone line that
leads to my BBS.  Since then, I've had a significant increase in
handshake problems when receiving BBS calls.  (The modem itself
determines the ring, and seems to be 100% accurate in doing so.  I use
the ZFAX voice mail/faxback software as a "front end" that loads the
front end BGFAX for normal rings and handles Distinctive Ring type 1
as voice.  For a normal ring, BGFAX is loaded before the line is
answered.)  Would a service like distinctive ring affect the line
quality after the line is answered, even if there's no switch box to
add another hardware link?

2.  Is there a way to boost a signal between the wall and the modem,
or would I even want to?  I'm running an extension cord about 200'
from the phone jack to the modem, as moving the jack was out of the
question in my landlord's eyes.  I'm afraid of signal degradation in
that distance -- should I even worry about it?

Thanks in advance!


Stuart Whitmore   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lawitzke)
Subject: Frame Relay SVC Specs Wanted
Date: 19 May 1994 15:30:25 GMT
Organization: Michigan State University. College of Engineering


My management has heard that ANSI has recently released a specification
for Frame Relay switched virtual circuits (SVCs).  Could someone provide
me with the exact ANSI reference number so that I can get it ordered?


Advance thanks,

John Lawitzke   Systems Analyst
ADAK Communications Corp.  Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 11:00:00 EST
From: Donald E. Kimberlin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Seeking Beta Site for Telecom Management Software


        The maker of some unique PC-based software with significant
new ability to maintain databases of WANs; share that information
among the several involved functions of an organization and authorized
common carrier functions, and conduct automated audits of the monthly
bills is seeking a U.S. beta site.

        This software has already been in use in other nations for
almost a year, so a beta test of it does not mean the user has to
wring out basic bugs in the software.  This release is merely the U.S.
version of a proved package.  The possibility does exist that detail
modifications of functions and screens will occur, as there may be
detail items for user convenience that need inclusion.  Meantime,
using the software portends an opportunity to save significant money
with an automated means to trap billing errors and find inactive
circuits on complex WANs.

        This software, although PC-based, requires at least a 486/33
or 66 as a server for the multiple users that access its shared
database in order to fulfill all its uses.  Further, the organization
selected for a beta site should have a dedicated private line bill
that runs in excess of USD25,000 per month, preferably much more.  Use
of the software should provide well in excess of 10% savings per month
on that bill.

        While this software is useful to catalog and track dedicated
lines used in switched voice networks, it does not track dial service
traffic or billed minutes.  Its function is strictly for dedicated
lines themselves, and tracking occupancy of those lines with
multiplexed applications on them, if any.

        The provider of the software is not prepared at this juncture
to answer casual inquiries or provide multiple demo copies of the
software.  Please include some description of:

        - the number and type of lines and nodal points,
        - common carriers you use,
        - any private construction or "off-tariff deals" you
                 may have, and
        - approximate amount of your monthly billing

in your inquiry.  Seriously interested and qualified parties should
e-mail the originator at [e-mail].  The U.S.  version of
this software will be ready by late May, so seriously interested
parties should be prepared to install it in June and start into
immediate use.

        Again, no casual or "merely interested" inquiries, please.
There are not facilities available to respond to them.  And again, the
e-mail address for seriously interested and qualified parties is
[e-mail].

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

Date: Wed, 18 May 94 17:19 EST
From: Al Cohan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Internet Address for Computer-Privacy


Computer Privacy is moderated by Prof. Leonard P. Levine and it can
be reached at [e-mail].


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Its been awhile since mention was made of
this fine publication so now is a good time for it. Originally started
by Dennis Rears as a continuation of a very long and controversial thread
started here in TELECOM Digest, Dennis turned over control of his publi-
cation to Professor Levine several months ago. Actually, two e-journals
had their beginning here as part of TELECOM Digest. The other was the
very popular Computer Underground Digest (or CuD as it is frequently known)
which began here a few years ago as a thread on computer hacking about
the same time that the federal government was having a major investigation
into computer crime which involved some prominent net personalities.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 06:37:58 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Using CDMA for LAN's?


I have a question for the CDMA and LAN experts out there:

After studying how CDMA is implemented, I was wondering if anyone knew
if such a concept would work for LAN's.  I know that CDMA is designed
for Mobile "wireless" applications, but the idea if coding to me seems
to also have other possibilities.

If you have an Ethernet style topology (i.e. one thick cable) running
through an office, is it possible for multiple transceivers to
broadcast a message on several frequencies at once (i.e. CDMA).

The benefit of such a system to my mind is that it would allow
multiple workstations to transmit/receive files simultaneously.  It
would also allow for applications such as voice and video, which
require CBR facility, to also operate on the same network.

The coding could be derived as a calculation based on the unique
addresses of both the sending and receiving workstations.  This would
reduce the overhead on the PC/workstation transceiver as it would only
have to focus attention on certain frequencies.  In other worlds, a
kind of digital FDM LAN with packet and VBR facilities.

For me, the benefit of such a product is that it would allow a company
to go to existing LAN customers and provide a upgrade path to
multimedia networking without re-cabling the office or buying new
PC/workstations.  All you would have to do is put in new LAN cards
(and make money?).

Question 1:
Would such a concept work? Or would you only hear garbage on your
cable due to intereference?

Question 2:
Is there a company developing such a product for LAN's? (Or has it
been already developed?)


Best regards,

[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 08:49:16 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same?


In many ways CNID and ANI are similar yet as has been pointed out
here, ANI is a much older service and CNID is a parallel (though not
always exactly the same) function tied to CLASS services.

With the FCC mandate for CNID service, is it not possible that the
telcos will use this to drop ANI? Also it has been mentioned that
"911 service requires special trunk lines and equipment". Clearly CNID
does not and needs only a low-cost display. Will this make local 911
response a possibility?

While we are at it, I would *suspect* that per-call blocking will be
the standard, per-line will be standard for unlisted subscribers, a
different dial tone will be returned when blocking is enabled;
emergency, recipient paid (800), and possibly 900 numbers will receive
CNID reguardless of privacy bit setting (possibly with a special
ring); and a host of other features will be available "at slight
additional charge".

And pizza shops, like my computers, will refuse to answer if CNID is
blocked.


Warmly,

Padgett


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't think ANI will ever be completely
dropped in favor of using Caller-ID exclusively since CID can be blocked
at the caller's option while ANI delivery cannot be blocked. The latter
is delivered more with the idea in mind 'here is what you are paying for
when you automatically accepted the collect calls' while the former is
intended to announce who is calling. If ANI were dropped, then there
would have to be some adjustments made to CID which did not allow the
caller to override number delivery in certain cases such as 800 calls.  PAT]

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

Subject: CO Switch Types by Exchange Code
Date: Wed, 18 May 94 11:15:25 PDT
From: Michael Stanford <[e-mail]>


I am looking for a listing of all the CO switch types in the USA by
area code and exchange code -- I have heard that such a list is
available on the Internet.  Do you have any idea where I should start
looking?

To clarify, my phone number is [phone].  I would like to
look up 202 332 in the list and see that it is hooked to a Northern
Telecom XX.XX switch or whatever it is.  I presume the list would be
quite large -- a maximum of about 200,000 entries.


Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 codes
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 12:24:52 PDT


In TELECOM Digest, V14 #233, Will Martin <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> As I thought of that, it also caused me to wonder the same thing about
> 800 numbers. They, too, are always dialed with the leading "800", and
> so that number-space could be a full XXX-XXXX range too. The only
> thing stopping it is the expectation of the users and how the software
> is written. Are there 800-XXX exchanges in use now?

I've seen quite a few 800-800-XXXX numbers listed.  Before portability,
I believe Sprint administered them.


Mike King    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought 800-800 'belonged to' MCI,
but I could be mistaken.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 16:55 EDT
From: The Tibetian Traveller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: SRI Ends Two Bobs


Will Martin wrote:

> Also, there's at least one aspect that no one ever seems to mention:
> you can hide your SW reception. I can listen in my bed to shortwave,
> using a radio that's the size of a paperback book...No one has ever
> shown me how they can receive from a satellite without an external
> antenna of some kind,

Will makes several fine points about 'stealth satellite' reception.
However, there are small concelable antennas for satellite use.  The
special forces had one that would fold up to a size like a foldable
umbrella.  Signal/noise wasn't the greatest, but it allowed one person
to carry everything necessary to communicate via satellite on his
back.


Garnet

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

From: [e-mail] (Cid Technologies)
Subject: Re: Money Saving Cellular Tip (CO/NY NYNEX rates)
Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 23:07:14 PDT


On May 13 07:46:30 1994, [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl), in response
to a post by John Levine, wrote:

> [the point being that having one's long-distance cellular calls billed
> separately could save money]

> This is one reason a person might choose one cellular carrier over
> another.  Of the two cellular carriers in New York, one (Nynex) lets
> you pick your own long-distance carrier and be billed separately if
> you wish, the other (Cellular One) forces you to AT&T and bills you
> for it.  Or at least it was that way a few years ago, can current
> customers comment?

It still is that way.

CO/NY bills you for both local and toll calls. Local calls are six cents
per minute, and you can call from central Jersey to Fairfield County,
CT at six cents per minute, plus airtime.

NYNEX does NOT bill for local calls, so any call within NYNEX/NY's
service area is always toll-free -- you pay only airtime. This can
mean a significant savings, especially at night, when rates for both
CO/NY and NYNEX are around 30 cents per minute (NYNEX is like 25, CO
is around 35, depending on your plan). A 6 cent per minute local
charge is around 20% of the total cost, so NYNEX at night can come out
to be * 40% * cheaper (ie, 25 cents per minute for a local call on
NYNEX, 41 cents per minute on Cell One/NY). Note however that
NYNEX/NY's "home" rate plan/local calling area does NOT include
Fairfield Cty, CT, as does Cell One's.

As to toll calls, both NYNEX and CO/NY charge standard (read: the most
expensive) AT&T rates. NYNEX will let you use whatever other equal
access LD company it does business with, CO/NY won't -- it has no
equal access provisions as they are not required to provide them by
law.

Interestingly, CO/NY does NOT give you a night discount on your toll
calls.  You pay AT&T's EVE call rates on ALL toll calls after 5PM --
there is no discount for night calls.

You can see this clearly on your CO/NY bill is you roam to other areas
near NY which do bill AT&T NIGHT rates. On my most recent bill, I
placed two calls to Hingham, Mass (617-749) on a Saturday afternoon,
thus normally qualifying for AT&T's NIGHT rate.

The first call had a toll charge of 16 cents for a one minute call,
which is AT&T's EVE rate, not night. I then drove to Philly, placed
the same 1 minute call, and was billed 12 cents for a minute call,
which is AT&T's NIGHT rate. Thus ComCast/Philly will bill at AT&T's
night rate, while CO/NY won't. Now four cents is no big deal, but it
goes to illustrate the point.

I talked to CO/NY about this, and it is indeed their policy to bill
you the eve rate even when you should be billed the night rate. I
usually use our 800 numbers and no-surcharge 800 calling card card, so
this is no big deal for me, and I'm not sure if its worthwhile for
them to change (seems like no one else noticed or mentioned it to
them.)

For those who may be outraged that CO/NY is doing this, well, it's a
common practice, although most cell co's will bill you at standard
night rate, like ComCast does. (And Bell owned ones MUST do this --
they can't "skim" off the tariffed rates).

On a recent flight I was talking to a couple of people "associated"
with AT&T and McCaw (being purposely vague). Among many other topics
of conversation, we discussed good/cheap LD co's to use, and one guy
(who wanted to shock me, it seems! :) ) mentioned that the recent LD
deal which AT&T cut with McCaw, where McCaw committed to using AT&T at
all of its properties, gave McCaw *daytime* LD rates of *eight cents per
minute*! So if this is correct, McCaw is skimming between 13 and 17
cents per minute on daytime calls.

Now I have no idea how correct this information is, but you can bet
McCaw and the other non-Bell owned Cell Co's are getting a very good
deal from whatever IXC LD provider they choose. So in most cases, the
Cell Co. is not only making money on airtime, but on the LD charges as
well. (And I'm sure cell cos which charge a local call charge make
something on that, too, although not as much. Additionally, some like
CO/NY, extend the local call charge to include a significantly larger
area than the Bell-owned cell co can legally offer a similar local
calling plan to.)

> [...] in New York, at least, the oligopoly pricing leads to
> very expensive air time charges, for many callers 90 cents per minute.
> This dwarfs the long-distance price component and reduces the benefit
> of getting to choose your long-distance carrier.

If you think NY is bad, go to LA! Airtime charges for ANY incomplete
call, absolutely pathetic coverage, some of the lamest customer service
(both A and B sides) in the West, and severe rush hour "blocking" so
its impossible to get a call out, let alone receive one! :(   LA is
*the* definitive example of the worst manifestations which are the
direct result of the current duopoly. Airtime charges to call a busy
signal are an outrage, and are perpetuated only because there is no
alternative. If I worked for LA Cell or Pac*Bell LA I'd frankly be
embarrassed to admit it for fear of the same (well-deserved) scorn
which early AOS operators received for charging outrageous calling
card surcharges to a captive user-base.

But back to NY, as I noted before, NYNEX does have somewhat better
airtime rates and plans, and does not charge for local calls. If you
call locally to NY and NJ, and don't want to be committed to a higher
priced CO/NY plan, NYNEX is always a good deal. AND -- they don't
charge airtime for incomplete calls over 40 seconds. My main problem
with NYNEX is their rather high roaming charges, awkward and dysfunc-
tional automatic roaming network, and their exquisitely inept customer
service dept, probably the worst in the northeast. If you can get past
all this (ie, don't roam and don't call customer service), they have
very good service in the NY Metro Area and their system is *slightly*
more stable and reliable than CO/NY's.

> One hopes that some day in the US there will be more than two
> providers for portable phone service, to bring the price down.

Amen to that! The sooner, the better!


Doug        CID Technologies    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Palestinian Country Code
Date: 18 May 94 23:01:43 GMT
Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bob
Goudreau) writes:

> According to a recent issue of the {Economist}, the recent agreement
> between Israel and the PLO in setting up a "Palestinian Authority" in
> the Gaza strip and the Jericho area includes provisions that allow the
> Authority to issue postage stamps and to use a separate telephone
> country code.  Does anyone know if the ITU has issued the new code
> yet, and if so, what number was used?  The country code list for Zone
> 9 (which includes Israel, Jordan, etc.) in the Telecom archives shows
> that 970, 978 and 979 are currently vacant, so I suspect that it will
> be one of those.

The ITU refused to issue a separate country code for Gaza since the
necessary paperwork wasn't submitted by the Palestinian authorities.
If they do submit this, I would assume that Gaza would get its own
code. Currently Gaza is under the Israeli 07 area code whereas Jericho
is under 02 (Jerusalem) area code.


Josh   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #237
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01113;
          19 May 94 17:32 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22851; Thu, 19 May 94 13:45:35 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22838; Thu, 19 May 94 13:45:31 CDT
Date: Thu, 19 May 94 13:45:31 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #238

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 19 May 94 13:45:30 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 238

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID (Carl B. Page)
    Telecomworldwire Publisher Responds (Darren Ingram)
    Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors!! (Peter Corless)
    Re: 3270 Emulation (Wind (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Lexus Cellular Phones (John Gilbert)
    Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device (Will Martin)
    Re: Footnote to A History of Underseas Cables (Ray Bruman)
    Re: History of Underseas Cables (David Ofsevit)
    Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? (Alan Varney)
    Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Tony Harminc)
    Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Carl Moore)
    Re: Cellular Modems (Mike Borsetti)
    Re: Call For Hearings on Assured Public Access to Internet (C. McGuinness)
    Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set Up Access (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Greg Abbott)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Carl B. Page)
Subject: Re: FCC Order on Interstate Caller-ID
Date: 19 May 1994 00:27:12 -0700
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


>> We have already seen the question appear relating to "How do you know
>> with per line blocking if it is toggled on or off ?" One answer would
>> be star-six-seven on and "something else" off but the phone company only
>> has 100 star numbers now.

> True.  Fortunately, some of them remain unassigned so it's a perfectly
> workable solution.

In particular, *82 seems to have been selected as the Unblock code if
it is needed.  Many of the 100 are assigned to stupid, rarely used, or
unused applications.  For example there are two codes to turn on and
off CNID delivery.  This is not a blocking option -- it is equivalent
to unplugging your CNID display for a while.  Since the telcos want
to charge money to turn CNID on and off, it is unused as far as I
know.

Of course, just try getting your local teleco to tell you what *NN
codes might be stupidly assigned.  I had a lot of fun with US West on
that one.  How many people use any service is "confidential competitive
inforformation".  The real source of the reluctance is that they want
to use the *NN codes for lucrative services, not a revenue neutral
service like per-call unblocking.


(arl
[e-mail]  Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
Public Access UNIX and Internet in PDX at [phone] (2400-14400, N81)

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 11:06 BST
From: Darren Ingram <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecomworldwire Publisher Responds
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: Samples From Telecomworldwire - Part 1

> If this is the quality of detail that readers may expect, I would
> suggest saving the 700 Pounds for something else.

> See if you can find three errors of fact in the last sentence quoted.

Telecomworldwire is designed as a management-brief overview and not a
complex reporting tool for every event. The publication has to react
to the news and of information which has been reported first, second
or even third hand, using attributation as required.

Perhaps the message was not Pro-American as much as it could have been
<g>. Anyway, our international readers and subscribers do not seem to
share the same opinion as the writer.  Our database revenues keep
breaking targer predictions and our fax service is going very well.
So we must be doing something right. Unfortunately TWW cannot, by
definition, have the same extensive leadtimes as some magazines.  And
yes, at times, we can screw up, mix things up and the like --- all
part of the fun of a pressurised timely wire-feed.

> special subscription offer to the readers of Telecomworldwire and
> send them a *free* subscription to this Digest. How's that for a
> deal!  :)  Remember, TELECOM Digest is supported by the generous

Nice try Pat!

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Corless)
Subject: Re: AT&T Major Billing Errors!!
Date: 19 May 1994 12:25:59 GMT
Organization: Cisco Systems Customer Service


Patrick A. Townson ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I think you may be coming down a little to hard on them demanding a
written apology, etc.  PAT]

I second Steve Bracks's remarks on this issue. Getting poor customer
service heaps on insult to injury. ( ... literally, if you are in the
health care industry! ;-)

Apology letters take only a little time to write, and only a stamp to
mail.  The biggest "cost" is in the emotional trauma of admitting that
you could ever possibly have been in the wrong.

Customer service today relies upon the empowerment of the person answering
the phone to 1) be able to identify the problem and 2) solve the issue
to the customer's satisfaction. If a customer feels completely disempowered
by the process of lodging their complaint, then it is valid to escalate
their issue to someone else who'll listen.

A successful customer service transaction with AT&T might not
necessarily have resulted in the customer "getting their way," but at
least given the impression that their voice was heard. In this case,
it seems that the transaction was completely unsuccessful for the
customer. A kind reply might not fix the issue either, but again
acknowledges the customer as a human being, and shows that AT&T cares
about their individual residential users. Action taken to correct an
issue at a point like this (taking a lose-lose situation to a win-win)
is the kind of thing that service heroes try to do, and are the kind
of experiences that win customers for life.

To bounce back to the original issue -- misbillings -- if AT&T has
problems getting billing done through the local carriers, then it is
paramount that they identify the cause of the misbillings and take
appropriate action. You would think that they'd *want* to know if
customers are getting the great service "as seen on TV," and if not,
why not? Otherwise they'll lose not just the customers that their new
service plan was trying to attract, but they may also risk losing
existing customers! (As many studies show, complaints travel faster
than praise, and are often more believed as well!)

BTW: Thank you Pat, for pointing out the possiblity of billing through the
local carrier as the possible cause of the issue. Issue escalation to
Usenet once again came to the rescue!

I'll be interested to hear if and how the issue is ever resolved. (You
see, I am an AT&T customer myself ... :-)


Peter Corless   Cisco Systems, Inc.
Senior Customer Service Representative
email: [e-mail]     toll-free: (800) 553-NETS
fax:       [phone]     direct:    [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think time and again the main reason for
many/most of AT&T's billing errors comes as a result of billing through
the local telcos.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: 3270 Emulation (Wind
Date: 19 May 1994 12:48:37 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)


In <[e-mail]>, Roger Fajman <[e-mail]> writes:

>> I'm looking for a good Shareware 3270 Emulator for Windows. I do a
>> great deal of work in the VAX/VMS environment and use WRQ's Reflection
>> 2 for Windows, however, this is not suited for the IBM mainframe
>> environment. If you know of any 3270 Emulators for Windows, could you
>> please provide me with the information I need to obtain them.

> P.S. - WRQ sells a version of Reflection with TN3270 capability.

"Reflection 3270" is the product which does this.  In addition to the
base terminal emulation features, it supports file transfer, EEHLLAPI,
DDE, OLE 2.0 Automation, and comes with a Visual Basic - like scripting
language.  It runs with our TCP/IP stack, or can use third-party Winsock-
compliant stacks.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones
Organization: Motorola, LMPS
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 12:45:49 -0500


 From Motorola Cellular Service Bulletin #179 4/92

Motorola designs and manufactures cellular telephones for several
OEM's.  In such cases the OEM manufacturer has contracted Motorola to
design a unique telephone system to fit their particular requirements.
Standard Motorola equipment will not operate properly if installed
into unique OEM cables.

Motorola strongly discourages any attempt to install a standard
Motorola cellular telephone into unique OEM cables.  Custom features
designed into OEM phones are not operaable with standard Motorola
equipment, and standard Motorola telephones do not operate properly on
OEM-designed cables.

Motorola is under contract to OEM manufacturers in these cases and
cannot provide technical details on equipment specially-designed for
any customer, nor can Motorola sell unique OEM equipment directly to
anyone other than the OEM under contract.

Customers are urged to contact their car dealer for information on
purchasing the unit which is designed for their application.


John Gilbert   [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 7:54:45 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device


>> Has anyone heard of a digital writing device presumably using
>> lightpens or something equivalent, that has two "terminals" for
>> people to use to communicate over the phone as if by writing? ...

We used these here at this agency before we moved over to the then-
advanced-technology Western Electric "Electronic Blackboard" for audio
teleconferencing. (That was an actual blackboard in a metal frame/stand,
about 4' X 5' or so, in which the blackboard area was a double-layer
pressure sensitive region. As you wrote on it with chalk, the layers
touched and sent a signal which was displayed on a video monitor at
the remote site. It used modem-like tones for transmitting the data
down the phone line. Erasing was neat -- in the absence of an eraser,
cutting off a light-path between two sensors in the eraser tray caused
the pressure on the board to be interpreted as an erasure instead of a
solid line. Or you could hit a switch and just kill the whole video
image at once.) This device went away when video teleconferencing came
in.  I wonder when WE last sold/leased these, or if they're still around?

I just checked with our A/V person on the name of those earlier writing
devices we used, and he says they were "Telenotes" -- he's pretty sure that
was the name of the company, too, but I guess they could have been made by
the previously-referenced "Telautograph" company and "Telenotes" might
have been a model name.  Anyone out there recall if these were competing
brands or just company and model names?

I never saw them in actual use -- by the time I got involved in our tele-
conferencing work the Telenotes had been relegated to a box on the shelf
in the back of the conference area ... they used ordinary ball-point
pens writing on plain paper strips. The receiving box's pen was slaved
to the sender's, whose writing motions were duplicated at the remote
site. I have the vague recollection that there were separate sending
and receiving units; the same device didn't switch back and forth from
being a sender to being a receiver. In that case, I guess the conferences
required two separate phone calls, one for each connection.  Anyone
recall if that is the case or if I'm wrong about that? (I also dimly recall
acoustic-coupling muffs on them ...)

I don't know if these could be set up so that multiple receivers could
be slaved to a single master.  It seems like that would be necessary
in many circumstances.


Will

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

From: [e-mail] (Ray Bruman)
Subject: Re: Footnote to A History of Underseas Cables
Date: 18 May 1994 22:18:18 GMT
Organization: Raynet Corp, Menlo Park, CA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (James H. Haynes) writes:

> Another interesting facet of history, also from George Oslin's book,
> is the relation between transatlantic cables and the U.S. purchase of
> Alaska.

> Other figures mentioned in connection with this event are Leo Tolstoy,
> who was made a count in recognition of his work promoting telegraphy
> in Russia, and a U.S. diplomat named George Kennan.  Oslin doesn't say
> so, but I would presume the latter is an ancestor of the living
> diplomat with the same name.

Yes, he is an ancestor, and he was only a 20-year old adventurer when
he set out in 1864.  In 1870 he published an amazing account of the
trip: "Tent Life in Siberia."  It was reissued in paperback about 5-10
years ago.  Unfortunately it is by now out of print (according to the
publisher) but my friend got hers through the Quality Paperback club
and I hope to get a copy myself some day.  As noted in the forward, it
is so much like Mark Twain's "Roughing It" that you could jumble the
titles and it would make sense.  It is hair-raising, hilarious, and
completely engrossing.


Ray Bruman   Raynet Corp.  [e-mail]   415-688-2325

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 09:01:52 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: History of Underseas Cables


    I was surprised that in the excellent series of articles on
telegraph and telephone cables there was no mention of Arthur C.
Clarke's fine book "Voice Across the Sea" (Harper, 1958).  I don't
know whether it's in print anymore, but it is very well written and
worth finding.  It gives the full history of the early cables, and
proceeds through early radio telephone connections through the first
AT&T voice cables in the 1950s.


David Ofsevit    Digital Equipment Corp. (for identification only)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps our resident historian on these
things, Don Kimberlin will respond to your comment.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 08:02:51 +0500
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


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

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

> Do you have a limit on the number telephone IDs :) that you are allow
> to block calls from?  Or do they charge you on a byte-used deal? :)
> Like I always say, I'd rather have a list of allowed numbers and
> forget the rest. :)

   The latter capability is known as "computer access restriction" or
some such title.  Basically, it blocks calls unless from a small (say
ten) set of numbers.  Those not on the list can be forwarded to an
alternate number or to a TELCo "not accepting calls from this number"
announcement.

   The list sizes are small, each TELCo sets their own limit on size.
They will never substitute for a large CPE-based screening system.  On
the other hand, the Call Block list can have "private" numbers added
to it -- something CPE can't do.


Al Varney

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 13:11:20 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes?  I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate


[e-mail] (Anton Sherwood) wrote:

> Speaking of NNX and NXX, is there a letter for the set {0,1}?  I
> haven't seen one used.  If (strangely) there isn't a convention, how
> about B for Bit, so old-style area codes are NBX?

The letter Y has been used since the earliest days in this context.
Old style numbers are NYX NNX-XXXX.  They've always been in upper
case, which is not in keeping with mathematical use.


Tony H.

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 12:03:31 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate


I am not 100% sure; I remember Z used for "0 or 1 only".

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 00:34:53 PDT
From: Mike Borsetti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Modems


> Anyone out there with experience or recommendations regarding cellular
> modems.

Yes.  As a matter of fact I am the author of a comprehensive yet brief
informational paper on how to do data transmissions over cellular
(AMPS) entitled -- very creatively -- "Primer on Transmitting Data
over Cellular".  It currently isn't available on the Internet, but I'd
be glad to e-mail it to you on request.  If you have a CompuServe
account, you will find it posted in the Wireless Data library of the
TELECOM forum.

The primer contains a discussion of the modem protocols that work well
over cellular and of the hardware needed to make it all work.  It also
lists phone numbers for all manufacturers (known to me) in the field.


[e-mail]
Business Development Manager, Wireless Data
Cellular One/San Francisco

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

From: marks![e-mail] (Charles McGuinness)
Date: Mon, 16 May 94 11:05:56 EDT
Subject: Re: Call For Hearings on Assured Public Access to InterNet


I hate to let politics intrude in a otherwise valuable discussion of
the technical and business aspects of the telecommunications industry,
but I find it hard to let the above referenced article pass by without
commenting.

The notion of "Assured Public Access to InterNet" strikes me as being
pure BS.  It seems more like this coalition wants to assure themselves
of subsidized telecommunications in the future.

On the other hand, I'm glad TELECOM Digest published the letter.  Now
I can write my representatives to tell them not to waste their time
with the demands of this pompous coalition!

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 08:21:28 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: What Network Equipment is Needed to Set up Access Point


> It sounds like you're about to get into the wonderful world of Unix.
> The addresses we have on the internet don't seem to want to let people
> telnet into our site.  This is because we have a network with only DOS
> machines on it.  I have heard that we are going to have to get a Unix
> box and a fully qualified domain name if we want to be fully on the 'net.

We have a similiar situation but it is the result of a corporate firewall
many miles from here that blocks inward FTP and TELNET.

DOS has nothing to do with it. I have a nice little obsolete 386SX-16
in my office which is running three concurrent Novell DOS 7.0 TASKMGR
sessions -- one FTP server, one SMTP server, and a DOS box in case I
want to look at things or send E-Mail. The Ethernet package is FTP
Software's PCTCP (lots o' plugs). Really just a matter of the right
software, an IP address and being registered with a Domain Name Server
(DNS).

Nice thing about PCTCP is that it gives you the whole header and lets
me experiment with features like Telnet 25 (do-it-yourself E-Mail)
plus lots of other things that only a fanatic who uses both VAXen and
3090s would notice.

Could do the same thing with Windoze I suppose, but TASKMGR, like
DESQVIEW, has much less performance overhead on this machine and I'm
just lazy.

I have another 386DX-25 at home that can do the same thing and was
built from the parts left over when I upgraded my main hobby machine
to a 486 (at son's urging; 7th Guest ran too slow). Only cost was
$39.95 mini tower case with power supply since old CGA monitor and
other leftovers are just fine for the purpose.

Originally, I set it up to examine E-Mail headers (you can't trust
them) and capture entire packets (you can trust those but you have to
know what you are looking at) after a friend was the subject of some
viciously forged E-Mail but it has proved handy since.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 10:28:22 CST
From: "Greg Abbott"  <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers


In message Wed, 18 May 94 02:43:08 CDT, [e-mail]
(TELECOM Moderator) noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I have also pointed out in the past,
> years ago when I worked at the credit card billing office my extension
> on the centrex system was 7265.  The bar and grill downstairs where many
> employees went for lunch (or to idle away the afternoon hiding from their
> supervisor) had the phone number 726-5xxx. I could set my watch by it:
> every day at 11:30 -- the start of the first lunch hour -- my phone would
> ring. I would answer; a voice on the other end would say 'damn' (or worse
> or more crude, depending on who) and click off. They were calling down-
> stairs to get their lunch order started and had forgotten to dial '9'
> for an outside line. Then at 12:30, the start of the second lunch hour,
> the process would be repeated with one or two more calls like that.  PAT]

Pat, you should have taken a few orders from the callers ... I bet they'd
pay closer attention to what number they were dialing!


GREG ABBOTT          INTERNET: [e-mail]
9-1-1 COORDINATOR    COMPUSERVE: 76046,3107
VOICE: 217/333-4348  METCAD  FAX:   [phone]
1905 E. MAIN ST.     URBANA, IL 61801  PAGER: 800/222-6651  PIN # 9541


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A couple times when I was not
distracted with my own work and was expecting such calls to arrive I
did not take any orders but I did offer suggestions of my own for
their dining pleasure.  After all, it was the Diner's Club ... I'd
answer and the ones who were listening at that point would respond
angrily and hang up; they knew they had dialed wrong. For the ones who
were not listening when I answered, their first question often as not
was 'what kinda soup?' meaning what kind of soup do you have today?  I
grew quite creative in my responses, most of which cannot be printed
in a family digest like this one. If they asked about the luncheon
special, I had an answer for that also. Suffice to say my answers were
often scatalogical in nature.

Then about the same time -- late sixties -- my home phone number somehow
wound up on a list of the names/phone numbers of janitors for some real
estate company here. I'd get these calls at all hours from crabby tenants
wanting to know such things as why wasn't there any heat in their apartment
(my answer: for the rent you pay, you are not entitled to any hot water or
heat in the winter); when would the garbage be taken away (my answer: if it
were not for filthy pigs like you, there would not be so much garbage); or
similar. That was only after three or four calls to the real estate company
asking them to please correct the typographical error in their list.

As I recall, John Higdon once said he had to take hotel reservations for
quite awhile on his 800 number; other Digest readers have reported equally
creative solutions to persistent wrong number callers.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #238
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01692;
          19 May 94 18:55 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25393; Thu, 19 May 94 14:57:23 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25384; Thu, 19 May 94 14:57:20 CDT
Date: Thu, 19 May 94 14:57:20 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #239

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 19 May 94 14:57:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 239

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    What Are Baseworks and Display Construction Set Packages? (A. Hashmi)
    Directory Assistance From Cellular Companies (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service (Bud Bach)
    Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone (Fran S. Menzel)
    Re: International Callback Services (Peter Leif Rasmussen)
    Re: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software (Richard Kashdan)
    Re: Call Display From New York (Tony Harminc)
    Re: 800 Number Billback (Jonathan Loo)
    Re: "Private" Message on CID Box ([e-mail])
    Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? (Joseph Herl)
    Information Needed on Netiquette (Rosemary Angela Mauro)
    Re: Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine (Jonathan Loo)
    Re: DID Loophole or I'm Screwed up? (Randy Gellens)
    Re: Need Info on R.L. Drake Co. (Bennett Z. Kobb)
    Re: Problems With Call Return (Steve Elias)
    Re: Caller ID Gets Me Jealous (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Cellular Phone Timers (Mike Roche)
    Re: Palestinian Country Code (Carl Moore)
    Re: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software (Robert J. Rhodes)
    History of Area Code Splits (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 including Compuserve and GEnie.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Atiqullah Hashmi)
Subject: What Are Baseworks and Display Construction Set Packages?
Date: 19 May 1994 13:04:12 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, New Jersey, USA


Hi netters,

Could any kind soul describe what are these packages and what do they do:

1. Baseworks
2. Display Construction Set(DCS)

Also if there is any book/material/online info for details on these
things, kindly let me know.


Thanks very much,

Atiq

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Directory Assistance From Cellular Companies
Date: Thu, 19 May 94 09:13:00 PDT


Henry Mensch <[e-mail]> wrote about GTE Mobilnet's "lame"
Directory Assistance in the Bay Area.

Many cellular operators are sourcing Directory Assistance service to
alternative operator services outfits. Many of these firms lack access
to LEC or RBOC on-line data (including most recent adds/moves/changes),
thus accounting for such inaccuracies in their service.

McCaw operations recognize this and rely on LEC and RBOC DA bureaus
for Directory Services to provide the highest degree of accuracy and
efficiency to its cellular subscribers.  McCaw cellular units in the
Southwest (including Metrocel in Dallas) recently added automatic call
completion to enhance existing DA service.  Now subscribers can enjoy
the added convenience of call completion when calling for Directory
Assistance.  The automatic call completion is included as a part of
Directory Assistance service and offered at no additional charge. McCaw
is extending this service throughout its U.S. operations including
those it operates under the Cellular One (tm) name.


Regards,

Lynne

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

From: [e-mail] (Bud Bach)
Subject: Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service
Date: 19 May 1994 14:22:05 GMT
Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola


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

> Ameritech offers Chicago-area reverse lookups (NPAs 312 and 708 only).
> Call 796-9600 from 312+ or 708+ phones and pay $.35 for two lookups.
> From outside those NPAs, call 312-796-9600; you just pay the toll.
> This service uses human voice for prompts and synthetic speech (that I
> find hard to understand) for the names and addresses.  Remember,
> Chicago-area lookups only.

Note that if you ask the thing to repeat the same information several
times a real live person comes on line.


Bud   [e-mail] (Bud Bach)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ditto if you sit there and do nothing at
all after it first answers; the asssumption then is you are calling from
a rotary phone and the call is passed to a live operator. The Name and
Address Service we have here has been around since the 1930's. Prior to
the consoliated service at 796-9600, the same listings were obtained by
dialing <exchange>-2080. The old 'two-oh-eight-oh' service was manual;
that number rang on the desk of the Chief Operator's clerk in each CO
and they looked at an index card in a box on their desk.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 17:22:56 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> DIAL: 900-933-3330, then use a touch-tone phone to enter ten-digit
> numbers.  The charge is still $1.00 a minute -- cheaper and as
> accurate as the defunct Telename service George mentioned.

I just tried it on my home number, which is listed and has been in
service for more than a year. It told me it couldn't find it.


Andrew Laurence             Oakland, California USA
[e-mail]   Pacific Daylight Time (GMT-7)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's because, as Lynne Gregg points
out in her note earlier in this issue, many of those outfits rely on
old, obsolete listings rather than accessing the up-to-date listings
of telco. They'd have to *pay* telco to do that; then there would be
less profit in their operation. I guess they figure it is better to
work with older, less expensive databases and be right part of the time
rather than do the job right but make less profit.    PAT]

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

From: f.s.menzel <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 07:33:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Re: Searching For a Specific Telephone


Steve Cogorno wrote:

>> For quite a while now I'am searching for a specific telephone probably
>> manufactured by AT&T.Specific features: narrow receiver, the speech
>> unit of the receiver is bent almost 90 degrees; the receiver is shaped
>> like an L , wire phone, mostly seen in black colour.I suppose it most
>> be a very common model in the US , because I saw in many different
>> movies.

> It sounds like you are referring to the MERLIN/System 25,75, etc Voice
> Terminals.  You will not be able to use these without a Control Unit,
> which will cost more than $1500 in most cases.  The phones themselves
> range from $250-500 depending on the size.

Steve: The controller is not required if you stick to the analog sets
such such as the 7102, which deals with ordinary tip and ring.  I don't
know what price the resale market is getting, but $250-500 sounds
high.


Fran Menzel 908-957-5615     AT&T Global Communications Systems

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 09:16:55 JST
From: [e-mail] (Peter Leif Rasmussen)
Subject: Re: International Callback Services


I would like to comment on the callback FAQ posted here by Bruce Hahne.

I read a version of that before and investigated various services and
found that Globalcom 2000 looked very interesting. That is about a
month ago. The representative I talked with, Scot Bundren was very
quick to answer my questions about the services, until I had provided
him with my credit card number!

Then all questions have gone unanswered, for a period of now two weeks.
The answers to questions before used to come within 24 hours. I also
now notice that his email address has changed from before [e-mail]
to now [e-mail].

What I want to say is that I fear this might be a scam.


Peter Rasmussen, Japan

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Kashdan)
Subject: Re: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 05:59:50 GMT


[e-mail] ([e-mail]) writes:

> We had a home grown telecommunication package that allowed us to send
> alphanumeric messages to our PAC-TEL pagers. We are interested in
> updating the softwaree. We are interested in reasonably priced
> commercial software or in the protocol specs of the 800 number we
> communicate with the old package.

I have a Windows-based package called Alfie-Jr. that works pretty
well.  The publisher is Evtek Corporation 800-388-8499 and it was
pretty cheap, I am pretty sure it was something like $39 or $49.

Another one you might check out is the Borland Sidekick 2.0 (not
Sidekick Plus, but version 2.0 of the regular Sidekick).  This will
send alphanumeric pager messages.

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 14:45:02 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Call Display From New York


I found out how my caller from JFK airport in New York placed that
call to me in Toronto that showed 212 210-0000 on my Call Display.  He
dialed MCI's 800 number (he didn't say what it was), and keyed in his
MCI card number and my phone number.  So MCI seems, under some
circumstances at least, to pass CNID to Bell Canada.  This is perhaps
not surprising, in light of the corporate relationship between the
two.  It still isn't clear who produced the apparently bogus NPA and
number in the first place.  How long will it take the regulators to
disallow this sort of thing, I wonder.


Tony Harminc

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

Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 17:33:36 -0400
From: Jonathan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback


Pat Townson wrote:

> You are not being charged for the call to the 800 number. That part is
> free to you the caller with the recipient paying for the carriage. You
> are being charged for the return collect call the Information Provider
> makes to you, which the AOS operator asked if you would accept the
> charges for. Admittedly sometimes they do not bother to call back but
> simply continue the conversation with you on the same connection, but
> none the less the AOS operator at some point asked if you would accept
> the charges for the call; when accepted, it then is like any other
> collect call.

They often don't call back; AT&T explained to me that they transfer
your call to a 900 number; at least that is the case with recorded
messages.  Or is it?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've heard this is the case also, that
your call is forwarded to a 900 number. I presume they somehow have
to force in the number from which you are calling so the billing can
be done. Either way, it is a poor practice and in bad taste.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (MUR)
Subject: Re: "Private" Message on CID Box
Organization: WELLESLEY COLLEGE
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 11:59:24 GMT


Another posting in this folder referred to "Anonymous Call Blocking",
a service offered by the phone company in Texas. Is this one of the
Fed's mandated services, which will be available everywhere soon, or
is it just something offered at the discretion of individual phone
companies?

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 13:47:41 -0500
Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself?
From: Joseph Herl <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Many thanks for taking the time to respond to my question about how to
call myself.  Your response was detailed and absolutely correct.  The
ringback number 1-577-nnnn works here in Champaign.  I think this will
be a big time saver when we move next week.


Joe Herl


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, so it does work throughout all of
Illinois Bell's territory. Mine is 1-573-nnnn. I hope other readers in
northern Illinois find this useful.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rosemary Angela Mauro)
Subject: Information Needed on Netiquette
Date: 19 May 1994 03:36:15 GMT
Organization: University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I am currently engaged in putting on a presentation for a
telecommunications class at the U of Oregon. I need any information
you may have regarding netiquette,nethics and conventional terms used
on th intenet or email. Perhaps someone has an email address where I
could write for information.  Would appreciate any response.


Thanks.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Imagine that! Someone actually *asking*
how to be polite and courteous on the net instead of being *told* by
several dozen angry readers ... :)  I suggest news.announce.newreaders
is one good source for the information.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 21:59:50 -0400
From: Jonathan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Annoyance Calls From Answering Machine


Another telephone company service that can help is Call Trace, *57.
Ask the Business Office about it.  It might not be *57 in your area.

By the way, Pat's suggestions sounded a little too draconian.

The idea of "it is dialing correctly but some equipment in the central
office is on the intermittant fritz (telco's problem, and less likely
than the first two probabilities)": how often does this occur?  It
doesn't sound like a common problem, and if there is such a problem:
what can be done to fix something that serious?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It isn't that common, and sort of
difficult to find and fix. Let's say it is an older central office with
a lot of mechanical equipment. One of the pieces of common equipment
there -- used by all subscribers -- goes bad, gets a loose connection,
etc. It used to be in the old stepping switch offices that sometimes a
switch would get old and worn out and miss a 'step' here and there.
Maybe the number the answering machine is *supposed* to call is just
one digit off the number it actually gets connected to, and then it only
happens when the answering machine is making a call and happens to get
assigned the piece of faulty equipment in the CO. In other words, it
happens all the time to whoever happens to select that particular piece
of equipment in the central office, but it only happens that the answering
machine gets that circuit once every five or ten calls, like any other
typical user.

I think I mentioned once that I long ago would call a certain number in
the daytime and always get connected with no hassles, yet when calling
the same number at midnight or one in the morning I'd always get stuck
in the CO somewhere with the call going nowhere and never completing. Once
I was able to get someone in night plant willing to look into the matter,
it was found that the first trunk in a group of several to be offered to
me was bad. In the daytime when traffic in the CO was heavy, no one ever
got the first selected trunk over and over again. In the middle of the
night I *always* got it. Some of those obscure little kinks in the CO
take a Sherlock Holmes to root them out, report them and get them fixed.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 17 MAY 94 00:42:00
Subject: Re: DID Loophole or I'm Screwed up?


>   Per FCC Part 68 and TELCo tariffs, anything other than audible ring
> and busy tone (with some exceptions) is "meaningful" -- and the call
> must be supervised (answered).

I thought it was OK for a PBX to issue an intercept without returning
supervision.  For example, "The extension you dialed does not exist.
Please call xyx-xxyy for assistance."  Do these messages have to be
supervised?


Randall Gellens        [e-mail]
Net**2 656-6350    (Please forward bounces to
Mail Stop MV 237        [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Bennett Z. Kobb)
Subject: Re: Need Info on R.L. Drake Co.
Organization: New Signals Research
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 11:30:30 GMT


Their current address:

RL Drake Co
PO Box 3006
Miamisburg OH 45343

800 568 3795

Note that it's Miamisburg and not Miamisville.


Have a nice forever,

Bennett Kobb

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

From: Steve Elias <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return
Date: Thu, 19 May 94 11:06:29 MST


Hi Monty,

IMHO, Call Return is a fine service and I am pleased with it so far.
It is a good workaround to the California PUC wimp out on Caller ID.
I've called back a bunch of wrong numbers to my answering machine so
far. It's fun.

Just because some people are too clueless or obnoxious or shy to use
Call Return courteously does not mean the service should not be
offered. There are some of us who are capable of using Call Return
courteously and effectively!


eli

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

Date: Mon, 16 May 94 07:26:34 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Caller ID Gets Me Jealous


In TELECOM Digest V14 #228 [e-mail] (David Hayes) writes:

> Personally, I believe that the phone companies are afraid
> that so many people would select per-line blocking (rather than
> per-call) that no one would want to pay for Caller ID service.

Selecting per-line blocking to hide a phone number doesn't help.  It
doesn't prevent the number from being listed in the directory; all it
does is slow the information gatherer down.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  1+[phone]
                                          FAX   1+[phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Roche)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Timers
Date: 19 May 1994 17:43:10 GMT
Organization: Tadpole Technology, Inc. Austin, TX
Reply-To: [e-mail]


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is apparently, at present no way to
> start or stop the timer(s) with supervision. I believe the timers are
> wired through the SEND button and that is about it.

Actually on my Motorola MicroTac UltraLite the timer starts when the
phone is assigned a channel and stops a second or so after I push
"END" ie. when the phone gives up the channel. My previous phone (an
OKI) behaved the same. This yields an accurate "billed" time for
completed chargable calls.

It would be nice though to be able to tell the phone (FUNC x); "the
last call was 'free' (incomplete, customer service etc) so subtract
the last call time from the cumulative timer.

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 14:14:29 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Palestinian Country Code


So you are saying that +972 7 includes Gaza, right?  The zone.9 file
currently doesn't have any reference to city code 7 under +972.

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 14:28:19 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Robert J. Rhodes)
Subject: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software


[e-mail] ([e-mail]) wrote:

> We had a home grown telecommunication package that allowed us to send
> alphanumeric messages to our PAC-TEL pagers. We are interested in
> updating the softwaree. We are interested in reasonably priced
> commercial software or in the protocol specs of the 800 number we
> communicate with the old package.

There are some commercial packages available that will work with most
paging company systems. I have used a package called PC Page, made by
Metriplex, Inc. Their phone number is [phone]. It is a DOS
based product that works well.

We also are using some software provided by our local paging vendor
(Mobil Media)called MobilComm Messaging Software. I don't know how you
would go about acquiring it. You could try contacting Mobil Media.
Their number is [phone]. This is a Windows based package and
works with 800 service.  It was written by a company called Desktop
Paging Software, Inc. I don't have the phone number for them.

Mobil Media also has a package that is DOS based called SNAP Page. It
is similar to the PC Page product.


Robert J. Rhodes   [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 14:04:25 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: History of Area Code Splits


New stuff added in history file, which I note has been changed back to
history.of.area.splits; this is accounting for the message from
Gregory P. Monti, and not yet for that from Alan Varney.  This is for
these areas: 217,309,618,815 Illinois 304 West Virginia add full
cutover note for Lincoln Telephone portion of 402 Nebraska Ohio (all
areas: 216,419,513,614) 315,518,607 New York Wisconsin (all areas:
414,608,715) 817 Texas (note that Fort Worth and vicinity changed
earlier).

Other comments:

408,805 should have been included in changes for California?

How do you arrive at 1+10D for 610 in Pennsylvania?  It is still part
of 215, which along with the rest of Pa. has 7D noted instead.

What about area 914 in New York?

I was surprised by the note about West Virginia going to 7D for long
distance within it.  There is some local service from it to other area
codes, at least into Maryland; I am most familiar with the local calls
between Cumberland, MD and Ridgely, W.Va.  In 1991 I wrote a note to
the Digest that 707-xxxx from a Ridgely pay phone did indeed refer to
the 301-707 prefix in Cumberland.


TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Although Carl sent the latest version of
the "History of Area Code Splits" file to me separately to be included
in the Telecom Archives when I do the next update there, it has been
quite awhile since it was itself published in the Digest, and it is a
file I am asked about frequently. So, to conclude this issue, here is
the 'history.of.area.splits' file, updated to May 18.  My thanks to
Carl for his continued hard work in keeping this Archives file up to
date and comprehensive.

  Date:     Wed, 18 May 94 14:07:36 EDT
  From: [e-mail]
  Subject:  history.of.area.splits

Last updated: 18 May 1994 by Carl Moore

Generalizing prefixes from NNX to NXX (i.e., allowing N0X/N1X) is an
alternative to splitting an area which has had only NNX up to this
point.  When an area has NXX (not NNX) prefixes, its long distance
dialing instructions usually are:

  7D or 1 + NPA + 7D within area (can no longer use 1 + 7D);
  1 + NPA + 7D to other areas (can no longer use NPA + 7D);
  for 0+ calls, try 0 + NPA + 7D (some 0 + 7D would require timeout).

In other words, the leading 1 (or 0) means that what follows is
an area code.  These instructions can, without further revision,
accommodate area codes of form NXX, not just of form N0X/N1X, and
thus could be universal by the time area codes must generalize to
NXX.  The deadline for switches to be able to handle NXX area codes
is 1 January 1995 (had been 1 July 1995).

It was thought that the first batch of NNX area codes would be of NN0
form, so that some areas could keep 1 + 7D for intra-NPA long distance
by disallowing prefixes of NN0 form; I did not know if this would have
been affected by use of 52x codes (x not 0) for Mexico.  But on 22
July 1993, it was announced that area 205, covering all of Alabama,
would split in 1995 to form 334.

It is unclear how generalizing area codes to NXX would affect the
policy of not using N0X/N1X prefixes until NNX starts running short.

I found an exception to the above dialing instructions in February
1992 for 215-267 (Denver) and 215-484 (Adamstown) in Pennsylvania.
These exchanges, served by Denver & Ephrata Telephone & Telegraph
(also serving a part of the 717 area), were still using the old
instructions (1 + 7D and 0 + 7D within area code), even though
this necessitated timeout resolution for some calls.  I learned
(on 2 September 1993) that they would move to 717 (Denver going
to 717-336 because of 717-267 being in use at Chambersburg).  On
25 September 1993, I noticed that (during permissive dialing) all
long distance from there was to be dialed as 1+NPA+7D (with 0+NPA+7D
for all 0+), with "1 717" apparently being dropped after the full
cutover to 717.

The suggestion (at least from Bellcore) has been seen that ideally,
all calls should be makeable as 1+NPA+7D (this does not necessarily
forbid shorter forms).

These areas prepared for N0X/N1X prefixes before it became necessary
to prepare for NNX area codes:

213 California, July 1973
  (7D on all calls within it)
  (later 213/818, now 213/310/818, to become 213/310/818/562)
  (but for some time, this area continued to publish 0+7D instruction
   for within-NPA 0+ calls)
212 New York, some days after 24 Nov 1980
  (7D on all calls within it)
  (later 212/718, now 212/917/718)
312 Illinois, Oct 1982--but got 1st N0X/N1X spring 1983?
  (7D on all calls within it)
  (now 312/708, to become 312/708/630)
201 New Jersey
  (7D on all calls within it; also applies to 609)
  (now 201/908)
214 Texas, 1986 or 1987 (by July 1987)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 817,
   at least in Fort Worth area)
  (now 214/903)
301/202/703 Maryland/DC/Virginia, 1987, due to DC area growth
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
  (301 now 301/410)
415 California, Feb 1989?
  (7D on all calls within it)
  (now 415/510)
404 Georgia, Oct 1989?
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 912)
  (now 404/706)
919 North Carolina, 2 Mar 1990
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 704)
  (now 919/910)
416 Ontario, 3 Mar 1990
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
  (now 416/905)
602 Arizona, 1 July 1990
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
  (to become 602/520)
313 Michigan, 1990?
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
  (now 313/810)
512 Texas, 9 Sept 1990
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
  (now 512/210)
205 Alabama, Dec 1990
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
  (to become 205/334)
215 Pennsylvania, 20 May 1991
  (7D on all calls within it; exception noted above for 2 prefixes
   later moving to 717, but the new instructions also applied to:
   717-354,355 New Holland
   717-656,661 Leola
   717-768 Intercourse)
  (now 215/610)
206 Washington, 12 Jan 1992
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
  (to become 206/360)
713 Texas, 8 Mar 1992 (permissive dialing 8 Dec 1991)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
  (to become 713/281)
714 California, 1992?
  (7D on all calls within it)
  (now 714/909)
503 Oregon, 10 July 1993
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)

No note about N0X/N1X prefixes, but instructions are being changed
to prepare for NNX area codes:

305,407,813,904 Florida, 7 Mar 1992 (at least for 813)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
207 Maine; 603 New Hampshire (17 July 1993); 1993-1994
  (This was to include all New England areas except Connecticut,
   but this list now has separate entries for Massachusetts,
   Vermont, and Rhode Island.)
  (Earlier, for 413 going to 7D on all calls within area code: Feb-
   June 1993; full cutover 21 Sept 1993; 1+NPA+7D for local calls to
   another area code permissive 1 Mar to 8 Apr 1993.)
  (7D on all calls within area code; optional for New Hampshire,
   with per-line option to block 7D and require 1+NPA+7D for toll
   within area code)
413,508,617 Massachusetts (order by public utility commission in
   Oct 1993; mandatory, in 413, 1 June 1994; eastern Massachusetts
   to follow later in 1994)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
802 Vermont, permissive 18 Feb 1994, mandatory 18 May 1994
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
401 Rhode Island, announced Jan 1994 (but when to be implemented?)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
303,719 Colorado (27 Feb 1994); 612,507,218 Minnesota (late 1994);
  319,515,712 Iowa; 701 North Dakota (19 June 1994, full cutover
  3 Oct 1994; 605 South Dakota; 308,402 Nebraska (full cutover
  late 1994 for Lincoln Telephone area); 505 New Mexico (14 Feb
  1994, full cutover 19 Jun 1994); 801 Utah; 307 Wyoming; 406
  Montana; 208 Idaho; 509 Washington (15 May 1994, full cutover
  17 Sept 1994); 1993-1994 (U.S. West areas except Arizona,
  Oregon, 206 in Washington)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
219,317,812 Indiana, c. Aug 1993 (full cutover 1 Dec 1993)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
615 Tennessee, 1 July 1993(?) (full cutover 1 Sept 1993)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
901 Tennessee, Sept 1993?
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
803 South Carolina, Sept 1993?
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
209,408,619,707,805,916 California; Pacific Bell, by 11 Oct 1993
  (These are the California area codes not cited above, as of Feb
   1993, as preparing for N0X/N1X prefixes; but some of these, in
   whole or in part, already have the new instructions.)
  (GTE areas: 0+NPA+7D for 0+ within own area code permissive 11 Oct
   1993, fully cut over 10 Oct 1994; direct-dial not affected.)
  (7D on all calls within area code)
412,717,814 Pennsylvania, for 717 1 Nov 1993 (full cutover 31 July 1994),
  for 814 8 Nov 1993 (full cutover 1 Aug 1994); announced Sept 1993
  (7D on all calls within area code)
716 New York, 5 Dec 1993 (at least for Rochester Telephone; is this
  permissive or mandatory date?)
  (7D on all calls within it)
601 Mississippi, Dec 1993
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
302 Delaware, 1 Apr 1994 (full cutover 7 Jan 1995)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
519,613,705,807 Ontario; 418,514,819 Quebec; 204 Manitoba; 306
  Saskatchewan; 403 Alberta (and Yukon and NW Territories); 506
  New Brunswick; 604 British Columbia; 709 Newfoundland (and
  Labrador); 902 Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island; 4 Sept 1994
  (all of Canada except 416 and 905 in Ontario)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
315,516,518,607 New York, 1994?
  (7D on all calls within area code)
217,309,618,815 Illinois, 1994?
  (7D on all calls within area code)
304 West Virginia, 1994?
  (7D on all calls within it)
216,419,513,614 Ohio, 1994? (full cutover 1 Jan 1995)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
414,608,715 Wisconsin, 1994?
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
817 Texas, 1994? (already in use in & near Fort Worth)
  (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)

Areacode splits:
If no date appears, the split may not have been announced publicly due
to lack of direct-dial facility at the time, or may never have occurred.
Early splits can only be guessed at with the following guidelines:
If an areacode is of form N1X, it is in a state or province with more
than 1 areacode. (The reverse, if it was ever true, is now obsolete.)
If an areacode is in a state or province with only 1 areacode, it is
of form N0X.  (The reverse, if it was ever true, is now obsolete.)

what?/209 California
what?/707 California
what?/805 California
305/813 Florida
what?/309 Illinois
502/606 Kentucky
504/318 Louisiana
612/507 Minnesota
402/308 Nebraska
what?/607 New York
704/919 North Carolina
405/918 Oklahoma
901/615 Tennessee
what?/806 Texas
206/509 Washington
what?/608 Wisconsin
416/519 Ontario, 1953
404/912 Georgia, 1953 or 1954
    December 1991 Greater Atlanta call guide, in discussing 404/706
    split, said "It's been 38 years since Georgia added an Area Code."
613/705 Ontario, 1957 (did 705 also take part of the then 416?)
201/609 New Jersey, late 1950s
415/408 California, 1960
616/906 Michigan, sometime after Nov 1960
what?/807 Ontario, 1962 (either an area which had no area code, or 705 split)
305/904 Florida, July 1965
703/804 Virginia, 24 June 1973 at 2:01 AM
714/619 California, Nov 1982
713/409 Texas, Mar 1983 (full cutover 90 days later)
213/818 California, Jan 1984
212/718 New York, 2 Sept 1984 (full cutover 31 Dec 1984)
    Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island became 718;
    Manhattan & Bronx stayed in 212;
    Bronx switched from 212 to 718, 1 July 1992 (full cutover
    15 May 1993; but until then, calls from Bronx to Brooklyn/
    Queens/Staten Island must still be dialed 1+718+7D, and
    effective 25 Sept 1993 must be dialed 7D)
303/719 Colorado, 5 Mar 1988
305/407 Florida, 16 Apr 1988
617/508 Massachusetts, 16 July 1988
312/708 Illinois, Nov 1989 (full cutover 9 Feb 1990)
202 District of Columbia & vicinity, 1 Oct 1990
    This behaved somewhat like a split despite no new area code.
    202 area code, previously useable for all but the outermost
    Maryland and Virginia suburbs, was restricted to DC proper.
    (Use 301 or 703, as the case may be, to reach the suburbs.)
    As a result, government offices (now including the Pentagon)
    using zipcodes starting with 200,202,203,204,205 and located
    in Md. or Va. can no longer be listed in area 202.  Prefixes
    in the Pentagon, which is in Virginia, were previously in area
    202 (not 703), and in 1990 were moved to area 703.  (Local
    calls across area code border changed from 7D to NPA+7D.)
214/903 Texas, 4 Nov 1990 (full cutover 4 May 1991)
201/908 New Jersey, 1 Jan 1991 (full cutover 8 June 1991)
415/510 California, 2 Sept 1991 (full cutover 27 Jan 1992)
301/410 Maryland, 1 Nov 1991 (full cutover 1 Nov 1992)
213/310 California, 2 Nov 1991 (full cutover 16 May 1992; was
     to be 2 May 1992, but was postponed indefinitely because
     of riots just before then)
    (all GTE plus some PacBell went into 310)
212/718/917 New York, 1 Jan 1992 (917, to be overlaid on
     212 & 718, is to be used for cellular & pagers)
404/706 Georgia, 3 May 1992 (full cutover 3 Aug 1992)
512/210 Texas, 1 Nov 1992 (full cutover 1 May 1993)
714/909 California, 14 Nov 1992 (full cutover 14 Aug 1993)
    (Riverside and San Bernardino counties go into 909;
     Orange County remains in 714)
416/905 Ontario, 4 Oct 1993 (full cutover 25 Mar 1994,
    postponed from 10 Jan 1994)
919/910 North Carolina, 14 Nov 1993 (full cutover 13 Feb 1994)
313/810 Michigan, 1 Dec 1993 (full cutover 10 Aug 1994)
215/610 Pennsylvania, 8 Jan 1994 (full cutover 7 Jan 1995)
205/334 Alabama, 15 Jan 1995 (full cutover 13 Mar 1995)
    (the first NNX area code to be announced, on 22 July 1993)
206/360 Washington, 15 Jan 1995 (full cutover 9 July 1995)
602/520 Arizona, 19 Mar 1995 (full cutover 23 July 1995)
    (announced 29 Nov 1993)
713/281 Texas, 1995 (nature of the split not yet decided)
213/310/818/562 California, Mar 1995 or Mar 1996 (cellular/pager overlay)
708/630 Illinois, 1st quarter 1995

Area codes 706,903,905 had been used, at least in the U.S., for
calling parts of Mexico.  (These codes were later announced for
Georgia, Texas, and Ontario respectively.)  706 and 905 were
discontinued 1 Feb 1991 for calls to Mexico (which was and still is
reachable in country code 52); I have no such date available for 903.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #239
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04982;
          20 May 94 3:07 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05194; Thu, 19 May 94 23:43:09 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05185; Thu, 19 May 94 23:43:07 CDT
Date: Thu, 19 May 94 23:43:07 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #240

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 19 May 94 23:43:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 240

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    ADSL and MPEG Viewing Tests (Robin Whittle)
    Cellular -> Analog Converter ([e-mail])
    311 Goes Statewide in New York (Dave Niebuhr)
    Distribution of WATS Numbers in the Numbering Plan (Kurt F. Sauer)
    Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? (Kevin Ray)
    Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? (Paul A. Lee)
    Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? ([e-mail])
    Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 Codes (Sergio Gelato)
    Re: Anyone Use AT&T Message Service? (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: CO Switch Types by Exchange Code (Paul Mokey)
    Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts (John Harris)
    Re: Wanted: Business Phone System (Paul A. Lee)
    Re: 800 Number Billback (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same? (Jay Hennigan)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Robin Whittle)
Subject: ADSL and MPEG Viewing Tests
Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 13:18:06 +1000


Magazine article on ADSL and MPEG-2 by Robin Whittle

ADSL stands for Asymmetrical Digital Subscriber Line - a technology
for transferring several Megabits/sec of data to the home, and several
hundred kbits/sec back to the exchange, using the existing twisted
pair copper wires - while the existing analog phone uses them as
usual. It does this by throwing a *lot* of Digital Signal Processing
at the many barriers the existing wires present to high bit-rate
communications. Each ADSL link is independent - it is not like a
shared coax cable.  For each link, there must be two transceivers -
one at the exchange and one at the home.

ADSL is seen as a way of bringing Pay TV, Video On Demand and
Interactive Broadband Services to homes without the need to lay new
cable.

In the May and June editions of {Australian Communications} is a two
part article I have spent several months preparing.  16 pages of text,
tables and diagrams report on DMT ADSL and on the results of the MPEG
Test Group's recent subjective viewing tests.

The Test Group reports that for MPEG-2, for some types of program, 5
to 6 Megabits/sec is required to give quality comparable to normal
television.  This does not include 256 to 400 kbit/sec for sound.  2
Megabits/sec may be OK for film material compressed off-line, where a
human operator can fine tune the compression algorithm's attention to
the most important part of the picture.  Fast action video material is
much more demanding.

Here is an outline of the two parts of the article.

Part 1 - ADSL - Bridging the Superhighway Gap?

Introduction.
        Video On Demand.
        Provision of alternative phone services.
        Brief comparison with coaxial cable, satellite and
        microwave Pay-TV distribution.

CAP and DMT - Two Approaches to ADSL.
        How QAM (Quadrature Amplitude Modulation) works - as in CAP.
        DMT (Discrete Multi Tone) is 249 channels of QAM.

The Twisted Pair Bottleneck.
        Physical description of buried telephone wires.
        Barriers to transmission of data :-
                Attenuation.
                Inter-Symbol Interference.
                Interference and Noise.
                Crosstalk.

HDSL - High bit-rate Digital Subscriber Line.
        Brief mention of this which provides 2 Mega bits/sec
        duplex over 2 or 3 pairs.

Why the ANSI standards committee chose DMT over CAP.

Telecom Australia's ADSL Pilot - for 300 homes in early 1995.
        71 hour 2 Mega bit/sec Video Server from DEC.
        155 Mega bit/sec SDH fibres link to ADSL switches, each
        with 100 CAP or DMT transceivers.
        Diagram and discussion of the system - which will be
        the second or third in the world and the first at
        2 Mega bits/sec.

Table listing the ANSI draft standard's options for downstream and
        duplex data rates.

Discussion of cost and (dis)advantages compared to digital coax.

Part 2 - Bringing Home ADSL - The Race is On

Detailed discussion of reach limits - depending on cable and data rates.
        It seems that 6 Mega bit/sec could work to 3 km of 0.4 mm
        cable (10 kft of 26 gauge). This - or a little more - may be
        enough to reach between 80 and 95% of urban subscribers in
        Australia. Many doubts remain about the distribution of cable
        lengths, crosstalk, impulse noise and the performance of
        practical ADSL transceivers.  Computer models predict 3.7km
        for 6 Megabits/sec and way over 4km for 2 Megabits/sec.
        I expect it will take two years of transceiver development,
        extensive field trials and new surveys of the existing cables
        before anyone will really know how many homes can be reached
        at 6 Megabits/sec.

Cost and Availability - Assessment of plans by Amati, Motorola and
        Aware & Analog Devices.
        Amati plans to release a 2 Megabit/sec "Presto" and a >6
        Megabit/sec "Overture" which will use Motorola DSPs and
        Amati's own custom chips. Aware & Analog Devices are working
        on multi DSP "chipset" and will evolve cheaper designs from
        there.  Analog Devices have a low-cost 2 MHz 14 bit monolithic
        Analog to Digital Converter which will be essential for low
        cost ADSL transceivers.  Motorola are designing a single chip
        transceiver for 1996 at <US$100. This is a very ambitious
        plan.

Latest details of issue 1 of the ANSI standard for DMT ADSL which will
        be good enough for trials. The second draft will take at least
        another year and will contain a specification for an interface
        to customer premises equipment which will be suitable for mass
        production.

Total System Cost.
        Likely costs of complete system including MPEG-2 video and
        audio decoders. C-Cube video chip needs four 4M DRAMs and may
        cost US$35 next year.

MPEG-2 Subjective viewing tests - as mentioned above.
        Factors which affect encoding difficulty and of some of the
        defects which are visible at low bit rates.

Brief discussion of managing Video On Demand and other data using ATM.
        Sydney networking company Jtec will develop an ATM/ADSL
        switch for Telecom Australia, but no details are available yet.

Inside DMT.
        Two diagrams depicting attenuation, crosstalk and noise issues
        and how they affect the  and data carrying capacity of each of
        the 249 downstream and 25 upstream QAM sub-carriers.  With two
        pages of text which describe the passage of bits through all
        the stages of transmission and reception.  Includes
        description (but not explanation) of Reed-Solomon FEC,
        interleaving and Trellis Coding. This is a terse, but complete
        description for the more technical reader.

I believe that ADSL will happen and will probably play a role in
bringing the information super-you-know-what to our homes, schools and
businesses -- particularly in Australia where coax cable is just
starting to be laid.

As Eli Noam said, ADSL is like feeding vitamins to a horse instead of
buying a truck.  However, DMT ADSL is serious nutrition - the old
twisted pair nag *can* be run at 6.144 Megabits/sec downstream plus
640 kbits/sec duplex - while the ordinary phone is used normally.
However all claims about ADSL and other ambitious technologies being
mass producible in (the obligatory) "two years time" should be
considered in the light of (Stewart) Fist's law :-

***      A product takes twice as long to develop as planned.      ***
***   When it arrives, it costs twice as much as first claimed -   ***
***                   and is half as good.                         ***

                    ---*--**--***--**--*---

"Australian Communications" is a monthly magazine averaging 150 pages,
covering networking and telecommunications management with a clear
layout, great diagrams and in-depth articles. Other articles in the
May issue concern options for controlling congestion on ATM networks,
a review of a Cisco ATM router and a seven page article on client/server
security issues.

If your library does not carry it, you can fax them on [phone]
for subscription and back-issue details.  Airmail subscriptions
beyond Asia are approx $US67.

I would like to compare notes with anyone on ADSL, digital coaxial-
cable and SHF multi-megabit radio links.  I am also interested in
applications of the future world network and the social implications -
so I guess I am interested in almost everything.


Robin Whittle
9 Miller St. Heidelberg Heights 3081 Melbourne Australia
Ph [phone]  Fax [phone]
[e-mail]   Internet access thanks to CIRCIT

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular -> Analog Converter
Date: 19 May 1994 23:25:45 -0400
Organization: International Internet Association


Does anyone know of an adapter/converter that connects to a cellular
phone (most likely in place of the handset) and provides an analog
Rj-11 jack?  Or, is there some other way to connect analog phone
devices to a cellular phone.  It needs to be able to make outgoing
calls, and the capability of incoming calls would be needed, if it's
at all possible.

Thanks.

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 17:09:54 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: 311 Goes Statewide in New York


This month's insert in NYNEX's (formerly NYTel) bill had a small item
about using 3-1-1 for TDD users to contact emergency assistance.  This
will be in place in all areas where NYNEX has a presence in its
various LATA's.

3-1-1 will remain in place until the E911 system is implemented
statewide.

I do not know what will happen with those LATAs that are small parts
of other states (CT, MA, PA and possibly VT).


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] (preferred)
                            [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  1+[phone]
                                          FAX   1+[phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kurt F. Sauer)
Subject: Distribution of WATS Numbers in the Numbering Plan
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 21:38:27 GMT


I was unaware that 1-800 number prefixes were available to more than
one LD provider.  Someone called this "portability."  Yeah, probably
an FAQ question, but I didn't know how to determine if this were true.
If it is, how is the call placed?  Wouldn't only the LD carrier have
the true route for the call?


Kurt F. Sauer


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is called '800 portability', and unlike
in the past where telcos could only route toll-free calls by the first
three digits -- the exchange --, meaning exchanges were assigned to or
'belonged to' a given carrier, now routing can be done on the entire
number. The LD carrier enters the correct information in a database which
is used by all telcos. When you dial an 800 number, your local telco makes
a quick search of the database and routes your call to the 'real' number
to which the 800 version is attached.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself?
Date: 19 May 1994 14:40:47 -0500
Organization: MCSNet Services


TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to [e-mail] (Joseph
Herl):

> least in the Chicago 312/708 area, ringbacks are accomplished thus:

> Dial 1-57x-last four digits. The 'x' is a digit 1-9. It varies from one
> exchange to another so you have to test to see which works. For example,

I live in the 708-622 (Elgin) exchange (also including 741/742/468/464/695/
697/931/888/) in which 1-57[0-9]-my_last_four_digits produced "when dialing
a call within your area code only dial the seven digits, when ...". What
does work in this exchange is "511" and the last four digits.

Dialing 711-last_four_digits is like dialing 911 ... ???

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 18:05:15 -0400
Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself?
From: Paul A. Lee  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


You should be able to ring your own line if you're served by a switch
that handles (and is enabled for) revertive calling -- I think that
includes Northern and Siemens, at least.

To use revertive calling:

     - Go off hook
     - Dial the number for that line
     - Listen for revertive call enable tone*
          * Some switches return a repeating "zip" type tone; others return
            a gated/modified busy signal
     - Hang up
     - Line will start to ring* if revertive calling is in effect
          * Some switches will ring line normally; others will provide
            a specially gated ("distinctive") ring for revertive calling
     - Wait for ringing to stop, indicating another party on the line has
       answered
     - Go off hook and converse
     - Hang up (some switches will return a burst of ring when revertive
       calling is ended)

I've encountered this feature in several GTE service areas. Instructions
for using it are published in the Milwaukee (Ameritech) book, but I haven't
tried it here.


Paul A. Lee                           Voice  414 357-1409
Telecommunications Analyst              FAX  [phone]
Woolworth Corporation            CompuServe  70353,566
   INTERNET  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can't say I recall seeing such informa-
tion in the Ameritech book here in Chicago.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself?
Date: 19 May 1994 23:28:24 -0400
Organization: International Internet Association


Joseph Herl ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Many thanks for taking the time to respond to my question about how to
> call myself.  Your response was detailed and absolutely correct.  The
> ringback number 1-577-nnnn works here in Champaign.  I think this will
> be a big time saver when we move next week.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, so it does work throughout all of
> Illinois Bell's territory. Mine is 1-573-nnnn. I hope other readers in
> northern Illinois find this useful.   PAT]

It seems to work in Nebraska that if you dial your own phone number
and hang up, it will ring back.  That's how we always do it.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After dialing do you get a busy signal
or some special tone? If we here dial our own number, in some exchanges
we get a busy signal and in other exchanges get an intercept that 'your
call cannot be completed as dialed, please check the number and dial
again, etc ..." Even if we have call waiting installed, dialing our own
number produces a busy signal or the above recording.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 18:35:17 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Sergio Gelato)
Subject: Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 codes


In TELECOM Digest, V14 #237, Mike King <[e-mail]> wrote:

> In TELECOM Digest, V14 #233, Will Martin <[e-mail]>
> wrote:

[...]

>> is written. Are there 800-XXX exchanges in use now?

> I've seen quite a few 800-800-XXXX numbers listed.  Before portability,
> I believe Sprint administered them.

The question was actually about 800-YXX-XXXX numbers (where Y=0 or 1).
I haven't seen any such numbers advertised in North America; but I
have seen UK numbers of the form 0839 1xx xxx.


Sergio Gelato    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Anyone Use AT&T Message Service?
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 13:07:39 -0700 (PDT)


Said by: Mark

> I am currently living outside of the USA and usually use AT&T
> USA-DIRECT to call the US.  Well, a few weeks ago, I called, using my
> calling card, and got a busy signal.  After a few seconds, I hear a
> [computer generated] voice asking me if I want to record a message and
> have it sent at a later time followed by the prices. (I think it was
> $1.75 or $1.25, something like that per minute) All I had to do was
> press '#123' and I was prompted for a message and then was prompted at
> the end for an OK message. (i.e. press 1 or 0 or something like that)

> Well, it worked great ... has anyone else used this service?  I assume
> it has been available in the USA for a while already.

Yeah -- I use it all the time for messages.  There is also a feature
that has a real-live AT&T operator deliver it.  You can specify if you
want whoever answers the phone to get the message, or if the operator
should ask for and only release the message to a specific person.


Steve    [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Mokey)
Subject: Re: CO Switch Types by Exchange Code
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 20:57:38 GMT


Michael Stanford <[e-mail]> writes:

> I am looking for a listing of all the CO switch types in the USA by
> area code and exchange code.

You can get what you're looking for from Bellcore at [phone].
It's available both in paper form and on diskette.

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 17:08 WET DST
From: [e-mail] (John Harris)
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts


[e-mail] wrote:

> Do you have a limit on the number telephone IDs :) that you are allow
> to block calls from?  Or do they charge you on a byte-used deal? :)
> Like I always say, I'd rather have a list of allowed numbers and
> forget the rest. :)

Hang in there.  There is a CLASS feature called 'Selective Call
Acceptance' that will do what you want.  Basically it was intended for
people who will only take calls from their kids or stockbroker at
supper time; so it will have a limit of ten numbers.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a limit of ten numbers from
> which calls can be rejected. A new entry to the list at that point
> cause the oldest entry to drop off.   PAT]

For those of you that need more than the ten numbers allowed by the
telephone company, there are boxes you can buy.  BEL-Tronics in
Georgia makes a pair of boxes with a synthesized voice which will
reject up to 100 numbers and/or all anonymous calls.  It is great for
getting rid of junk faxes.  The only limitation -- the number must call
you once, so you can move it from the incoming call list to the reject
list.

Model ND100 $ 99.95 MSRP (Number display only)
Model AD100 $109.95 MSRP (Name display if your telco sends it)
"Dealers may sell for less."

Contact BEL-Tronics Limited
        8100 Sagl Parkway
        Covington, GA 30209
        [phone]     [phone]


John Harris      BEL-Tronics Ltd, Mississauga, Ontario L5L 1J9
[e-mail]  [phone]             Fax [phone]

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 17:38:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Wanted: Business phone system
From: Paul A. Lee  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


In TELECOM Digest V14 #236, Drew Benson wrote:

> I'm looking for an inexpensive phone system designed for small-scale kinds
> of things. Not more than eight outgoing lines.

I have a Panasonic KX-T61610 hybrid system at home. The system comes
loaded for six loop-start trunks and 16 stations. Station sets can be
either proprietary (key/feature) sets or standard single-line sets,
including answering machines, modems, faxes, cordless, etc. Features
(with proprietary phones) include paging (group and all-call),
automatic trunk selection (in and out), some call restriction
capabilities, live SMDR output, and other basic small business or home
functions. The system is under $800, and the sets are $90-$150 from
your local Graybar Electric. Do-it-yourself installation and
programming.


Paul A. Lee                   Voice  414 357-1409
Telecommunications Analyst      FAX  [phone]
Woolworth Corporation       CompuServe  70353,566
INTERNET  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback
Date: 19 May 1994 18:14:55 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In <[e-mail]> TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response
to Jonathan <[e-mail]>:

> You are not being charged for the call to the 800 number. That part is
> free to you the caller with the recipient paying for the carriage. You
> are being charged for the return collect call the Information Provider
> makes to you, which the AOS operator asked if you would accept the
> charges for. Admittedly sometimes they do not bother to call back but
> simply continue the conversation with you on the same connection, but
> none the less the AOS operator at some point asked if you would accept
> the charges for the call; when accepted, it then is like any other
> collect call.

If it is considered a collect call, then I should think billed number
screening would keep it from happening.  Yet, on my mother's telephone
bill, a charge for an 800 number appeared, despite the fact that there
was billed number screening on that line.


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Had the call been handled by AT&T, Sprint,
MCI or your local telco, then billed number screening *would* have prevented
it from getting through. The thing is, many AOS companies do not consult
the database used by the major players. Even your local telco will advise
you that (should you request billed number screening) they will not abso-
lutely guarentee you will never be billed for a collect or third-number
call ... just that *they* will not originate such a charge. But, all is
not lost: some of the others maintain their own similar database. For
example, Telesphere, a long distance billing service for many AOS's and
Information Providers who bill through telcos maintains its own database
of people who do not want such charges. They'll gladly add you to their
list on request; then the AOS/COCOT's they represent will get the same
automatic decline of charges when someone uses one of those phones (or
services) that Bell would give. Ditto a couple other COCOT/AOS operations;
they tend to work from the Telesphere database as well.

Generally whevever I get a charge on my phone bill for a collect (or
whatever) call from a COCOT, I just call the customer service number
for that carrier and get added to their negative listing. I must be on
six or seven such databases by now, and as a result I don't think
there is a COCOT/AOS left in the USA that can stick me with charges.
If you sign up for billed number screening with your local telco, that
will end it where telco and the Big Three are concerned; contacting the
Telesphere people will take care of about 80-90 percent of the rest,
especially where the more expensive and obnoxious 'charge for an 800
call' IP's are concerned.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jay Hennigan)
Subject: Re: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same?
Date: 19 May 1994 18:10:52 -0700
Organization: Regional Access Information Network (RAIN)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

> With the FCC mandate for CNID service, is it not possible that the
> telcos will use this to drop ANI? Also it has been mentioned that
> "911 service requires special trunk lines and equipment". Clearly CNID
> does not and needs only a low-cost display. Will this make local 911
> response a possibility?

The special 911 trunks are associated with ANI and ALI (Automatic
location idintification), and the PSAP (Public Safety Answering Point)
system associated with 911 allows calls to be transferred to other
agencies with the ANI and ALI passed.  In come cases, I believe that
the 911 PSAP operator can seize the calling line as well.  The 911
response is often as local as a city police or fire departmant
dispatch center, although the ALI lookup tables can be 100 miles away
at the LEC's data processing center.


Jay

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #240
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10478;
          20 May 94 17:36 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13064; Fri, 20 May 94 10:28:12 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13053; Fri, 20 May 94 10:28:09 CDT
Date: Fri, 20 May 94 10:28:09 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #241

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 20 May 94 10:28:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 241

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Belgian Phone Company Rips Off Customers! (Leo Nederlof)
    ANI by Calling 1 800 XXX XXXX ([e-mail])
    GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Greg Alexander)
    Re: What is the Mercury Button? (Clive D.W. Feather)
    Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device (Clive D.W. Feather)
    Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator? (Stacy L. Millions)
    Re: Cellular -> Analog Converter (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: Lexus Cellular Phones (Greg Alexander)
    Re: 800 Number Billback (Tim Russell)
    Cost of Large Fiber Systems (Stewart Fist)
    Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (James D. Oliver III)
    Re: "Free Trade" Rules (Alan T. Furman)
    Re: Problems With Call Return (Al Quaglieri)
    Re: Problems With Call Return ([e-mail])
    Re: Problems With Call Return (Al Cohan)
    Call Return is *Good* (Dave O'Heare)
    Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway (R. Gellens)
    Re: Video Conference Bridges ([e-mail])
    Illinois Ringback Numbers (Michael Fumich)
    Free Information - Teleconferencing Show ([e-mail])
    Last Laugh! Signs You Have a Bad Long Distance Company (Top 10 List)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:59:12 +0200
From: Leo Nederlof <[e-mail]>
Subject: Belgian Phone Company Rips Off Customers!


Having migrated to Belgium about two years ago, I have had to adapt my
standards concerning public utilities to a significantly lower level.

The phone company, Belgacom, is one of them.

It started already when I first applied for a connection. After three
months and several visits of inapt service people, I pulled myself a
cable from the cellar of the building to my apartment on the third
floor, after which the phoney people came, installed a wall socket and
charged me the full entrance fee, 4183 belgian francs - about 150 US$
(for which they are legally assumed to even dig a cable to a remote
farmhouse, if necessary).

Last month I had my connection moved to another house, where wall
sockets were already installed. For Belgian standards, this happened
almost flawlessly, since it took them, after my old connection had
been disconnected, only four days and two visits to get the new
connection on-line.

The surprise came when I got my phone bill last week: I have to pay
the full entrance fee again!!! This is crazy! Who do they think they
are?  If it weren't for the monopoly, they would never keep their
customers.

On top of this, the quality of the phone lines is, as we would say in
Dutch, kut met peren, meaning far below any acceptable level. Noise,
blocking, excess dialing delay, you name it, they got it.

I can't wait for competition to enter the telecom market here ...


Leo Nederlof              Alcatel Bell Research Centre
[e-mail]    Network Technology Group
phone: [phone]     Francis Wellesplein 1
fax:   [phone]     2018 Antwerp - Belgium

Disclaimer I: opinions expressed are my own, not my employer's.
Disclaimer II: I do not mean to offend Belgian people in general; there's
a lot of nice and friendly people here (and besides, I have to live with
them.)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: ANI by Calling 1 800 XXX XXXX
Organization: Eskimo North
Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 13:51:56 GMT


About ten months ago, I read in alt.dcom.telecom or comp.dcom.telecom a
posting which contained a number, I think it was 1 800 235 1414, if I
recall correctly. By dialing it one would obtain one's own number as a
demonstration that call blocking does not work when calling 1 800 XXX
XXXX numbers. After that, they would advertise a 1900 XXX XXXX number
which would circumvent this.

Well, maybe I do not have the correct number or maybe it does not work
anymore.  After having been posted here they must have got many many
calls.  Does anybody know if this service has another number now?  Or
does anybody know any other numbers for obtaining ANI, in the Seattle
area?


Thanks,

Carlos.

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Alexander)
Subject: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager?
Date: Fri, 20 May 94 03:41:45 EDT
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida


I am interested in buying a GSM phone, and was hoping to learn a
little more about the short message service offered in some.

This service allows the caller to be transfered to an operator (if
your line is busy or whatever), where they leave a message which pops
up on your phone.

I have spoken with several stores, service providers and
representatives of the actual phone makers themselves (Nokia) (in
Australia), and have got different stories from everyone as to how it
works.

Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone is
in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service areas
(eg Asia Pacific -- Thailand, and non city areas of Australia). If its
a pager -- cool, I will still be contactable. If it relies on being in
the area -- good too (I will NEVER miss the message).

So both have strengths, but I'd like to know what I'm getting. (Both
would be great -- but very unlikely ;)


Thanks for any help!

Greg  [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button
Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:41:00 BST
From: Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]>


Something the other messages in this thread have omitted is that, even
if the phone has a display, the contents of the blue Mercury button
are not displayed during dialling or by any "display memory" feature.

We now subscribe to 132 service, so I can forget the laboriously
memorized ten digit PIN.

Readers of Telecom worried about security might be interested to know
that Mercury send out the PIN in two separate letters, one giving the
first six digits, and the other, posted on a different date, giving the
other four.


Clive D.W. Feather      Santa Cruz Operation
[e-mail]           Croxley Centre
Phone: [phone]  Hatters Lane, Watford
Fax:   [phone]  WD1 8YN, United Kingdom

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

Subject: Re: "Howdy Mail"? Scrawl-Like Writing Device
Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:47:12 BST
From: "Clive D.W. Feather" <[e-mail]>


According to _The_Codebreakers_ by David Kahn, the first teleautograph
was used in France to connect the War Office to Army Headquarters (or
something similar; this is from memory). It was viewed as secure
because there was only one machine in the world!


Clive D.W. Feather      Santa Cruz Operation
[e-mail]           Croxley Centre
Phone: [phone]  Hatters Lane, Watford
Fax:   [phone]  WD1 8YN, United Kingdom

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

From: [e-mail] (Stacy L. Millions)
Subject: Re: What is a Synchronous Modem Eliminator?
Organization: Sobeco Ernst & Young
Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 11:56:15 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Victoria
Matho) writes:

> Does anyone know what an SME or synchronous modem eliminator does??

They are the rough equivalent of the async null-modem cable. They are
used to put two sync devices back to back if you are unable to configure
one of the devices as a DCE. I have one from Electrodata Inc. that I bought
about four years ago. I use it to test routers. It can be configured
to provide clock rates from 14.4kbps to 896kbps.


stacy     [e-mail]   [e-mail]   sobeco!stacy

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Ptasnik)
Subject: Re: Cellular -> Analog Converter
Date: 20 May 1994 06:37:58 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


[e-mail] writes:

> Does anyone know of an adapter/converter that connects to a cellular
> phone (most likely in place of the handset) and provides an analog
> RJ-11 jack?  Or, is there some other way to connect analog phone

If you have a Motorola flip phone, there are several manufacturers who
make them.  They generally cost less than $150, and are available from
any more competent cellular dealer.  Appliance stores may not be aware
of them.

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


Dave Ptasnik     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Alexander)
Subject: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones
Date: Fri, 20 May 94 02:59:58 EDT
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida


[e-mail] (Eric A. Litman) writes:

> I was recently going over the phone options for the Lexus GS300, and
> noticed that the phone system Lexus offers is a Motorola -- basically a
> souped-up AlphaTac. When installed by a Lexus dealer, the phone
> integrates with the stereo system and the AC to mute the stereo, lower
> the AC, and allow conversations to be held over the car's audio system.
> My question is, can my Motorola DPC550 handheld be integrated into
> this system, or are there special "hooks" in the Lexus-specific phone?

Don't know about that model, but (apparently) the new Lexus LS400 has
a portable phone. I won't see it till Saturday, but I've heard it
*looks* like the Microtac.  Might help your enquiry if you ask the
dealer about that model.

Hope that helps some.


Greg   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Russell)
Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback
Date: Fri, 20 May 94 1:09:59 EDT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'way they can charge you for calling
> an 800 number' is the same way AT&T can charge for it. For example you
> can call AT&T's 800 number to put through a collect call to someone or
> to charge a call to your credit card. Merely because you originated it
> via an 800 number does not mean charges cannot be incurred for the call
> as a result. In the case of the Information Providers who use an 800
> number in this way, *someone* in your firm called the 800 number and
> gave the answering operator permission to place the charges on your line.

    PAT, I have a feeling you're off base on this one.  Remember the
scam a couple of years back that was billing directly for calls to an
800 number?  Well, the latest rage in the 800 and 900 business is a
concept called "calling card", and it's a way of getting around the
FTC rules that came out of that.

    Basically, it requires two calls to the same number, one to "activate"
your card, and one to actually get into the program and get billed.
The process of calling back supposedly establishes a client relationship
and gets around the FTC rules.

    I'm nearly certain that's what at least some of the calls in question
were for, especially seeing VRS mentioned: they're big billers for this.

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

Date: 20 May 94 04:49:13 EDT
From: Stewart Fist <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cost of Large Fibre Systems


Can anyone give me some confirmation on figures that I've been
collecting on the capital cost of large-scale, long-distance fibre
optic cable systems?

My current information is that the cost of the cable and the electronics
is about equal, and each represents about 30% of the total cable costs.
36-fibre terrestrial cable costs $12 per metre in Australia.

The other 30-40% of the capital outlay is for design, supervision,
equipment housing, power, trenching, transport, etc.  Does that
division sound about right for the average terrestrial system?

With fibre cables having data-rates of 2.4Gbit/sec, does 40 to 50kms
between repeaters sound about right?  I would have thought more based
on the 150km distances now being achieved in undersea cables (at a
lower rate), but I'm told that 40/50 is now average.

What rough price should I allocate for each repeater on each fibre
(allowing for any extras needed to drive and house it).  In most cases
a 36-fibre cable will only have a few fibres commissioned so I need to
work it out on a per fibre, or per pair basis.  What about the average
cost of 2.4Mbit/s terminal equipment?  I was quoted $16,000 for a
2.4Mbps optical fibre multiplexer (presumably, using a pair of
fibres); is this about right?

I know all these prices are always highly variable, and subject to
enormous variations, but if anyone can provide price guidelines, or
just rules-of-thumb guidance, it would be appreciated.

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

From: [e-mail] (James D. Oliver III)
Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number
Date: 20 May 1994 09:10:48 GMT
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science


A few years ago I had a roommate named Joe who was about to move into
a one bedroom apartment and, thinking it would improve his social
life, was going to get SEXY-JOE as his phone number.  He dropped the
idea after we pointed out that a) women weren't going to go for it and
b) we would use this as ammunition for a lifetime.


Jim Oliver    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Back about 1962-63 I got a phone line in
my apartment which spelled PATRICK. Actually it was 312-RAvenswood-8-7425.
I did not keep it very long and don't remember why; it seems to me that
whoever had the number before myself had polluted it pretty badly with
messages left in strange places written on walls, etc.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: "Free Trade" Rules
Date: Fri, 20 May 94 02:54:46 PDT


Dale Wharton writes:

> For the rest of us, the prospect of government helplessness and
> all-out international competition in the communications industry does
> not appear so attractive.

In the USA, we thank our lucky stars that we have the Clipper Chip to
save us from the horrors of government helplessness.

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

Date: Fri, 20 May 94 02:44 EST
From: Al Quaglieri <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return


Russ Greene recently wrote of his annoyance with Call Return
(TELECOM Digest Vol. 14 #236). Here is the comment I mailed him:

RG> Below is a letter I'm sending to Pac Bell and the Public
RG> Utilities Commission regarding my dissatisfaction with Call
RG> Return.

RG> Feedback, comments and discussion are invited.

Dear Mr. Green,

As a writer who works from home, I find the telephone a necessary
annoyance. During my working hours, all calls are screened via the
answering machine. Picking up the phone requires me to stop working,
so I only do so when absolutely necessary. Any call, even one left for
the machine to deal with, makes for a break in my concentration.

Although I've trained my friends to call once and leave a short
message, there are still others who steadfastly refuse to talk to my
machine. Instead, they will call every half hour and, not reaching a
human, hang up.

Call Return has helped me virtually eliminate this rude and
unnecessary telephone behavior. It has also effectively squelched
crank callers, wrong-number dialers who repeatedly refuse to believe
they've dialed a wrong number, insistent salespersons, and other
shifty characters who refuse to identify themselves.

It's incredible thing that we willingly install loud bells in our
homes which anyone, anywhere can make ring, any time of the day or
night. We accept this lousy situation for the sake of communication.
The very intrusive nature of the medium makes "reaching out and
touching someone" a privilege, not an assumed right. If you have the
power to ring this bell in my house without subsequently conveying any
useful information, I'm happy to have the power to tell you to cut it
out.

Viva Call Return!


Al Quaglieri    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 13:36:10 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The fact that she used it in an extreme
> way ...
> ...  message and would call again later. Ordinarily, Call Return is a
> good idea since it allows a person who has just missed (typically within
> seconds or minutes) receiving a call due to being somewhere else. However
> in this case ...

I thought that one purpose of "call return" was to be able to call
back an "anonymous caller" without knowing his(her) number.  This was
not clearly stated in the brochure about "caller id" services from
Uswest, so I telephoned them, the lady who answered hesitated about my
question, transferred me to another person who confirmed that
"anonymous calls" can indeed be returned.  The problem was that in my
area, Seattle, "last call return" has not been authorized, even though
most other related services have been.


Carlos

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

Date: Thu, 19 May 94 15:07 EST
From: Al Cohan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return


Since Party "A" initiates the call to Party "B" in the first place,
why shouldn't Party "A" be charged for the call when Party "B" elects
to use Call Return?

All of the TV Promo's that I've seen usually show a lady running into
the kitchen with two or three large shopping bags in her hand, putting
them down on the table then making a mad dash to the ringing wallphone,
only to pickup and hear dialtone. They of course the pitch for call return,
not missing a call etc.

What if the first calling Party "A" was telesleeze? Interesting thoughts
come up when the issue of who is paying for the call comes up. I personally
view Call Return as a form of roulette. What even happened in the "old
days" when Party "A" just simply called again?


Al

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

Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 10:50:43 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Dave O'Heare)
Subject: Call Return is *Good*


We were subject to a large number (several per day) of calls that left
no messages on the answering machine. When this happens over a period
of days or weeks, even the most confident person can become worried
that someone might be "casing the joint".

We signed up for CLID and got a display. If someone leaves a message
on the machine, I'll return the call at a reasonable hour for that
person.  If they don't leave a message, and the number isn't one I
recognize, they get a call back when I get to the machine, whatever
time it is.

"Hi, you called" in as cheery a voice as I can manage. We then go
through as long a song and dance as needed to figure out why they did
me the discourtesy of not leaving a message. I then "educate" them (as
the original poster said) of the need to leave a message, so that they
won't get a phone call like the one I just put them through. I've
talked to a lot of telemarketers that way. It amuses me greatly to
waste their time instead of them wasting mine :-).

If a call comes through as anonymous while I'm home, I answer the
phone with "What the f**k have you got to hide?" in as foul-tempered a
bellow as I can manage (usually pretty good :-). Nobody's ever done it
twice.


Dave O'Heare    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 20 MAY 94 01:36:00 GMT
Subject: Re: "TV & Movie Mania" Radio Show Hits the Info Superhighway


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lauren Weinstein is a long time
> participant in the Internet, and a charter subscriber to TELECOM
> Digest, dating back to 1981 when this journal was first published.
> From time to time I like to reprint his classic message, "The Day the
> Bell System Died", and before long it will be time for it again.  His
> latest venture, the "Neon" thing, has been enormously successful and
> if you have not called to listen to it, you really should.  PAT]

As I recall, not only was Lauren a charter subscriber to the Digest,
but he was a very prolific contributor to it and the Digest from which
it spun off (Human-Nets).  So prolific that there was a rumor around
that Lauren was not human, but an AI experiment at UCLA.  There were a
few attempts at proving this theory by counting the number of posts
from him and their length, and "demonstrating" that no human could
have posted them all in so short a time, nor could a human have
answered so many questions in such technical detail in so short a
time.  I can't remember if Lauren ever actually confirmed or denied
those rumors ;-)

Of course, those were the days when the net was one (small by today's
standards) collection of hosts, and people were very friendly and
open.  One major site was proud of running with no security at all.
Anyone anywhere could telnet to them, and have total access to their
system.  This was very conducive to learning, and research.  It was a
very different atmosphere, and of course was eventually ruined.
Someone deleted their files, thinking themselves clever, I suppose.
About as clever as walking into a library and pouring ink over the
books.


Randall Gellens        [e-mail]
Net**2 656-6350    (Please forward bounces to
Mail Stop MV 237        [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (TeleConXIV)
Subject: Re: Video Conference Bridges
Date: 20 May 1994 10:18:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, John McHarry <mcharry@access.
digex.net> writes:

There are a number of companies making videoconferencing bridges.
first are the main codec manufacturers - CLI, PictureTel, VTEL, GPT,
BT, NEC.  There are also companies like VideoServer.  Most of today's
bridges are ITU/TSS H.320 (or some subset) compatible.  Most of the
codec manufacturers have proprietary algorithms in their own multipoint
control units (MCU's).  CTX. CTX+, SG-3, etc.  Send e-mail if I can
give you more information ([e-mail]).

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

Date: Fri, 20 May 94 09:17:00 EST
From: North Coast Communications <[e-mail]>
Subject: Illinois Ringback Numbers


As noted in previous messages, ringback for most Ameritech served
numbers seems to be "1-57X" + the last four digits of the phone
number.  Another writer noted that "511" + last four digits works as
well. This is also true in many locations. If the above does not work,
try 511 + "your FULL seven digit number". This is what works here in
708-891, 862, and 868 and other locations I have tried.

Now does any have the current ANI (200) number? It USED to be 200-TEL1,
(or 200TEL 0-9). Many of the ANI numbers seem to be mnemonics of some kind.


Michael Fumich      (reply to: [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (TeleConXIV)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Free Information - Teleconferencing Show
Date: 20 May 1994 10:30:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


          Information to Attendees and Exhibitors

                        TeleCon XIV
The Fourteenth Annual Teleconferencing Users Conference

THE WORLD'S LARGEST CONFERENCE AND TRADE SHOW ON TELECONFERENCING

                  October 12, 13, 14, 1994
                  Anaheim Convention Center
                     Anaheim, California

Covering:

   *All forms of teleconferencing; Videoconferencing, Audioconferencing
and Audiographic Conferencing, Computer Conferencing, Collaborative
Computing;
   *Local and Wide Area Networking (LAN/WAN)
   *Distance Learning
   *Telecommuting, Telemedicine
   *Applications of the National Information Infrastructure  (NII)

TeleCon is the worlds largest conference and trade show on teleconferencing.
The teleconferencing industry is currently over $3 billion and growing.
TeleCon XIV is expected to have attendance of over 12,000 people at
the exhibits with over 5,500 attending all three days of the session.
TeleCon XIV will have over 700 exhibit booths.

Building upon Telecon XIII's 1st Desktop Showcase in 1993, Applied
business teleCommunications has expanded the desktop area into its own
hall at the Anaheim Convention Center.  The Desktop Showcase provides
exhibitors with the ability to demonstrate all types of desktop
communications: video, collaborative computing, groupware, multimedia
applications and video on demand side-by-side in one area.

Plans are being made for the showcase to feature networking connectivity
between showcase booths and three interoperability booths:

 * Consortium for Audiographics Teleconferencing (CATS)
 * Packet Video
 * Intel Personal Conferencing Initiative (PCI)

Potential exhibitors and attendees are invited to fax the following
information to 1-405-743-3426:
  Name
  Company name
  Address
  Phone number
  Fax number
  E-mail address

Feel free to call 1-800-829-3400 or e-mail requests to [e-mail].

Please specify you saw the info on-line and if you want exhibition or
attendee information.

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

Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 08:45:19 MST
From: Daryl R. Gibson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Last Laugh! Signs You Have a Bad Long Distance Company


Forwarded FYI to TELECOM Digest:

Date sent:      Thu, 19 May 1994 21:31:29 -0700
From:           Bob Lennard <[e-mail]>
Subject:        David Letterman's Top Ten List for 05/19/94
To:             Multiple recipients of list TOP-TEN <[e-mail]>
Send reply to:  Late Show Top Ten List mailing list <[e-mail]>

-----> Thursday, May 19, 1994 <-----

Signs You Have A Bad Long Distance Company

10.  All calls are $2 for the first min., $94 each additional min.
 9.  Operator makes you describe what you're wearing;
 8.  Their so-called "dial tone" is just a guy with a kazoo;
 7.  You can only place long distance calls during an electrical storm;
 6.  They bill you for calls made by some guy named Pepe, and when you
     complain they say, "Whatsa problem, man, you no like Pepe?";
 5.  Whenever you call their office, you hear gunfire;
 4.  For some reason, your phone doesn't work unless you're wearing 3-D
     glasses;
 3.  Everyone you talk to sounds like the guy at the drive-thru window
     at McDonald's;
 2.  No matter what number you dial you always get Richard Simmons;
 1.  Their slogan is:  "Reach out and touch yourself".

This Late Show with David Letterman Top Ten list copyright 1994 World Wide
Pants. Lists are contributed by Bob Lennard and Rick Nebel.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to the list send your request to:
[e-mail]. In the BODY of your message put:
    subscribe top-ten first last
Replace first and last with your name. To unsubscribe, put:
    signoff top-ten

If you have any questions or comments send them to [e-mail]

        -----------

Forwarded to TELECOM Digest by:

       (801)378- 2950   [phone]
      [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #241
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22334;
          22 May 94 14:08 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25542; Sun, 22 May 94 10:57:13 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25533; Sun, 22 May 94 10:57:11 CDT
Date: Sun, 22 May 94 10:57:11 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #242

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 22 May 94 10:57:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 242

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    LECs Must Offer Signalling Info For Tandem-Switching Services (Bob Keller)
    AT&T Support for New Digital Signature Standard (David R. Arneke)
    Book Review: "Internet: Getting Started" by Marine et al. (Rob Slade)
    CPSR Response to FCC CNID (Monty Solomon)
    New Area Codes For Modems (Ameritech) (Monty Solomon)
    Short Message Service (SMS) (Richard Cox)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 13:54:13 GMT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: LECs Must Offer Signalling Info For Tandem-Switching Services


Report No. DC-2602      ACTION IN DOCKET CASE        May 19, 1994

       RULES ADOPTED REQUIRING LECS TO OFFER SIGNALLING INFORMATION
                       FOR TANDEM-SWITCHING SERVICES
                  (CC DOCKET 91-141, TRANSPORT PHASE II)

     The Commission took another step in a series of initiatives to
remove barriers to competition in the interstate access telephone
market by adopting a Third Report and Order in the expanded
interconnection proceeding.  In prior orders on expanded
interconnection for special access and switched transport, the
Commission created new opportunities for parties to provide special
access and switched transport transmission services in competition
with local exchange carriers (LECs).  Today's decision will enable
parties, for the first time, to offer tandem-switching services in
competition with the LECs.

     The Order requires Tier 1 LECs (those having annual revenues from
regulated telecommunications operations of $100 million or more for a
sustained period of time), except National Exchange Carrier
Association (NECA) pool members, to offer to any party the signalling
information necessary for the party to provide tandem-switching
services.

     Specifically, Tier 1 LECs, except NECA pool members, must offer
any interested party, including interexchange carriers (IXCs),
competitive access providers (CAPs), and end users: (1) the "Carrier
Identification Code" (CIC), which indicates the long-distance carrier
to receive a call; and (2) the "OZZ," which indicates the specific
trunk group on which a call is carried from the tandem to the IXC.
LECs currently transmit these data from their end offices to their own
access tandems in providing tandem- switching services.  The
Commission stated that the record showed that LECs will be able to
provide this information at minimal cost by treating third-party
tandems, in effect, as if they were LEC tandems.  The Commission ruled
that Tier 1 LECs must offer the signalling information for traffic
from their equal access end offices, but not from LEC tandems.  LECs
will not be required to allow parties to collocate switching equipment
in LEC offices.

     LEC access charges at both the originating and terminating end
must be billed to the customer of record.  If a terminating LEC's
customer of record is an IXC, the LEC must accept billing tapes from
the tandem operator used by that interexchange carrier.

     As a result of the new requirement, a party such as a CAP could
collocate its transmision equipment in a LEC end office, transport
traffic to its own tandem, and switch it at the tandem. Alternatively,
a party could use LEC-provided transport to carry traffic and signalling
information to its own tandem.  In addition, small IXCs that currently
purchase LEC tandem-switched transport could obtain economies of scale
by aggregating their traffic from end offices on a single direct
trunk, routing traffic to their own tandem or a tandem operated by
another party, and switching it at that point.

     The Commission ruled that LEC offering of the necessary
signalling information will constitute a new service under price caps.
LECs will be required to make a cost-based showing under the price
caps new services test.  In addition, LECs will be required to
establish a rate element for the signalling information as a separate
service category within the trunking basket.  This service category
will be subject to an upper pricing band of 2%, but not a lower band.
The Commission concluded that LECs would not be granted any additional
pricing flexibility at this time.

     The Commission concluded that this further initiative in its
expanded interconnection proceeding would serve the public interest
because it would produce important benefits at minimal cost.
Facilitating third-party access to signalling information would permit
various telecommunications entities, including CAPs and IXCs, to offer
tandem-switching services in competition with the LECs.  Increased
competition should, in turn, exert downward pressure on access charges
and long-distance rates.  In addition, enhancing competition would
promote more efficient use and deployment of networks and encourage
technological innovation.  Finally, competitive tandem-switching
services would increase access to diverse facilities for IXCs and
users, which could improve network reliability.

     The Tier 1 LECs subject to the Third Report and Order will be
required to file tariffs offering the CIC and OZZ at their equal
access end offices within 90 days of publication of the Third Report
and Order in the Federal Register.

     In the Second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission also
sought comment on a proposal by the Independent Data Communications
Manufacturers Association, Inc. (IDCMA) to allow third parties to
collocate customer equipment in LEC offices. The Commission will
address that proposal at a later time.

     Action by the Commission May 19, 1994, by Third Report and Order
(FCC 94-118). Chairman Hundt, Commissioners Quello and Barrett, with
Commissioner Barrett issuing a statement.

     News Media contact: Rosemary Kimball at [phone].
     Common Carrier Bureau contacts: Gary L. Phillips at
     [phone] and Linda L. Haller at [phone].

                                  - FCC -


Bob Keller <KY3R>        Robert J. Keller, P.C.        Tel [phone]
[e-mail]    Federal Telecommunications Law    Fax [phone]
finger me for daily FCC info + see ftp.clark.net:/pub/rjk/ for other files

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

From: [e-mail] (David R Arneke)
Date: 22 May 94 10:24:49 GMT
Subject: AT&T Support for New Digital Signature Standard


NEWS FROM AT&T

FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Bill Jones, AT&T
[phone] (office)
[phone] (home)

FOR RELEASE FRIDAY, MAY 20, 1994

AT&T SECURE SOFTWARE SUPPORTS NEW U.S. DIGITAL SIGNATURE STANDARD

     GREENSBORO, North Carolina -- Several of AT&T's commercially
available secure software products already incorporate and comply with
the U.S. government's newly approved Digital Signature Standard (DSS).

     "AT&T anticipated approval of Federal Information Processing
Standard (FIPS) 186," said William A. Franklin, software security
products manager, AT&T Secure Communications Systems.  "And we worked
with our partner, Information Security Corporation, to ensure that our
commercially available secure software products would comply with the
new standard when it was announced."

     The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) this
week announced that the Secretary of Commerce had approved FIPS 186,
which incorporates the new Digital Signature Standard.  The new
standard takes effect Dec. 1, 1994.

     In a May 19 notice in the Federal Register, the NIST said the DSS
incorporates a new Digital Signature Algorithm (DSA) appropriate for
applications requiring a digital, rather than written, signature.  The
DSA authenticates the integrity of the signed data and the identity of
the signatory.

     Applications include: electronic mail, electronic funds transfer,
electronic data interchange, software distribution, data storage and
other applications which require data integrity assurance and data
origin authentication.

     "Using our digital signature software for such applications can
help cut government agencies' and commercial organizations' operating
costs," Franklin said.  "Digital signature authentication can increase
the pace of communication, and that, in turn, reduces the cost of
doing business."

     AT&T secure software products that comply with the government's
new Digital Signature Standard include:

     -- AT&T SecretAgent (R) Software, which provides DES encryption,
the NIST Digital Signature Algorithm (DSA), the RSA cryptosystem for
digital signatures and key management, and the federal Secure Hash
Standard (SHS) for data integrity.

     SecretAgent Version 3.0 is in beta testing, and will begin
shipping by June 15.  Version 2.0 is currently available.

     SecretAgent Version 3.0 features include: cross-platform
compatibility among MS-DOS, Windows, Macintosh and various UNIX
operating systems; user transparent support of RSA and DSA public
keys; and mail-enabled operation through the Vendor-Independent
Massaging (VIM) interface.

-- AT&T Surity (TM) DSA Signature Software, which provides
authentication and data integrity assurance for electronic documents.

The program uses the DSA and the Secure Hash Standard to verify that
documents were transmitted by their assumed sender and that they have
not been modified in transmission.  DOS, UNIX and Windows version are
available.  A Macintosh port is in development.

     -- AT&T Cryptographic Development Kits, which incorporate a
comprehensive library of linkable code modules that can be purchased
by software developers who want to build security into their DOS,
Windows, Macintosh and UNIX applications.

     One kit includes code for DES encryption, the ElGamal public key
cryptosystem, the Digital Signature Algorithm and the Secure Hash
Standard.

     A second contains most RSA security functions, including RSA
encryption, key management and digital signatures.

     A third package combines the DSA and RSA kits.

     To place orders or get more information, please call the AT&T
Secure Communications Customer Service Center at 800 203- 5563.

                             # # #

Product names are trademarks of their respective companies.

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

Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 14:00:13 GMT
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Internet: Getting Started" by Marine et al.


BKINTGST.RVW  940224

Prentice Hall/Brady/Ellis Horwood/Simon and Schuster/New Riders/Digital Press
113 Sylvan Avenue
Englewood Cliffs, NJ   07632
[phone]    FAX [phone]
or
11711 N. College Ave.
Carmel, IN   46032-9903
or
201 W. 103rd Street
Indianapolis, IN   46290
or
15 Columbus Circle
New York, NY   10023
800-428-5331
or
Market Cross House
Cooper Street
Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1EB
England
[e-mail] - Phyllis Eve Bregman is postmaster
[e-mail] Alan Apt
Beth Mullen-Hespe [e-mail]
"Internet:  Getting Started", Marine et al, 1994, 0-13-289596-X

This is *not* a book introducing you to the Internet.  This is another
book on establishing a connection to the Internet.  A "first-timer",
as the cover has it, would almost certainly be bemused, if not totally
lost, by discussions of service providers, domain name servers and
costs.  The only introductory material is a brief overview of Internet
applications in chapter nine.

For those wishing to connect, this is a reasonable overview.  It
introduces the major topics, but often is very limited in terms of the
necessary details.  The setup for a router and the selection of
software is covered in a scant two paragraphs for each subject.
Obtaining an IP number and establishing a domain is recommended six
chapters before those items are defined.

Where this book does shine is in the listing of organizations related
to the internet.  If you are serious about establishing an Internet
node, you will need to contact a number of bodies quite aside from
your service provider.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKINTGST.RVW  940224. Distribution
permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 04:17:54 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: CPSR Response to FCC CNID (fwd)


Forwarded FYI to the Digest:

   From: [e-mail] (Jeff Johnson)
   Subject: CSPR Responds to FCC CNID Ruling
   Date: 18 May 1994 17:28:55 GMT

CPSR has responded to the FCC's recent ruling on Calling Number

Identification (CNID).  Our response took two forms:

1. Carl Page of CPSR/Oregon, who was (with Erik Nilsson) an active
participant in the Oregon state hearings two years ago that led to an
Oregon decision that followed many of CPSR's recommendations,
wrote a "Petition for Reconsideration" of the FCC's ruling, and is
submitting it today to the FCC.  I provided advice and editorial
feedback on the petition.  The main points of CPSR's petition are:

1) Phone companies argue that line blocking undermines the value of
CNID, but in fact the evidence suggests that this is false, 2) CNID
with no line-blocking undermines the value of the "unlisted number"
service, which has a higher market penetration rate than is projected
for CNID, 3) per-call blocking is unreliable as a way to preserve
privacy, especially in the age of direct marketing, "data harvesters,"
and the information superhighway, 4) Call Trace could be more useful
to residential phone customers than CNID if it were inexpensive and
universally available, yet the FCC's ruling ignores it entirely, and
5) the distinction between CNID, which can be blocked, and Automatic
Number Generation (ANI), which provides calling numbers to 800 and
900-service providers and which cannot be blocked, should eventually
be eliminated, such that blocking is available for all calls.

2. I provided advice to the National Association of State Consumer
Advocates (NASUCA), which is submitting its own "Petition for
Reconsideration" with the FCC.  NASUCA consists of the majority of
state Consumer Advocates, who work for their respective state Public
Utilities Commissions.  NASUCA's main arguments are: 1) the ~40 states
that have considered CNID did so in a very open and democratic manner
(e.g., held public participation hearings and evidentiary hearings,
solicited and received numerous letters and written arguments, etc.),
and most (36) of those states have decided that per-line blocking is
necessary to provide a fair balance between the privacy of callers
and callees, 2) the FCC's ruling, which was not based on such a
democratic process, may well pre-empt those of the states, so the FCC
should reconsider its ruling and allow CNID blocking, however generated
(i.e., per-line or per-call), to work for interstate calls. In other
words, calls for which the caller has blocked number disclosure should
simply be marked as blocked, regardless of whether the blocking was
initiated on a per-call or per-line basis.  This would actually be
simpler than requiring callers (and the network) to treat interstate
calls differently from local calls.

Hopefully, the FCC will reconsider.


JJ
[e-mail]    email [e-mail] *

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

Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 04:18:39 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Area Codes For Modems (Ameritech)


Forwarded FYI to the Digest:

  From: [e-mail] (Stanton McCandlish)
  Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
  Subject: New area codes for modems (Ameritech)
  Date: 16 May 1994 10:16:12 -0400

[e-mail] (Michael Halleen) says:

> On the news this morning there was a story that Ameritech is considering
> adding a new area code in the Chicago area.  They may split the suburbs
> (now 708) into two zones, or they might create a new code just for fax
> machines and modems.

> While right now it costs nothing extra to call to 708 from 312 (suburbs
> from city), that might not always be true.

> This is not a modem tax scare, but is it possible that this could end up
> costing internet users (those who dial up) more money?  Could this be
> an attempt to squeeze more money out of a growing business?

More likely, they are just running out of numbers, or need to change
the way calls are routed, or some such administrative problem.  This
is not really that rare a thing, the branching of prefixes and area
codes, and I think it likely that your state Public Utility Commission
defines LD charges by distance, rather than by area code or telco
whim.

> I'd like it if someone from the EFF would answer this.  Is there anything
> we can do to make it clear that we will not accept this?  (besides waiting
> for Chicago Cable to start offering phone service)

If you mean the splitting of the area codes, probably nothing you can
do about it, and there's unlikely to be much of a reason to anyway.
If you mean preventing tariffs targeted at modem and fax users, you
can always send letters to the heads of both the telco and the PUC
discouraging any such ideas if they are brewing.  At this juncture -
no actual modem-tariff in sight - there's not much else to do.


Stanton McCandlish * [e-mail] * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist

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

Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 13:56:13 -0700
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Short Message Service (SMS)


[e-mail] (Greg Alexander) asked:

>>  I am interested in buying a GSM phone, and was hoping to learn
>>  a little more about the short message service offered in some.

>>  Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone
>>  is in range?

We've just got the first "workable" SMS system in the UK, on the new
DCS1800 (PCN) system known as "ORANGE".  Essentially it is a message
transfer system that uses a form of handshaking between the mobile
switch and the handset: so error-free receipt of the message can be
guaranteed.

If the intended recipient's phone is not in range when the message is
sent, the network will hold the message until an error free path is
available for the message to be handed over.  This is important, as
the worst thing about a cellphone being out of range is for there to
be a message waiting when the phone gets back into coverage, and that
message has to be listened to from a fringe area with really poor
reception.  When the message is received, it is stored on the user's
SIM card -- which can be removed from the phone for security.  Even if
several people share a phone, the messages would stay completely
private (SIM cards can be protected with a PIN code).

We do not *just* have a message bureau, however: we also have the
ability to send messages *directly from handset to handset* and these
messages cost less to send than it would cost to make a phone call to
say the same thing!

In the future there are plans to provide notebook computer access to
the handset (using PCMCIA cards) and this will substantially increase
the functionality of the message service.  It will become possible to
send text messages from the handset (or computer) to any other GSM/PCN
system, to any of the old analogue paging networks, or as an X400
message or a facsimile document.  If a SMS message contains a phone
number with a request to be called back, the handset will (on a
key-push) grab that number and store it in the phone's memory, ready
to be called back by the user.  Oh, and we also have full Caller-ID
and last call return.

All this because the new ORANGE service in the UK seems to be
different to our other Telcos ... rather than saying "how little can
we get away with giving the customer", they say "how much useful
functionality can we cram into the system, and so make people want to
use our phones, without having to increase the prices !  After all,
ORANGE is *not* the first PCN (DCS1800) system in the UK ... but it IS
the first to offer all these features.

A sidenote: although there are two handsets now available for ORANGE,
these facilities will only work on Nokia handsets, not on the Motorola
alternative.


Richard D G Cox
Mandarin Technology, P.O. Box 111, Penarth, South Glamorgan, Wales:  CF64 3YG
Voice: 0956 700111 Fax: [phone]  VoiceMail: 0941 151515 Pager 0941 115555
E-mail address: [e-mail] - PGP2.3 public key available on request

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #242
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00200;
          23 May 94 16:04 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11554; Mon, 23 May 94 12:24:31 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11540; Mon, 23 May 94 12:24:27 CDT
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 12:24:27 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #243

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 23 May 94 12:24:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 243

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Internet: Mailing Lists" by Hardie/Neou (Rob Slade)
    Competitive Market Structure for Alaskan Telecommunications (Bob Keller)
    Network "Resources" on GSM? (Steve Davies)
    Motorola Cellular Phones (was Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) (Harry P. Haas)
    Itemized Billing in UK (Randy Gellens)
    Fujitsu F9600VS PBX (Jeff Wahlgren)
    Cordless Phone Wanted With Ten Mile Range (Roger Guorong)
    TMN/ASN.1/GSM Specialists Needed (Jay Borden)
    What Kind of Capacity is in VBI? (Paul Robinson)
    Microsoft Telephony API (Marco A. Pinones)
    What is a New Activation? (Bob Berger)
    Hunting GTE (Paul Callahan)
    War Department Technical Manual (Ry Jones)
    "Best Booth" at Supercomm (Randy Gellens)
    Hackers On Planet Earth Newsgroups ([e-mail])
    Accidental Phone Silliness  ;) (Elana Beach)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 15:17:56 MDT
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Internet: Mailing Lists" by Hardie/Neou


BKINTMLS.RVW  940217

Prentice Hall
113 Sylvan Avenue
Englewood Cliffs, NJ   07632
[phone]   FAX [phone]
or
11711 N. College Ave.
Carmel, IN   46032-9903
or
201 W. 103rd Street
Indianapolis, IN   46290
or
15 Columbus Circle
New York, NY   10023
800-428-5331
or
Market Cross House
Cooper Street
Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1EB
England
[e-mail] - Phyllis Eve Bregman is postmaster
[e-mail] Alan Apt
Beth Mullen-Hespe [e-mail]
"Internet:  Mailing Lists", Hardie/Neou, 1994, 0-13-289661-3

"What are you writing?"

"Another book review ... "

"Figures.  What's it on?"

"The Internet."

"Now, there's a surprise!  I think I'm gonna have a heart attack and die from
*not* being ..."

"That's getting old."

"Hummph.  So this is another Internet guide?"

"Nope.  It's about mailing lists or distribution lists."

"Like in junk mail?  'You may already be a winner' type of thing?"

"Well, if it's an unmoderated list, junk mail comes close.  Basically
these are mail programs assigned to a certain topic.  Everyone who is
interested in a topic can join a list.  When they send a message to
the list, it goes out to everyone who is signed up.  And everyone
signed up gets a copy of all mail sent to the list.  However, since it
is on the Internet, rather than done through the postal system, it can
run fast enough to seem almost like a conversation."

"So these guys explain all about it?"

"Well, not in a lot of detail.  They give a brief idea of the concept,
and the different programs like requesters, BITNET LISTSERVs, mail
servers and MAILBASE.  They even mention Usenet, which does the same
type of thing in a different way, even though it isn't really covered.
They don't give a lot of detail, but you can always get help from
these systems, anyway.  One of the big irritations in mailing lists is
people who send administrative messages, like when they want to join
or quit, to the list itself, rather than the controlling program.
They don't belabour the fact, but they do mention it.  Twice."

"So this is a short book?"

"Almost 600 pages."

"?"

"Most of the book is a listing of a number of mailing lists.  You can
get similar lists on the net, but this includes lists from a number of
sources, as well as more detail than you might get from a simple
listing.  They also have probably done some editing to get rid of some
deadwood.  More than deadwood, actually.  NETTRAIN doesn't make it."

"So you could get all this free?  Why buy the book?"

"Oh, you could get all the info, and more up to date stuff as well.
But you'd have to grab yourself three or four huge files.  Even then,
you wouldn't have all the info that is listed here.  You'd also have
to check it out different ways, search all the synonyms for what you
want, and that sort of thing.  If you are just a hobby user, maybe you
don't want this, but if you are serious about the Internet, then you
probably do.  If you are acting as an Internet resource or trainer you
*definitely* want this book."

"Good index, then?"

"Not perfect.  If you want to find the DOROTHYL mystery writing list,
it isn't listed under mystery, writing, fiction, or even Sayers.  BEN,
which deals with botany and ecology of the Pacific coast isn't listed
under either botany or ecology.  The index could certainly use some
work, but it's a start."

"Hmmm.  Sounds interesting.  Can I borrow it?"

"No."

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKINTMLS.RVW  940217. Distribution
permitted in 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 '95, Toronto, ON, February 13-17, 1995, contact: [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 13:52:35 GMT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Competitive Market Structure for Alaskan Telecommunications


Report No. DC-2600        ACTION IN DOCKET CASE         May 19, 1994

     NEW COMPETITIVE MARKET STRUCTURE ADOPTED FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS
                           SERVICE IN ALASKA
                          (CC DOCKET 83-1376)

     The Commission has adopted a new market structure for
telecommunications service in Alaska that will ensure universal
service to Alaskans, more fully open the Alaskan telecommunications
market to competition, and foster improved efficiency and economic
growth.

     The new market structure is patterned after the competitive
market structures in the rest of the country, where carriers compete
on price and services. The new structure will replace the Joint
Services Arrangement (JSA) under which AT&T and Alascom, Inc.,
currently provide telecommunications service to and from Alaska. The
JSA will be terminated on January 1, 1996.

     The Commission generally adopted, with minor clarifications and
modifications, the Final Recommended Decision adopted by the Alaska
Joint Board on October 26, 1993.  The Commission said that the
recommendations were in the public interest because they provide a
comprehensive solution to the Alaska market issues and because they
best achieve the five objectives adopted earlier by the Joint Board --
preservation of universal service; continuation of rate integration;
maintenance of revenue requirement neutrality; allowance of
market-based competitive entry; and encouragement of increased
efficiency.

     Under the market structure adopted in the order, AT&T must
provide interstate message telephone service and wide area
telecommunications service (collectively referred to as MTS) between
Alaska and the lower 48 states at integrated rates and under the same
terms and conditions, including quality, technical standards, and
availability, applicable to AT&T's provision of services in the Lower
48 states. AT&T must also furnish MTS service between Alaska and
Hawaii at integrated rates.

      After the JSA is terminated, Alascom can offer interstate MTS,
independently from AT&T, under its own tariff with no obligation to
charge AT&T's integrated rates. Alascom must provide common carrier
services to other interexchange carriers providing service to Alaska
on a nondiscriminatory basis under tariff at rates that reflect
Alascom's cost of service. Alascom's tariff will provide separate rate
schedules for competitive (non-Bush) and Bush areas of Alaska. The
costs of service in each of these categories will be prepared pursuant
to a cost allocation plan developed by Alascom and approved by the
FCC.

     Alascom will continue to have a facilities-based monopoly in the
Bush. As the only carrier providing facilities in the Bush, other
carriers must use Alascom's facilities to provide service to and from
the Bush.  Alascom will recover the costs of providing service to the
Bush, including satellite and other facilities, through tariffs.
Moreover, the order retains the factor for circuit equipment that
allocates 86% of the costs of such equipment, including satellite
costs, to the interstate jurisdiction.  The Commission emphasized its
commitment to ensuring preservation of telecommunications service to
the Bush.

     The order requires a four year transition and a number of
transition mechanisms before the new market structure is fully
implemented. During the first phase, beginning July 1, 1994, AT&T and
Alascom will continue to provide service jointly pursuant to the JSA.
The JSA will terminate at the end of the first phase effective January
1, 1996. During the second phase AT&T and Alascom may provide service
independently. AT&T will be required to purchase from Alascom a fixed
amount of service that declines over the two and one half year period.
The order requires that the amount AT&T must purchase is based on the
demand for north and south bound traffic in the last year of the JSA.
This amount is then adjusted to reflect the use by Alascom and other
interexchange carriers of Alascom's facilities for interstate MTS.

     AT&T is required to fund a reduction in Alascom's plant balances
by a transition payment to Alascom of $150 million in two installments
of $75 million to be paid on July 1, 1994 and upon termination of the
JSA.  Alascom must apply the payment first to reduce its central
office switching plant accounts and then the remaining depreciable
accounts. This payment by AT&T to Alascom is eligible for exogenous
treatment under the Commission's price cap rules for AT&T.

     Finally, the order allows AT&T to request equal access from
Alaska local exchange carriers.

     Action by the Commission May 19, 1994, by Memorandum Opinion and
Order (FCC 94-116). Chairman Hundt, Commissioners Quello and Barrett.

     News Media contact: Rosemary Kimball at [phone].
     Common Carrier Bureau contacts:  Rose Crellin at
     [phone] and Robert Hall at [phone].

                                  - FCC -


Bob Keller <KY3R>        Robert J. Keller, P.C.        Tel [phone]
[e-mail]    Federal Telecommunications Law    Fax [phone]
finger me for daily FCC info + see ftp.clark.net:/pub/rjk/ for other files

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Davies)
Subject: Network "Resources" on GSM?
Date: 22 May 1994 21:21:31 +0200
Organization: Internet Access public-access service


Hi Telecommers,

I am looking for information about the GSM cellular phone system.

The GSM system has recently been launched here in South Africa and I
would like to educate myself.

Are there any mailing lists that discuss GSM?  How about archive sites
with information?

Many thanks for reading!


Steve Davies, Compustat (Pty) Ltd   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harry P. Haas)
Subject: Motorola Cellular Phones (was: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones)
Date: 23 May 1994 14:12:27 GMT
Organization: Georgia Tech Research Institute


In article <[e-mail]>, John Gilbert <[e-mail].
mot.com> wrote:

> From Motorola Cellular Service Bulletin #179 4/92
> Motorola strongly discourages any attempt to install a standard
> Motorola cellular telephone into unique OEM cables.  Custom features
> designed into OEM phones are not operaable with standard Motorola
> equipment, and standard Motorola telephones do not operate properly on
> OEM-designed cables.

While we're on the subject ...

I have a Motorola flip-phone with the hands free kit/3watt amp. It
makes for the same setup as the lexus, without muting the stereo.
BUT, my stereo has a mute input wire, and the CELLULAR 3-WATT
VEHICULAR ADAPTER has a wire yellow-black wire labeled "Auxilary
Alert".  Hmmm.

So does anyone know what the "Auxiliary Alert" wire is used for?  If
it is not an "activity" signal, does anyone know how to get an "activity"
signal from the Motorola system so that I can mute my stereo?

Thanks in advance.


Harry Haas  GTRI/SEAL/RSD/ASB   Georgia Tech Research Institute
Research Engineer II            225 North Ave.
[e-mail]      Atlanta Georgia, 30332

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 22 MAY 94 23:55:00 GMT
Subject: Itemized Billing in UK


An episode of "Eastenders," shown last week in Southern California
(which runs about a year or more behind the U.K.) featured a character
quite shocked to learn that his phone calls to his mistress now show
up as itemized call detail on their phone bill.  These were local toll
calls from the East End to the West End, which I assume are expensive
calls.

Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing?


Randall Gellens          [e-mail]
[phone]               fax [phone]
Mail Stop MV 237                Net**2 656-6350

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wahlgren)
Subject: Fujitsu F9600VS PBX
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 10:34:56 GMT
Organization: InterAccess,Chicagoland's Full Service Internet Provider


Has anyone had any experience with the Fujitsu F9600VS PBX? I am
looking to purchase a new switch for our schools in the near future.
Good, bad, anticdotal, information, stories, any info much appreciated.
Email to [e-mail] or post reply.


Thanks in advance.

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

From: [e-mail] (Guorong Roger)
Subject: Cordless Phone Wanted With Ten Mile Range
Date: 23 May 1994 15:54:10 GMT
Organization: Old Dominion University CS Dept.


Is there any kind of CORDLESS PHONE which can be used for ten to
twenty miles distance (not a cellular phone, not the regular cordless
phone which can only be used within the house). The telephone should
still use the regular telephone switching system. The master piece of
the phone should be installed at home, and the handset could be bring
ten to twenty miles away from the home but be still access the phone
at home.

Please send email to me if you know the answer. Thanks!


Roger


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are, but they are not legal for use
in the USA. About the closest you can come to this legally in the USA is
to use a manual phone patch attached to a CB radio or some other type of
legal radio service. I have a phone patch here for example which I have
not used for many years, basically since when I 'got out of' CB ... it
can be wired into the speaker and microphone of the base station and also
into the telephone line, but the law requires that an operator at the
base station listen to both sides of the conversation and manually key the
microphone when the telephone side wishes to speak. CB radios can legally
(in theory) transmit up to 150 miles; antenna selection, height of antenna
and atmospheric conditions play a major role in getting this kind of range.
In real practice, two or three miles -- maybe up to ten miles -- is the
useable range to be expected from unmodified units operating in urban areas.
In any event, *no automatic service* is allowed.

Now, if you use radios equipped for 144 megs -- what is known among hams as
'two meters' -- then repeater sites equipped with telephone patches are quite
common. They usually belong to a local club whose members jointly maintain
the cost of the repeater site and phone line, etc. A license is required from
the FCC to operate a two meter radio, and the emphasis and primary use is
unit to unit contact rather than unit to phone network. I know they sell
the kind of phone you are seeking in Europe, but they are mostly unavailable
and hard to find here in the USA.  If you've got the money, you might con-
sider setting up a little two meter arrangement of your own with a private
phone line attached, etc.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 09:31:05 -0400
From: [e-mail] (jay borden)
Subject: TMN/ASN.1/GSM Specialists Needed


I'm looking for contract asssistance from one or two people who have a
good knowledge of (all of) the above.  If you think you fit the bill
(or know someone who does) please drop me a mail.


Thanks,

jay b

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 05:47:26 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: What Kind of Capacity is in VBI?
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


I saw the following announcement in the Satnews listing, which reads
in part talks about selling space on U.K. Channel 4:

> terrestrial Channel 4.  The Broadcasting Act 1990 makes provision
> for the allocation of a number of lines in the Vertical Blanking
> Interval (not used for sound and vision) to users...

A question I have is, for a U.S. signal, which I believe the Vertical
Blanking Interval also exists, how much capacity is available on a
single TV channel and at what speed can the data be sent? Is this
related to closed captioning?  If not, what type equipment is needed
to decode VBI data and what kind of costs are involved to build it?


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marco A. Pinones)
Subject: Microsoft Telephony API
Date: 22 May 1994 17:50:09 GMT
Organization: ITESM, Campus Monterrey


I would like to know if there is any advance on Microsoft efforts to
provide a "standard" programming interface for PBXs and telephony
services.  I sent mail to people at Ericcsson about this and they told
me they are working on it.  Does somebody know if other companies are
working on it?


Greetings,

Marco P

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Berger)
Subject: What is a New Activation?
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 20:13:41 GMT


In most states buying a cellular phone is much cheaper with a new
activation; the carrier essentially subsidizes the purchase.

Now, just how do they define "new"? Let's say I have an old, clunky
cellular phone, and I want one of those whizbang pocket models. If I
cancel my old service on May 31st, can I get a "New Activation" from
the same company on June 1st? Or must I switch carriers to get a good
deal on the phone purchase?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It depends on how liberal your existing
carrier is. Some will allow a new 'activation' to occur (for the purpose
of getting a new phone at a greatly reduced price, or free) in exchange
for your commitment to a new obligation or service contract. In other
words, your carrier might say if you are willing to contract with them
for another full year at some minimum service level per month (greater
than what you are getting now, of course) then they will go along with
it. If you are already spending a lot of money with the carrier each
month then they may feel there is no need to try and induce you to spend
more. Free (or reduced cost) cellular phones in exchange for signing up
are a lot like any other service which gives you a bargain for your first
commitment (like a record or book club; buy one and get a dozen more for
free, etc) ... they want to hook you. Once hooked, they could care less
about you. The certain way to accomplish what you want is by switching
carriers.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 94 07:37:35 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Paul Callahan)
Subject: Hunting Service From GTE


I want to get a second line and have it hunt to the first, or vice-versa.

I reacall this from one or two years ago, but not the terms.  Let's say,
I call GTE up and ask for my old line to hunt to the new, and the sales-
droid is confused -- what else can I call it?

If anyone wants to get real specific we are talking about a 214-417 line.


Thanks,

Paul


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is called rotary hunting service. Not
all exchanges are set up to do it but these days I can't imagine you would
be on one. Nor can all exchanges hunt backward or in a circle or from one
number to another further away (called 'jump hunt') but most of them can.
Illinois Bell -- maybe other Bells -- give hunting between lines for free
but I don't know what GTE thinks about it. Please note there is a more
expensive (and charged-for) service called 'transfer on busy/no answer'.
'Transfer on busy' does about the same thing as hunting does, but the way
it is done -- the mechanics of it -- are a little different. Since Bell
charges for 'transfer on busy' but gives 'hunting' for free, I chose to
take the latter for my lines.  PAT]

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

From: Ry Jones <[e-mail]>
Subject: War Department Technical Manual
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 09:23:42 PDT


I have a copy of the TM11-498, Fundamentals of Telephony and Manual
Telegraphy. It was published in October 1944, and is really
interesting from a historical point of view. One of the things I got a
kick out of is the notation by every schematic containing a capacitor:
NEW SYBMOL -)|- REPLACES -||- IN ALL DRAWINGS

THAT shows the age of the book.

It covers a lot about relays and cordboards, and has a lot of
information about field telephony.


Ry


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Too bad you don't have a scanner so the
publication could be entered on line easily and put in the archives.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 22 May 94 20:24:00 GMT
Subject: "Best Booth" at Supercomm


Of more than 1,700 booths representing 496 exhibitors, Unisys took the
prize for the "Best Booth" at the SUPERCOMM Telecommunications conference
last week in New Orleans.  Judging criteria included company identity,
product presentation, design elements, exhibit personnel and booth work-
ability.

More than 23,000 people attended the conference, which is the largest
U.S. telecommunications event.  In the award-winning booth, Unisys
Communications Systems Division showcased the recently announced NAP
VoiceSource UNIX solution.  Other telephone company applications were
featured as well, such as SS7 data collection, desktop video
conferencing, multimedia personal computing, and LocateIt (an OSMOS-
based geographic mapping system developed by Bellcore).

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Hackers On Planet Earth Newsgroups
Date: 23 May 1994 16:43:49 GMT
Organization: Escape ONLINE.


We've launched a few new newsgroups specifically for the HOPE
conference this August in New York City. They are:

alt.2600.hope.announce  Announcements, bulletins, general info.
alt.2600.hope.d         Discussion including rides, places to stay, etc.
alt.2600.hope.tech      Technical issues (network, setup, etc.)

If your site doesn't have these groups, ask your sysadmin to subscribe
 -- they usually will if you ask and it's not being censored by a higher
authority. If you can't get on, post questions or comments here or
write to [e-mail].


Hackers On Planet Earth
August 13-14, 1994
Hotel Pennsylvania, New York City

For discounted room reservations, call (212) PEnnsylvania 6-5000 (no
shit).  Mention HOPE to get the special rate.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You're right; no shit. The hotel has
had that phone number for their switchboard for about sixty years. At one
time a very glamorous and famous place, Hollywood even made a movie about
it and used that number as part of the movie's theme.  Then of course
there was the campy Dracula movie a few years ago which used a take-off
on the same thing with the number TRansylvania 6-5000.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (The Great Whatever...)
Subject: Accidental phone Silliness  ;)
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 05:38:13 GMT


Figured I'd inject some non-serious discussion into this group...  ;)

Three people figure in this story: me, some guy named Ken and a mutual
friend named Karen.

Anyway, I was trying to call Ken at a time that I KNEW he was home,
and I got his @!%@! answering machine.

I got seriously annoyed, so as soon as I heard his machine beep, I hit
the "play" button on the outgoing message of my own machine and played
it into the phone.  Then I hung up.

15 minutes later, my phone rang.  It was Karen, calling to tell me
that Ken had just called her.  He was seriously freaked out, saying:
"Elana's machine just somehow called MY machine!!  And left a message!!!"

Twilight phone Zone for Ken.  ;-)

I guess that he was not exactly the brightest soul that ever walked on
this planet...!     :)  8)


Elana

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #243
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00763;
          23 May 94 17:10 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13264; Mon, 23 May 94 13:14:37 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13255; Mon, 23 May 94 13:14:35 CDT
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 13:14:35 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #244

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 23 May 94 13:14:30 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 244

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    FCC Seeks Further Comments on 0+ Call Routing (Bob Keller)
    Book Review: "The Internet Navigator" by Gilster (Rob Slade)
    Taiwan and Hong Kong Contacts Needed (Tara D. Mahon)
    Book Review: "How the World Was One: Beyond Global Village" (Mark Brader)
    Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service (Mark E. Daniel)
    Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service (Steven J. Davidson, M.D)
    Remote Telephone Access Information Wanted (Warren Birnbaum)
    Is There a Gadget Which Detects Fax and Voice? (Hem Ramachandran)
    Mispellers [sic] of the World, Unite! (Jonathan Welch)
    Is This True? (Atri Indiresan)
    DTMF Decoding Help Needed (Chad R. West)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 10:50:24 EDT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: FCC Seeks Further Comments on 0+ Call Routing


Report No.  DC-2601       ACTION IN DOCKET CASE                May 19, 1994

       FURTHER COMMENTS SOUGHT ON PROPOSAL TO ROUTE TELEPHONE CALLS
          VIA THE CARRIER CHOSEN BY THE PARTY PAYING FOR THE CALL
                           (CC DOCKET NO. 92-77)

     The Commission announced today that it seeks further comment on
whether to mandate a new system for routing "0+" calls -- that is,
calls that are made by entering a "0" followed by a long distance
number.  While it found that the evidence available to it indicated
that the benefits of the new system, called Billed Party Preference or
BPP, outweighed its costs, the Commission also found that some of the
data underlying its cost/benefit analysis were not as firm or as
current as it desired.

     Currently, 0+ calls are sent to the operator services provider
(OSP) to which the premises owner or payphone provider presubscribes.
Under BPP, calls would be routed automatically to the OSP preferred by
the party being billed for the call.  For example, a calling card call
would be routed to the cardholder's preferred OSP.  A collect call
would be routed to the called party's preferred OSP.  A call billed to
a third party would be routed to the OSP to which that third party had
presubscribed.

     The Commission found that BPP would provide three principal
benefits.  First, it would make operator services more "user
friendly."  Under a BPP system, callers would be able to make all of
their operator-assisted calls on a 0+ basis, and they would be able to
do so with the knowledge that calls would be automatically handled by
the OSP with which the billed party had chosen to do business at the
rates offered by that OSP.

     Callers who currently use access codes would no longer need to do
so.  Callers who do not use access codes would no longer face the risk
that their call would be carried by an operator service provider with
rates considerably higher than the industry average.  Based on data in
the Commission's November 1992 report issued pursuant to the Telephone
Operator Consumer Services Information Act, the Commission estimated
that BPP would likely enable consumers to save about $280 million per
year by avoiding operator service providers with rates higher than the
AT&T/MCI/Sprint average.

     Second, the Commission found that BPP would force OSPs to refocus
their competitive efforts towards serving consumers rather than
serving aggregators, such as premises owners or payphone providers.
The Commission recognized that such a shift in competitive focus would
almost certainly eliminate the commissions that OSPs now pay to
aggregators for directing 0+ calls to them.  Moreover, based on the
available data, it estimated that the elimination of commissions could
save operator service providers about $340 million per year on
interLATA 0+ calls.  Not only did the Commission find that this could
offset a substantial portion of the costs of BPP, but that a shift in
competitive focus could also foster lower prices and better service
for consumers.

     Finally, the Commission noted that BPP would eliminate certain
AT&T advantages in the operator services market.  For example, it
would enable AT&T's competitors to offer end users the same 0+ access
as AT&T.

     On the other hand, the Commission also noted that BPP is an
expensive technology.  While it found that available data indicated
that the net cost of BPP for LECs would be approximately $380 million
on an amortized unseparated cost basis, with an additional estimated
$35 million per year for OSP expenses, it observed that this estimate
was based on data that was not as firm nor as current as it would have
liked.

     Therefore, the Commission chose to issue a Further Notice that
sets forth in detail its cost/benefit analysis based on the available
data, giving parties the opportunity to comment on the analysis and to
submit additional, updated data to corroborate or refute it.  The
Commission also seeks comment on whether some or all of the benefits
of BPP could be achieved through alternative, less costly measures.

     Finally, the Commission also addressed some aspects of how BPP
should be implemented in the event it decides to mandate it.  For
example, the Commission decided that, if mandated, BPP should apply on
a nationwide basis to all 0+ and 0- interLATA calls and that it should
accommodate commercial credit cards.  It also concluded that BPP
should not give either LECs or OSPs the exclusive ability to issue
line number cards, however, it seeks further comment on whether BPP
should include a fourteen- or ten-digit screening design.  It also
seeks comment on whether prison phones should be subject to BPP.

     Action by the Commission May 19, 1994, by Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 94-117).  Chairman Hundt, Commissioner
Barrett, with Commissioner Quello concurring in the result and
Commissioners Barrett and Quello issuing separate statements.

     News Media contact: Rosemary Kimball at [phone].
     Common Carrier Bureau contacts: Mark S. Nadel at
     [phone] and Gary Phillips at [phone].

                                  - FCC -

Bob Keller <KY3R>        Robert J. Keller, P.C.        Tel [phone]
[e-mail]    Federal Telecommunications Law    Fax [phone]
finger me for daily FCC info + see ftp.clark.net:/pub/rjk/ for other files

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

Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 22:24:22 MDT
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "The Internet Navigator" by Gilster


BKINTNAV.RVW  940211

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
22 Worchester Road
Rexdale, Ontario  M9W 9Z9
800-263-1590
or
605 Third Avenue
New York, NY   10158-0012 USA
800-263-1590   212-850-6630
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]   [e-mail]
"The Internet Navigator", Gilster, 1993, 0-471-59782-1
[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

This book is an embarrassment to me.  I *think* that it's very good --
but I am at a bit of a loss as to why.

By and large, this is an Internet guide like other Internet guides.  A
bit of an introduction and some history, then coverage of the major
applications (email, ftp, telnet) and the more esoteric ones (gopher,
WAIS, World Wide Web).  Right from the front cover, though, Gilster
avoids the "whole Internet" bias of so many guides and aligns himself
with the dial-up user.  There is, in fact, a whole chapter devoted to
the use of email to access Internet resources; particularly useful to
those on commercial online services, business "mail only" connections
or Fidonet.

It is, of course, very much easier to point out the flaws.  Although
Gilster explains "why UNIX," there is a heavy emphasis on the specific
commands of mail, trn, elm and other UNIX specific programs.  (In the
chapter on email access to resources, Gilster switches to Compuserve:
oddly appropriate, but no less limited.)  While the explanation of
LISTSERV is complete and helpful, the sin of sending administrative
messages to the list, rather than the LISTSERV, is not emphasized.
Even in the opinion chapter, a discussion of the future of the
newspaper lauds Clarinet for providing syndicated material, apparently
unaware that Clarinet is strictly a reseller, and is providing for no
development of editorial content.

In spite of minor shortcomings, however, this book has a very
comfortable feel to it.  The material is clear and well-written, with
little attempt at the sarcasm or barbed wit of some other beginner
materials.  One positive factor may be the grouping of functional
items together, so that archie, for example, is covered in the chapter
on ftp.  There is only one icon; a very helpful little ship which
points out Internet accessible resources for the item under
discussion.

The resource guides included are not extravagantly large, and are of
variable quality.  The directory of Internet resources is very useful
for the beginner: not exhaustive, but of high quality in terms of what
*is* covered.  The bibliography is more exhaustive than useful, with
Gibson's fictional "Neuromancer" next to Quarterman's quite technical,
"The Matrix."

Overall, I highly recommend this for the beginner to the Internet.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKINTNAV.RVW  940211. Distribution
permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 94 13:38:07 EDT
From: Tara D. Mahon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Taiwan and Hong Kong Contacts Needed


Dear TELECOM Digest readers,

Insight Research is trying to locate people knowledgable about
operations support systems (OSS) for Taiwanese telecom providers.  We
are looking for contact names at wireless or wireline carriers to
interview for research on computers and telecom in Asia.

We need a cellular/wireless contact at Hong Kong Telecom as well.

If anyone can assist us, please send contact information (phone
number, fax number, e-mail address, etc.) to [e-mail].

Thank you in advance for your help.


Sincerely,

Tara D. Mahon                  [e-mail]
Insight Research Corporation   [e-mail]
354 Eisenhower Parkway         [phone] voice
Livingston, NJ 07039-1023 USA  [phone] fax

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Book Review: "How the World Was One: Beyond the Global Village"
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 08:41:46 GMT


David Ofsevit ([e-mail]) writes:

> I was surprised that in the excellent series of articles on
> telegraph and telephone cables there was no mention of Arthur C.
> Clarke's fine book "Voice Across the Sea" (Harper, 1958).  I don't
> know whether it's in print anymore, but it is very well written and
> worth finding.

I doubt that it's in print, because in 1992, Clarke incorporated a
large part of it into a new book.  I posted a review of that one then,
here and in slightly different form to certain other Usenet newsgroups.
I saved a copy of the other version of the review; here it is.

At the rate that books go out of print these days, it seems entirely
possible that *this* one isn't available *either*; I don't know.

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

  "How the World Was One: Beyond the Global Village", 1992 Bantam
  hardcover, approx 300 pages.  US price $22.50.  ISBN 0-553-07440-7.

This book is for people who are interested in telecommunications.
They'll like it.  Those readers who are voracious Clarke fans,
however, may find that they've read considerable parts of it before.

The book contains five main parts.  The first and longest one tells
about the early history of submarine telegraph cables, culminating
with the tribulation-filled laying of the first successful cable
across the Atlantic; and the second part rapidly takes the story
forward to transoceanic telephony and radio.

Most of this material was taken from Clarke's 1958 book "Voice Across
the Sea", but I had not read that one, and I found it fascinating.

Perhaps the most interesting thing was the many kinds of technical
difficulties encountered in the early days.  Cables were too light,
too heavy, too short; they broke, they leaked; they even sabotaged
themselves (no, I won't explain that one!).  And then there were
people problems -- wrong assumptions about technology went untested
until after they had been embedded in thousands of miles of cable.

On one of the cable-laying attempts, two ships started out in the
middle of the ocean and sailed in opposite directions with the two
ends of the cable, each paying it out as it went.  Their only
communication with each other was by telegraph through the cable
itself.  At one point the connection broke and the ships returned to
their starting point -- and each hailed the other with "How did the
cable break?"  Something had happened on the seabed, and they never
did find out what.

Then when the first cable was finally laid and the technology finally
tested, it hardly worked: after 12 days of trying to adjust the
instruments, the operators still needed over 16 hours to transmit a
99-word official telegram.  Depending just how they timed their
Morse-like code, I figure that the transmission rate must have been
somewhere between .05 and .1 baud!

The remaining three parts of the book do not really tell a continuous
story as do the first two; there are many distinct essays and speeches
and even a few pieces of fiction.  I had read several of the pieces
before, and some of them overlap to some extent.  So for these reasons
I didn't enjoy the second half of the book as much as the first; but I
still found it well worth reading.

The third part deals with Clarke's own involvement in the early
development of communication satellites.  As most of you will know, he
invented the idea of using the geostationary orbit for comsats --
though it didn't occur to him then that they might be unmanned!  This
part puts the idea in context of what he was doing at the time and of
what had already been invented by others, and includes the short story
"I Remember Babylon" where he anticipated some less savory uses to
which comsats might be put.

The fourth part concerns the impact of comsats as it has turned out in
fact, and Clarke's thoughts on where how they should develop in the
future; and the short fifth part is about the renaissance of submarine
cables with the appearance of fiber optics.  Look how the world has
changed already since the telephone appeared ... here are two early
reactions to the news of its invention:

     When news of Alexander Graham Bell's invention reached the
     United Kingdom, the chief engineer of the British Post Office
     failed to be impressed.  "The Americans," he said loftily,
     have need of the telephone -- but we do not.  We have plenty
     of messenger boys ..."
     ...
     In contrast ... the mayor of a certain American city was
     wildly enthusiastic.  He thought that the telephone was a
     marvelous device and ventured this stunning prediction:
     "I can see the time," he said solemnly, "*when every city
     will have one*."

The thesis of the book is simple, and one with which most of us on
Usenet will agree.  I know *I* do.  Better communication unites societies,
reduces ignorance, and generally benefits everyone; and it is, accordingly,
something on which the expenditure of time and money is well worthwhile.
As Clarke said on the occasion of the signing of the Intelsat agreement:

     For today, gentlemen, whether you intend it or not -- whether
     you wish it or not -- you have signed far more than yet another
     intergovernmental agreement.

     You have just signed the first draft of the Articles of
     Federation of the United States of Earth.


Mark Brader              "... There are three kinds of death in this world.
[e-mail]                    There's heart death, there's brain death, and
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto        there's being off the network."  -- Guy Almes

This article is in the public domain.

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 03:01:29 EST
From: [e-mail] (Mark E Daniel)
Subject: Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service


> The UnDirectory service (Clarity Inc., P.O. Box 8357, Red Bank, NJ
> 07701, 908-530-5100) provides national dial-up reverse directory for
> the whole U.S.  (Includes Alaska and Hawaii, but I couldn't get info
> on numbers for Puerto Rico, or 800+ and 900+ numbers.)

How long does a number have to be in service before it's in this
database?  I've had my number for over a year ever since I moved here
and I decided to see if it knew me, and it said that my number was
either unlisted or recently assigned.  As I said, I've had this number
for over one year and it is in the newest Ameritech directory, issued
December 1993.


Mark E Daniel                  (Loving SysOp of The Legend BBS)
Inet: [e-mail]  [e-mail] (Direct INet)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As pointed out here before, most such
services skimp on the costs of running same by using old, outdated
records. They do not want to pay what telco would charge them for
direct and immediate access to an up-to-date database. Therefore, you
get what you pay for, or at least they do. They can make a lot more
money by producing an inferior product which they then sell to you at
a greatly inflated cost. If someone would do this the right way -- the
way Ameritech handles 796-9600 -- it would be a winner.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 01:03:48 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Steven J. Davidson, M.D)
Subject: Re: Nationwide Name and Address Service


Pat writes:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's because, as Lynne Gregg points
> out in her note earlier in this issue, many of those outfits rely on
> old, obsolete listings rather than accessing the up-to-date listings
> of telco. They'd have to *pay* telco to do that; then there would be
> less profit in their operation. I guess they figure it is better to
> work with older, less expensive databases and be right part of the time
> rather than do the job right but make less profit.    PAT]

I just tried the 900 service with my present and immediate past (1981-1993)
telephone numbers.  Neither were known to the database.  I then tried
my "new" work number (in service for six years) it gave another address
and business name.  Then I tried my mother-in-law's number (12 years
and still in service) which was unknown to the database and my parent's
number (in use since 1955!) and it was unknown to the database.  These
last three numbers are all listed in the current Philadelphia directory.

Conclusion:  This service may not be worth even $1/minute, not just
because of absent information, but also because of erroneous information.


Regards,

Steven J. Davidson, MD, MBA, FACEP  |  215.843.3001/3029 voice/fax
Div. of Emerg. Med. Serv., 3426 Conrad St., Philadelphia, PA 19129-1651
[e-mail] | [e-mail] | [e-mail]
    Opinions are all mine, I'm often wrong, but never in doubt.

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 07:02:05 GMT
From: Warren Birnbaum <[e-mail]>
Subject: Remote Telephone Access Information Wanted


I am currently looking for names of companies that supply telephone
access to remote areas via satillite.  Any information on this would
be appreciated.


Thanks,

Warren Birnbaum   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hem Ramachandran)
Subject: Is There a Gadget Which Detects Fax and Voice?
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 18:42:54 -0500
Organization: University of Texas at Austin


Hi,

I am wondering whether there exists a gadget (in the market or one
which I can make) which detects between incoming fax and incoming
voice and switch it to two seperate ports or so?


Thanks for any help,

Hem


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Don't reinvent the wheel, Hem. These are
all over the place. Check the Radio Shack store in Austin for starters
and ask about the fax and data switch. I think the price is about $100.
Another source is Hello Direct at 800-HI-HELLO. You can get the kind which
actually listen to the incoming tones and decide whether to send the call
to a fax, a computer or a human; or the kind which uses Distinctive Ringing
Service from the telco to route the calls.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 06:24:49 -0500
From: Jonathan_Welch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mispellers [sic] of the World, Unite!


Forwarded to the Digest from rec.humor.funny, FYI:

 From: [e-mail] (Walter Daugherity)
 Subject:Mispellers [sic] of the world, unite!
 Date: Fri, 20 May 94 3:20:01 EDT
 Message-ID:<[e-mail]>

(True)

In an effort to snag more long distance telephone calls (charged to a
credit card or a third number), AT&T reserved the toll-free number
1-800-OPERATOR.  Not to be outdone, and perhaps knowing the public
better, MCI reserved the number 1-800-OPERATER and has been scooping
up calls intended for its arch-rival.


Walter C. Daugherity   Texas A&M University  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 12:43:19 -0400
From: Atri Indiresan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Is This True?


This appeared in rec.humor.funny. Can anyone confirm that this is
true?

Atri

> In an effort to snag more long distance telephone calls (charged to
> a credit card or a third number), AT&T reserved the toll-free number
> 1-800-OPERATOR.  Not to be outdone, and perhaps knowing the public
> better, MCI reserved the number 1-800-OPERATER and has been scooping
> up calls intended for its arch-rival.

Is this why AT&T is switching from 1-800-OPERATOR to 1-800-CALL-ATT?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T had the latter of the two numbers in
service for quite awhile prior to starting 'OPERATOR'. I would not be
surprised to hear there was a lot of confusion between OPERATOR and
OPERATER however.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 14:07:55 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: DTMF Decoding Help Needed


I am writing a program that needs to decode telephone touch tone
signals.  The problem is that I am having trouble finding a DTMF
decoder.  If anyone know where I can get ahold of one I would
appreciate it.


Thank you.

Chad R. West (Computer Science)
Monroe Community College
[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #244
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01195;
          23 May 94 18:03 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16173; Mon, 23 May 94 14:29:03 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16159; Mon, 23 May 94 14:29:01 CDT
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 14:29:01 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #245

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 23 May 94 14:29:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 245

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Help Needed on Call Initialization in GSM, TACS, AMPS (P. Allen Jensen)
    Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Arieh Cimet)
    Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Mike Lyman)
    Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (David S. Rose)
    Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (K. Ketheesan)
    Re: Distribution of WATS Numbers in the Numbering Plan (John R. Levine)
    Re: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same? (John R. Levine)
    Re: Video Conference Bridges (Ari Ollikainen)
    Re: Video Conference Bridges (Alan Leon Varney)
    Re: Bulk Call Display (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Sprint "Combined Billing" Error (Robert M. Hamer)
    Book Review: "Netiquette" by Virgina Shea (K. M. 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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (P. Allen Jensen)
Subject: Re: Help Needed on Call Initialization in GSM, TACS, AMPS
Date: 23 May 1994 09:32:12 -0700
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [login: guest]


Nimal Senarath ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I am a research student in Mobile communications attached to Networks
> Group, EE Dept, Melbourne UNiversity, Australia.

> I want to model Call INitialization in TDMA, FDMA systems for my
> simulation work. I want to know exactly how the decision of initial
> Base STATION selection is done (i.e. At the call origination).

> We know that the mobile checks for the highest received pilot signal,
> and connect to that base station if that is sufficient. However what I

Actually, it's a bit more complex than just the highest pilot signal.
The Radio Criteria named C1 used to select is defined as:

        C1 = (A - Max.(B,0))
Where
        A = Received Level Average - p1
        B = p2 - Maximum RF power of the mobil station

        p1 is the RXLEV_ACCESS_MIN broadcast by the cell
        p2 is the MX_TXPWR_MAX_CCH broadcast by the cell
Values are expressed in dB

(this is for GSM900, GSM1800 differs, and this does not include things
like reselect hysteresis, switch-on time, PLMN change, limited
service mode, using a prefered PLMN list in the moble unit, etc...)

The Received Level Average seems to be what you want to know about -
How long does it measure it to compute an average and how many
samples are taken as you say below ...

> need is that how long mobile will measure this Signal Strength before
> taking the decision and how often it measures this RSS values. (e.g.
> It can be that average value of RSS over 0.5 seconds intervals may be
> measured for about 'N' number of such intervals?; I assume measurements
> at 0.5 intervals because that is the measurement interval used for
> sending RSS values to the BS by the GSM system after the intitialization
> process.)

The minimum rate of measurement reporting in GSM is once per second.
This is for all cells being measured. (the Mobile station builds a list of
stations/frquencies to monitor ...)  This can include up to six neighbour
cells.

In the TCH/F + SAACH case, there are 26 very short intervals (1ms)
24 small intervals (2ms) and one long interval (6ms) every 120ms.

For more details - get the book:
"The GSM System for Mobile Communications"
by Michel Moule and Marie-Bernadette Pautet
ISBN 2-9507190-0-7

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

From: anl433![e-mail] (Arieh Cimet)
Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager?
Organization: Motorola Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:20:34 GMT


[e-mail] (Greg Alexander) writes:

> Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone is
> in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service areas
> (eg Asia Pacific -- Thailand, and non city areas of Australia). If its
> a pager -- cool, I will still be contactable. If it relies on being in
> the area -- good too (I will NEVER miss the message).

Short Message is a paging with acknowledgement service, i.e. the
system will attempt to deliver the messages until it receives an
acknowledgement from the mobile.

If a message is received while you are registered in the system then
it is delivered right away (and it will be redelivered if there are
any errors during transmission until an acknowledgement is received).
If you are not in the system, then the messages are stored and the
system database is marked so that the next time that you register in
the system, all the messages waiting for you will be delivered (there
is usually a scrolling mechanism in the phone). The operator may limit
how many waiting messages you can have and for how long they will keep
a message.


I. Arieh Cimet                  e-mail:  [e-mail]
Motorola ESMR Infrastructure     phone:  [phone]
1301 E. Algonquin Road             fax:  [phone]
Schaumburg, IL 60196

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager?
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 09:31:00 PDT


From: [e-mail] (Greg Alexander)

> I have spoken with several stores, service providers and
> representatives of the actual phone makers themselves (Nokia) (in
> Australia), and have got different stories from everyone as to how it
> works.    Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your
> phone is in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service
> areas (eg Asia Pacific -- Thailand, and non city areas of Australia).
> If its a pager -- cool, I will still be contactable. If it relies on being
> in the area -- good too (I will NEVER miss the message).

The messaging is delivered over the same cellular network to the
phone.  Yep, you must be within the coverage area in order to receive
the page. It'll be great when the gaps are filled in coverage areas.
Those days aren't too far off.


Regards,

Lynne

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Lyman)
Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Motorola Inc. - Satellite Communications
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:06:50 GMT


According to the way I interpret the meaning of "pager", I'd say GSM
Short Message Service is a little of both paging facility and message
storage/retrieval service.

The GSM service specification for SMS makes it possible for a
subscriber to receive messages up to 160 characters in length when
that subscriber is currently registered in a system that supports SMS.
Messages can be received either while the subscriber/phone is idle
(not in an active call) or when the subscriber is involved in an
active call. The big difference between SMS and a "pager" service is
that SMS will, in principle go through most of the actions that
normally take place for a regular GSM voice call (authentication,
etc).

Once a message is delivered to a subscribers' mobile phone, an
acknowledgment is sent from the phone to confirm that the phone
received the message. If the subscriber is not currently registered in
a system or has the mobile unit turned off or << your reason for
non-delivery here >> the message will be stored in a Short Message
Service Center and a flag is set in that subscribers' database that
will cause an indication on the subscribers' mobile unit that a
message is waiting, once the subscribers' phone is available. The
subscriber can then retrieve the message(s). If the mobile phone is
equipped with a SIM card (Subscriber Information Module), then
provision is made to store any SMS messages on the SIM. Messages sent
to subscribers' via SMS are "secure". That is, the message is
encrypted using a sophisticated algorithm. In addition, the originator
of the message can be advised of the outcome of the SMS delivery.

For a "normal" paging service, pages are sent to the subscriber's
pager without any indications in return as to successful delivery (spray
and pray service) although there is a movement afoot to provide "ack-back"
paging services. I dont think there are any spec's or functional systems
(are there ?).

The description of SMS that I've given is from a "specifications"
perspective and that actual implementation and operation may vary
according to the subscriber unit/network equipment vendor. I believe
the basic functional description will hold true.


Michael Lyman   Motorola S.E.D. ( Iridium )
Chandler, Az.   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager?
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 02:28:28 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


Greg Alexander <[e-mail]> writes:

> Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone is
> in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service areas

GSM, which is similar to the MIRS/ESRM technology in North America, is
an integrated system.  That is, one single system provides a variety
of\ wireless connections.  These include two-way voice, one-way
acknowledgement alphanumeric messaging, two-way data and in some cases
push-to-talk dispatch broadcast.  The key here is that all these
features are coming through the same system, using the same transmitters,
switches and mobile receivers.  Therefore the range/coverage on all the
services will be exactly the same.  If you're in range to get an alpha
message, you will also be in range for a voice connection, and vice
versa. (Actually, in practice there might some minor discrepancies in
fringe areas, but the usual case will be true the vast majority of the
time.)


David S. Rose / Ex Machina, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (K. Ketheesan)
Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Network Systems Lab, Arizona State University
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 12:15:24 GMT


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Greg
Alexander) writes:

> Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone is
> in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service areas
> (eg Asia Pacific -- Thailand, and non city areas of Australia). If its
> a pager -- cool, I will still be contactable. If it relies on being in
> the area -- good too (I will NEVER miss the message).

My understanding is that in order to deliver SMS messages in GSM, signaling
connection has to be established (if one is not already existing).  So
that implies that when you are outside the coverage area, you will not
be able to send or receive SMS messages.


K. Ketheesan               Network Systems Lab
Electrical Engineering     Arizona State University
[e-mail]        Tempe, Arizona

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 94 14:20 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Distribution of WATS Numbers in the Numbering Plan
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> [When you dial an 800 number, your local telco makes a quick search
> of the database and routes your call to the 'real' number to which the
> 800 version is attached.  PAT]

It's probably more accurate to say that the telco looks up the 800
number and then hands it to the appropriate IXC who can do anything
with it they want.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 94 07:56:00 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


Is it too much to ask that people actually retrieve the FCC's CNID
order rather than speculating about what it might say?  You can FTP it
in about 30 seconds if you're on a directly connected site.  It's at:

    ftp://fcc.gov/pub/Orders/Common_Carrier/orcc4001.txt

> With the FCC mandate for CNID service, is it not possible that the
> telcos will use this to drop ANI?

Considering that ANI is what they use to bill for toll calls, I would
think that such a move is, to put it mildly, unlikely.

> Also it has been mentioned that "911 service requires special trunk lines
> and equipment". Clearly CNID does not and needs only a low-cost display.
> Will this make local 911 response a possibility?

The hard part about 911 isn't delivering the ANI.  The hard part is
creating a complete and reliable data base with accurate street
addresses in which the number can be looked up.  In Vermont, for
example, there is an expensive multi-year program to assign a street
and number to every address in the state (most of Vermont is small
towns where a typical mailing address is Box 42, RFD 1, East Overshoe)
largely to make it possible to create the 911 location database.
Whether the number comes from ANI or CLID is a nit.

> While we are at it, I would *suspect* that per-call blocking will be
> the standard, per-line will be standard for unlisted subscribers, ...

The FCC order specifically forbids providing per-line blocking to anyone.
They say: "Thus, carriers may not offer per line blocking as a privacy
protection mechanism on interstate calls."  I think this is a terrible
idea, for reasons I won't rehash again here.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ari Ollikainen)
Subject: Re: Video Conference Bridges
Date: 23 May 1994 02:40:07 GMT
Organization: National Energy Research Supercomputer Center, Livermore CA


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, John McHarry <mcharry@access.
> digex.net> writes:

> There are a number of companies making videoconferencing bridges.
> first are the main codec manufacturers - CLI, PictureTel, VTEL, GPT,
> BT, NEC.  There are also companies like VideoServer.  Most of today's
> bridges are ITU/TSS H.320 (or some subset) compatible.  Most of the
> codec manufacturers have proprietary algorithms in their own multipoint
> control units (MCU's).  CTX. CTX+, SG-3, etc.  Send e-mail if I can
> give you more information ([e-mail]).

BT's new MCU is made by VideoServer.

CLI's MCU2 (proprietary + standards) is made by VideoServer.

PictureTel's and VTEL's standards capable MCUs are internally developed.

I hope the information you are offering via e-mail is more accurate ...


[e-mail]  Ari Ollikainen          {VOX: 510 423-5962}
Energy Sciences Network  {FAX: [phone]}
National Energy Research Supercomputer Center
Lawrence  Livermore  National  Laboratory
MailStop L-561, PO BOX 5509, Livermore, CA. 94551
~~RECOM Technologies Inc.~~

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 10:29:37 +0600
Subject: Re: Video Conference Bridges
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


> There are a number of companies making videoconferencing bridges.
> first are the main codec manufacturers - CLI, PictureTel, VTEL, GPT,
> BT, NEC.  There are also companies like VideoServer.  Most of today's
> bridges are ITU/TSS H.320 (or some subset) compatible.

   AT&T Network Systems also makes a MultiPoint Control Unit, with
H.series (Px64) compliance, interfacing with DS1-robbed-bit or
National ISDN-PRI trunks.  Bandwidths of 56/64/112/128 and 384 (H0 and
multirate) are supported.  Initial versions of the MultiPoint Model VS
handle 24 ports in up to 12 conferences, and can be cascaded to
support 46 endpoints.  BONDing & 1.5 Mbps are not yet available.

   It's a new product, so John might not have it on his list.


Al Varney

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 11:42:12 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bulk Call Display
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


>> So what interface are they using to receive the Call Display data?

> I believe there is just such a bulk interface available, called
> something like SMDA (Service Message Desk Accounting?).

I think you mean "SMDF" -- Simplified Message Desk Format.  Some
attendant console systems have the capability to use it in order to
route calls automatically.  I know the system we have at my other
office has it as an option.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert M. Hamer)
Subject: Re: Sprint "Combined Billing" Error
Date: 20 May 94 15:49:45 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


[e-mail] (Mike Pollock) writes:

> Sprint recently changed me over from direct billing to "combined
> billing" on my NYNEX local telephone bill.  Simple, right?  Wrong.

One solution is simply to not pay the NYNEX bill, call Sprint, and
tell them you don't want "combined billing."  They didn't kick when I
did that.  If they did kick, tell them you'll feel free to change to
another long distance company.  You ought to be able to get rates
similar to Sprint's from lots of places.


Robert M. Hamer [e-mail] 908 932 3145

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

From: [e-mail] (K. M. Peterson)
Subject: Book Review: "Netiquette" by Virginia Shea
Date: 23 May 1994 15:16:20 GMT
Organization: KMPeterson/Boston


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Rosemary Angela Mauro) writes:

> I am currently engaged in putting on a presentation for a
> telecommunications class at the U of Oregon. I need any information
> you may have regarding netiquette,nethics and conventional terms used
> on th intenet or email. Perhaps someone has an email address where I
> could write for information.  Would appreciate any response.

There's a book out on it now!!


                        A L B I O N    B O O K S
   P R O U D L Y   A N N O U N C E S   T H E   P U B L I C A T I O N
O F
                        N E T I Q U E T T E <TM>
                     B Y  V I R G I N I A  S H E A
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Mandatory reading for new users of the Internet. It should be bundled
with
every modem..." -- from the foreword by Guy Kawasaki
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Netiquette / by Virginia Shea
160 pages / 6" X 9" / $19.95
Albion Books / [e-mail]
ISBN 0-9637025-1-3

SPECIAL FEATURES

* The first and only book of network etiquette
* Authoritative essays on "Business Netiquette," "The Elements of
Electronic
     Style," "The Art of the Flame," and "Love & Sex in Cyberspace."
* Useful for every net user, from "newbie" to guru

INTENDED AUDIENCE:

The twenty-five million users of online services, corporate electronic
mail systems, and the Internet. Of particular interest to new participants
in online environments such as Prodigy, CompuServe, America Online,
USENET news, and electronic mailing lists.

BOOK INFORMATION:

Cyberspace is booming. Each month, millions of people are discovering
the power of the Internet, online services, and corporate email
systems.  With this power comes responsibility.

People who wouldn't dream of burping at the end of dinner post
offensive messages to international forums. Middle managers
inadvertently send romantic email messages to the company-wide email
alias. People at computer terminals forget that there are real live
people on the other end of the wire.  Topics are lost in noise,
feelings are hurt, reputations are damaged, time and bandwidth are
wasted.

There's no longer an excuse. This book brings etiquette to the
bustling frontiers of cyberspace. In a series of entertaining essays,
the author establishes the do's and the don'ts of communicating
online, from the Golden Rule to the art of the flame, from the
elements of electronic style to virtual sex. Accessible to both
network wizard and clueless newbie, this is the first book to offer
the guidance that all users need to be perfectly polite online.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Virginia Shea has been a student of human nature all her life. She
attended Princeton University and has worked in Silicon Valley since
the mid-1980s.

ABOUT ALBION BOOKS:

Albion Books is a San Francisco-based company dedicated to publishing
both high-quality bound books and free electronic texts.

TO ORDER:

The book is available from Computer Literacy Bookshops Inc. In the
eastern U.S., call [phone]. In the western U.S., call +1
408-435-0744.  Or use the response form below to order directly from
the publisher via mail or fax.

To find out about ordering via email, query [e-mail]. For more
information about this and other new books, contact Albion Books at
[e-mail].

(Note I'm not affiliated with them, this is off the InterNIC
Net-Happenings list...)


K. M. Peterson    email: [e-mail]
phone: [phone] voice   [phone] fax

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #245
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05040;
          24 May 94 3:50 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27534; Tue, 24 May 94 00:43:08 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27523; Tue, 24 May 94 00:43:06 CDT
Date: Tue, 24 May 94 00:43:06 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #246

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 May 94 00:43:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 246

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Getting Online" by Wood (Rob Slade)
    Followup: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Andrew C. Green)
    Local Call Billing in the UK (Richard Cox)
    CNID *Can* be Spoofed! (Andrew Robson)
    Documents for AT&T Model 1539? (Bob Keller)
    Urgently Request For Help With Research (Ali Tianero)
    PCBX Systems (Paul Barratt)
    Speech Recognition "Word Spotting" ([e-mail])
    900 mhz Cordless Phone; Any Information? (Jason Chou)
    Re: 800 Number Billback (Charles Chambers)
    Re: Information Wanted on Large Digital Data Exchange (D. Devereaux-Weber)
    Re: Cellular Phone Timers (Shawn Gordhamer)
    Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works! ([e-mail])
    Re: New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (Marty Brenneis)
    Re: Wanted: Hand-Held Challenge/Response Units (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 including Compuserve and GEnie.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 15:30:37 MDT
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Getting Online" by Wood


BKGTONLN.RVW  940315

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
22 Worchester Road
Rexdale, Ontario  M9W 9Z9
800-263-1590
or
605 Third Avenue
New York, NY   10158-0012   USA
800-263-1590   212-850-6630
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]   [e-mail]
"Get On-Line!", Wood, 1993, 0-471-58926-8, U$24.95

Most computer users do not yet have a modem, or don't use it on a
regular basis.  Those who do get a modem need a fair amount of help
from a knowledgeable friend.  It would be helpful to have a book which
covers all of the traps of buying a modem, what you need, how to hook
it up, how to set up the configuration and software, and how to
connect to some outside source.  The basics of how to deal with email,
file transfers, and how to use material with other programs.  This is
what Wood tried to do.

He only partially succeeds.  First, you had better have a PC and
either Procomm Plus, Crosstalk XVI, Smartcom EZ or Windows Terminal.
The descriptions of functions are written strictly for field
independent people: those who don't care what is going on, they just
want to know what key to press.  As long as nothing goes wrong with
the communications session, this is fine. Online devotees will know
that the chances of nothing going wrong are extremely slim.

Wood's material is quite dated.  It is very odd that any book written
in the past two years and purporting to advise on modem purchase does
not mention 14400 bps modems.  Also odd is the recommendation to buy
MNP 3 or 4 modems: I haven't personally seen one with less than MNP 5
in more than four years.  I also haven't seen an acoustic coupler
modem available for quite some time.

The content is also quite sparse in places.  While I can appreciate
the desire to write for the non-technical user, the truth is that
computer communications is still a field requiring some background to
set up.  Wood mentions the possible problems with COM ports and IRQ
levels -- but only mentions them.  There simply isn't enough
information here even to start to diagnose or rectify an interrupt
conflict problem.  The book even suggests that COM ports on computers
are so labelled, an unlikely eventuality.  This style follows through
to the communications parameter settings.  Wood does give good
suggestions for default settings, but no means of determining
problems.

The book does contain a smattering of everything.  There is a bit on
portable communications, online services of various types, netiquette,
and so forth.  Since these are not really the main thrust of the book,
one does not expect extensive discussion, but it seems a bit terse to
dismiss the Internet in less than two pages as an "echo network" and
"more chaotic than any of the BBS echo networks."  (There are quite a
number of errors in the short piece on the Internet.  And I should
also mention a section on viral programs which lists seven antiviral
vendors -- four of whom are McAfee agents.)

For novices, this does give a good starting guide, but only that.  You
will still need your knowledgeable friend.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKGTONLN.RVW   940315. Distribution
permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:36:09 CDT
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Subject: Followup: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone?


You may remember that about a month ago, I asked for help in locating
equipment that would connect a credit card authorization reader to a
cellular phone, for my father's use at a concert. His organization,
Symphony II, the orchestra of the Chicago Lyric Opera, was holding a
"silent auction" fund-raiser, and needed a way to get credit card sale
authorizations at a location where no POTS line was available.

Well, TELECOM Digest readers sent numerous recommendations and offers
of assistance, and thanks are due to Macy M. Hallock, Jr., Alan
Larson, Donald L. Wegeng, Henrik Rasmussen, Merrell Sheehan and Paul
A. Lee for their information, and of course PAT for operating TELECOM
Digest in the first place. (I apologize if I've overlooked anyone.)

As it turned out, Motorola stepped in to help. Following Paul Lee's
suggestion, my father contacted Bill Cochran of Motorola, who
forwarded the question on to his associate Sonya Borre' (any
misspellings are mine). She showed up bang on time at 9:00 a.m. the
Monday before the concert at Symphony II offices for a demonstration
of the gadgetry required to connect the cell phone to the reader. All
went well, and Motorola graciously loaned the necessary equipment at
no charge. The concert was held on Sunday afternoon, May 22nd, at
Pick-Staiger Concert Hall at Northwestern University in Evanston, IL,
and all the credit-card authorizations during the auction went through
with no problems.

So, readers of TELECOM Digest have been instrumental in solving the
problem for us. We thought you'd like to know.


Regards,

Andrew C. Green    Datalogics, Inc.  Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron   Chicago, IL  60610-3498

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:02:59 -0700
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Local Call Billing in the UK


[e-mail] said:

>>  These were local toll calls from the East End to the West End, which I
>>  assume are expensive calls.

{Chuckle} It is claimed that local phone calls in the UK are more
expensive than in most countries ... one UK pound buys about 38
minutes of call (before UK tax).  The fact that this call was made
from the East End to the West End (about six miles in distance) is
completely immaterial -- the charge would have been exactly the *same*
as the charge for a call to next door.

Calls on the BT network (the dominant provider both as LEC and IXC in
the UK) are currently charged in "units" and on most COs, calls of
more than nine units can be itemised irrespective of the distance/des-
tination of the call.  The duration of a unit depends on the distance
and type of call, as well as the time the call is made.  The price of
a unit depends on the calling plan of the individual customer, which
is known in BT-speak as a "customer option".

There are plans to abolish the unit-charging over the next few years.
Before STD ("DDD") was introduced here, local calls were charged as
one, two, three or four unit fee calls, depending on distance: but the
calls were untimed.

>>  Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing?

Local billing in the UK has been part of the national ("STD") billing
scheme ever since STD was introduced in the various areas (from 1958
onwards).  The option for itemised billing was more recently
introduced, but treats local & long-distance in identical ways.  In
fact the trend here is for the cost of local calls to increase, and
the cost of long-distance to drop ... for just the same reasons that
charges for intra-LATA long distance in the USA, are so much higher
than for inter-LATA long distance.  And the costs involved are mostly
for the switching, as bit-haulage is getting cheaper all the time!


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, P.O. Box 111, Penarth, South Glamorgan, Wales:  CF64 3YG
Voice: 0956 700111 Fax: [phone]  VoiceMail: 0941 151515 Pager 0941 115555
E-mail address: [e-mail] - PGP2.3 public key available on request

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

From: uswnvg![e-mail] (Andrew Robson)
Subject: CNID *Can* be Spoofed!
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 18:32:22 PDT


It would appear that Calling Number Identification can be spoofed, at
least for some applications.

My most valuable, though low key, use of CNID was as an aid to keeping
track of my teenage children.  If they are supposed to be at some partic-
ular location (e.g. spending the night at a friend's house), their
knowledge of the service assists them in resisting the temptation to
lie about their location when checking in.  This weekend we inadvertently
discovered a weakness in the system.

We received a call for one of the children from a friend (call her K)
which appeared to come from a different friend's (call her A) home.
Since I had a message for A, I asked if she could be put on the line
since K was calling from A's house.  K denied vehemently being at A's
house so the call ended poorly.

I later found out what apparently had happened.  A had been talking to
K and they decided to add my child to the conversation. So A placed a
3-way call to my house, added K, but was then called away from the
phone.  K was there when I answered, and was indeed at home, not at
A's house.

So CNID can be spoofed if there is a willing collaborator at the
desired apparent origin of the call.  Since my kids participated in
figuring out what happened, they know how it is done.  I now have only
a little more assurance of their location than my parents did of mine. :-)


Andy


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But it isn't the CNID which is being, as
you put it, 'spoofed'. Telco *is* reporting to you where the call you
received originated at. The fact that another party to the three-way
call was not identified on the display can hardly be termed a weakness.
You say that 'K' vehemently denied being at the home of 'A'; while she
was telling the truth she was doing so out of context obviously, and
as the conversation continued I am surprised that she did not mention
the fact that the call was three-wayed through 'A'. In a way, it seems
odd that 'A' was called away from the phone just as the three-way
connection was established and was unable (or chose not) to return to
the line for the duration of the call. Don't forget, you are also free
to place a call back to the number shown on the display; either your call
back to the number shown will result in a straight forward connection to
your daughter or it will result in clicking on the line while the call
is being forwarded or your being placed on hold while another three-way
call is set up.

Most folks can tell by the sounds they hear as a call is being established
whether or not it is in fact being forwarded (listen for extra clicks
or the slightest delay not usually there, etc) and in the event the
call does go through as dialed a simple request 'do not put me on hold
while you call my child to the phone' would either result in your
child answering forthwith or the other end's inability to produce your
child (since you have forbade the use of hold they can't very well
flash and get another three-way connection up.) Still not perfect, I
realize, but with a callback from your end you've added the need for
more complicity on *their* end(s), and the risk that among them,
someone's parent is likely to answer the phone, or come on the line,
etc. In other words, you can add to the obstacle course and increase
the likelyhood one or more of them will be caught in a lie.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 22:06:56 EDT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Documents for AT&T Model 1539?


Does anyone have the documentation (manual, instructions, etc.) for an
AT&T Model 1539?  This is a single line telephone with a built-in
digital (non-tape) remote answering system.  I picked one up (or most
of one anyway -- it was missing a few cables, mounting brackets, etc.)
"as is" out of a "bargain bin" at a local office supply store.  If
anyone has whatever booklet explains the ins and outs of this thing,
I'll gladly reimburse any reasonable expense incurred in copying and
mailing/faxing it to me.  Thanks!


Bob Keller <KY3R>        Robert J. Keller, P.C.        Tel [phone]
[e-mail]    Federal Telecommunications Law    Fax [phone]
finger me for daily FCC info + see ftp.clark.net:/pub/rjk/ for other files

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

Date: Tue, 24 May 94 09:57:59 JST
From: [e-mail] (Ali Tianero)
Subject: Urgent Request For Help With Research


Hello, Patrick!

I already wrote to the telecom listserv and asked for the index.

I couldn't find any information on cross connect equipments. I decided
to mail you personally in the hope that you can help me with my problem.

We are studying XC equipment classes and attributes for an incoming
project but we lack the needed data for a thorough study. In my
opinion, it would help us with our project if we get to know more
about the actual equipment so that the XC classes and attributes we
are dealing with would become more concrete.

Once again, thanks for any help you can extend.


Azaleah S. Tianero           | email : [e-mail]
NEC Technologies Phils.,Inc. | tel(voice)  : [phone]
MEPZ, Lapu-Lapu City         | tel(fax)    : [phone]
6015 Cebu, PHILIPPINES       | telnet(voice) : 8-0063-21-1653
                             | telnet(fax)   : 8-0063-21-1607


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This party wrote essentially the same
note originally to the Digest mailbox, and I did nothing with it. He
then today wrote me at my personal maibox; I still don't really know
how to answer him. If anyone wants to take a crack at it, please do
so, writing Mr. Tianero personally.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Barratt)
Subject: PCBX Systems
Date: 24 May 1994 01:26:49 GMT
Organization: Public Access Internet, Auckland New Zealand


I had a look today at a system from PCBX, a small business PBX based
on 386 / 486 DOS platform.  Does anybody have any user experience with
this technology?  Looks pretty tidy, only not quite %100 for NZ
telephony network.


Thanks,

[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (-s89432566-p.bflower-ele-500-)
Subject: Speech Recognition "Word Spotting"
Date: 23 May 1994 23:43:02 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney


I'm looking for info on Word Spotting. Any info on developing a HMM to
do this would be much appreciated. Please mail information or names of
books, papers etc. that will do this.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jason Chou)
Subject: 900 mhz Cordless Phone; Any Information?
Date: 20 May 1994 11:00:03 -0700
Organization: KAIWAN Internet, CA


Is there any information about 900 mhz cordless phones?  Has anyone
heard of Micro 900 MHz by Bel-Tronics Limited?  Any good?  Thanks!


Jason Chou   |   internet:[e-mail]   |   compuserve:70254,3706

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

From: [e-mail] (Charles Chambers)
Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback
Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 15:59:08 -0500
Organization: University of Houston


Based on the way these LD companies are handling charge back billing
based on your ANI, what would the problem with having your ANI blocks
from all LD companies (thus they can not bill back to it). I know that
this currently can not be done, but rather, if it could be done, what
would be the problems?


Charles Chambers     University of Houston
Telecommunications Department  Manager of Network Services


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The problem would be two-fold. First
off, the rules currently say that local telcos may not withhold
name and address information from long distance carriers -- even if
the number is otherwise non-published -- for billing purposes. Local
telcos are not in a position to evaluate the content of the connection
given or the cost for same (except for stuff like billing errors, etc).
So if the rule was changed where you the subscriber were allowed to
refuse any and all information to the long distance carriers, then you
would wind up with no long distance service at all; after all, what
carrier would want to handle your calls on the assumption that you might
or might not decide reveal yourself and pay for it? You can get basically
the same results now if you really want them: by not choosing any long
distance carrier (or choosing 'none' if applicable) your phone will be
effectively restricted from dialing long distance calls. Dialing 1 + 10
digits here (except for 700,800,900 calls) with no carrier default on
your line causes the call to go to an intercept (cannot be completed as
dialed). That still allows subscribers to deliberatly force a call out
using 10xxx + 1 + 10 digits, but it takes a conscious decision on the
subscriber's part; he is hardly in a position later to demand that the
carrier not bill him or collect on the charges. Another more call-proof
option available to subscribers -- at least here in Illinois Bell terr-
itory -- is to have the Business Office completely toll-restrict your
line. It can be set up in the central office with no overrides possible
at all. With complete toll-restriction, even dialing through the operator
won't work since she won't be able to complete the call for you either.
Double zero (for the long distance operator) will go to an intercept.
You *will* be able to place collect, credit card or third-party billing
calls however ... just no direct dial or operator assisted paid calls.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 94 14:02:27 CST
From: David Devereaux-Weber <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: David Devereaux-Weber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on Large Digital Data Exchange


We have a set of rack mounted modems from:

Multitech Systems
2205 Wooddale Dr.
Mounds View, MN  55112
[phone]   [phone]

We have about 400 on-line now, with plans to expand to 1000.


David Devereaux-Weber, P.E.             [e-mail] (Internet)
The University of Wisconsin - Madison   [phone] (voice)
Division of Information Technology      [phone] (FAX)
Network Engineering

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Timers
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 23:47:16 GMT


Tony Harminc <[e-mail]> writes:

>the phone has to be told by the network when charging starts and ends
> -- a supervision signal, if you will.

One big problem is that just knowing when charging starts and ends
won't be enough.  There would also need to be a "charge cancel"
signal.  When you dial someone, the charge starts immediately, while
the other phone is ringing (yes, you are charged ring time, at least
at Cellular One).  But, if you hang up before they answer, the charge
is canceled.  Therefore, there needs to be three signals to your phone:

- charge start pending
- chargable call
- charge end

I'd be happy if there was a way to subtract the last call from the
total time timer on my phone.  I know if a charge is real or not, so
at the end of the call, I can hit the "undo charge" function, and get
an accurate total timer.


Shawn Gordhamer    [e-mail]   Rochester, Minnesota  USA

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NPA Optional in 818 - it Works!
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 22:21:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Anton
Sherwood) writes:

> I just tried it in 415.  Hooray!

It works for the 503 Area Code as well in Portland, OR.


Sameer

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 23:13:31 PDT
From: Marty Brenneis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New (Lame) Directory Assistance From GTE Mobilnet (Bay Area)


On Tue, 17 May 1994 Henry Mensch wrote:

> Moral of the story: to use GTE's new gimmicky directory assistance dial 411
> or 555 1212 ... to get the real stuff dial *6543. Your mileage may vary,
> especially outside the Bay Area.

And TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Henry, a question and a comment: exactly
> what does this *6543 hook get you into?  You said 'new, gimmicky directory
> assistance' which leads me to wonder, did not GTE offer directory assist-
> ance like any other telco until recently, i.e. 'new'?. Is the cellular
> division of the company offering a new service and intercepting calls to
> 411 or 555-1212 which formerly had gone to a full directory bureau and
> providing some limited sub-set of the directory?

We are not talking GTE landline service here, we are talking GTE
Mobilenet cellular service. They have decided to do their own DA
service with people who don't have a clue how to look up a number.
Once they look up the number for you they just connect you to it. Of
course they nick you a little more for this "service".  You pay the
airtime while the person takes five times longer to find the wrong
number than a professional DA. The only good side is that they handle
DA for all of the GTE calling area, this way you can just dial 411 and
not worry about what the NPA is for your target party. Pac*Bell is the
local DA service from the landline side and they do an excellent job.
Perhaps the next time Pac*Bell lays off some DAs, GTE should hire
them.

Yo! You operating companies out there! I know that the DA centers have
been merging for many years. When I dial 411 in the 415 area the DA I
speak with really is taking calls for 415,510,707,408 and perhaps many
more. The ones in Sub California handle a bunch of NPAs. Why can't
they give the number that is outside the NPA that I dialed? It would
reduce traffic load.


Marty 'The Droid' Brenneis                      ...!uupsi!kerner!droid
Industrial Magician                                   [e-mail]
[phone]     ~~~   KAE7616 - 462.700 - 162.2      ~~~      KC6YYP

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 15:18:35 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: WANTED: Hand-Held Challenge/Response Units
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


> I'm looking for suppliers of hand-held challenge/response
> cipher key systems ...

> I envisage they'll work as follows:

> 1.      User connects via public network to our system;
> 2.      Our system lets them log in as normal, but they then
>         are "challenged" with a long code.
> 3.      The user must enter the code into the hand-held unit,
>         which provides the "response" using RSA or similar.
> 4.      The user then enters the "response", which is validated
>         against the expected value.  This may involve the use
>         of a public/private key system also, for encryption
>         of transmitted material.

> I'm very hopeful that units such as I've just described exist -- if no
> perhaps someone wants to make them?  (e.g. based on HP-100LX).

You need nothing near this complicated or expensive.  A simple, and
free system for doing the exact thing you have described, called
"skey" is already available.  The user can either preprint the
one-time usage passwords or run a short program on his own PC to
compute them.  Any time prior to running out of passwords he can
generate some more.

The following is from the documentation for the program:

   Description of The S/KEY One-Time Password System

     Neil M. Haller    [e-mail]
     Philip R. Karn    [e-mail]

            ABSTRACT

The S/KEY one-time password system provides authentication over
networks that are subject to eavesdropping/reply attacks. This system
has several advantages compared with other one-time or multi-use
authentication systems.  The user's secret password never crosses the
network during login, or when executing other commands requiring
authentication such as the UNIX passwd or su commands.  No secret
information is stored anywhere, including the host being protected,
and the underlying algorithm may be (and it fact, is) public
knowledge. The remote end of this system can run on any locally
available computer.  The host end could be integrated into any
application requiring authentication.

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

Had people been using this for network logins, that "password grabber"
program that was circulating a few months back would have been useless
and all people would have gotten was a lot of used and worthless
passcodes that no longer work.

A person who has it on their system told me that:

   Generating the keys is a painless process of running a command or
   two and typing in a password; the program(s) then generate a certain
   number of keys which can be printed out and carried in a person's
   wallet.  No extra hardware is required.

The files for this system can be obtained via anonymous ftp to

thumper.bellcore.com:  /pub/skey


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #246
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05700;
          24 May 94 5:59 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA28684; Tue, 24 May 94 02:42:03 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA28675; Tue, 24 May 94 02:42:01 CDT
Date: Tue, 24 May 94 02:42:01 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #247

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 May 94 02:42:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 247

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Problems With Call Return (Ed Ellers)
    Re: Problems With Call Return (Bob Schwartz)
    Re: Call Return is *Good* (Chris Cariffe)
    Re: Misdialed Numbers (Don Bontemps Jr.)
    Re: International Callback Services (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software (Ronald L. Wright)
    Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? (David A. Cantor)
    Re: Cellular -> Analog Converter (Russell E. Sorber)
    Re: What is the Mercury Button? (Richard Cox)
    Re: What is the Mercury Button? (David Woolley)
    Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 Codes (John R. Levine)
    LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service (Mark E. Daniel)
    Re: DTMF Decoding Help Needed (Daniel Finkler)
    Re: ANI by Calling 1 800 XXX XXXX (Glen Roberts)
    No 911 Available as Tot Drowns (Toronto Star via Dave Leibold)
    Do You Believe in Lauren? (Lauren Weinstein)
    New Long Distance Carrier is Advertising (Carl Moore)
    Re: 800 Number Billback (Steven Bradley)
    Re: Cellular Privacy? (Steven Bradley)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ed Ellers <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 15:03:07 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


<[e-mail]> writes:

> I thought that one purpose of "call return" was to be able to call
> back an "anonymous caller" without knowing his(her) number.  This was
> not clearly stated in the brochure about "caller id" services from
> Uswest, so I telephoned them, the lady who answered hesitated about my
> question, transferred me to another person who confirmed that
> "anonymous calls" can indeed be returned.  The problem was that in my
> area, Seattle, "last call return" has not been authorized, even though
> most other related services have been.

BellSouth is adding voice response systems to its COs and enhancing
Call Return so that, when you enter the code, you get a voice message
with the calling number (unless it's blocked or not available through
SS7) and can then press a key to place the call IF you still want to.
If it's a known number you can decide whether to call it or not; if
unknown you can call it or just write it down for later use.  Unlike
Caller ID, this works on all phones on your line; you don't have to
walk to a particular spot where you have added a box.  (You also don't
have to BUY the box ...)

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

Subject: Re: Problems With Call Return
From: [e-mail] (Bob Schwartz)
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 17:22:06 PDT
Organization: Bill Correctors, Inc., Marin County, California


> My situation dictates that I make numerous calls to people who have
> answered an ad that I run: people I do not know: When I reach
> someone's answering machine I often choose to leave no message.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The fact that she used it in an extreme way
> does not make Call Return a bad idea. And there is something to be said about
> the writer's discourtesy in reaching an answering machine and simply hanging
> up without speaking, if even only to say that he did not wish to leave a
> message and would call again later. Ordinarily, Call Return is a good idea

Pat, there is something of an old code amongst those that solicit via
phone. It goes something like this: Don't leave a message on a cold call.
Perhaps the greater courtesy is for those that seek contributions, answers
to surveys, new relationships ... is for them to hang up on a machine. Such
messages ane nearly as annoying as the calls themselves.


Bob Schwartz                                       [e-mail]
Bill Correctors, Inc.   [phone]   Marin County, California

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Cariffe)
Subject: Re: Call Return is *Good*
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 00:47:21 GMT


Yeah, it's a great service. I caught an ex-girlfriend with it, giving
me prank phone calls.

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Bontemps Jr.)
Subject: Re: Misdialed Numbers
Organization: CTS Network Services (CTSNET/crash), San Diego, CA
Date: 23 May 94 18:55:17 PDT


My dad and brother live in Costa Mesa and their home phone number is
one digit off from a local department store.  They get so many
mis-dialed numbers that they now answer the phone using the store's
name.  Sometimes when I'm there visiting, they put the person on hold,
and say they will transfer them to the correct department.  They
answer the caller's questions and thank them for calling the store,
then politely hang up.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: International Callback Services
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 20:24:11 PDT


Said by: Peter Leif Rasmussen

> I would like to comment on the callback FAQ posted here by Bruce Hahne.

> I read a version of that before and investigated various services and
> found that Globalcom 2000 looked very interesting. That is about a
> month ago. The representative I talked with, Scot Bundren was very
> quick to answer my questions about the services, until I had provided
> him with my credit card number!

> Then all questions have gone unanswered, for a period of now two weeks.
> The answers to questions before used to come within 24 hours. I also
> now notice that his email address has changed from before [e-mail]
> to now [e-mail].

> What I want to say is that I fear this might be a scam.

You might be right. Scott is a student at Crown College, University of
California, Santa Cruz.  I seriously doubt that he is an agent for a
call-back service.  His phone number is availible by finger, but that
is not a phone number in the Santa Cruz area.  Let me know if you have
problems; I can find out his campus mail address if you need it.


Steve   [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015

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

From: [e-mail] (Ronald L. Wright)
Subject: Re: Pac-Tel (PC) Communication Software
Date: 24 May 1994 00:21:04 GMT
Organization: Connected INC -- Internet Services


[e-mail] ([e-mail]) wrote:

> We had a home grown telecommunication package that allowed us to send
> alphanumeric messages to our PAC-TEL pagers. We are interested in
> updating the software. We are interested in reasonably priced
> commercial software or in the protocol specs of the 800 number we
> communicate with the old package.

McCall Cellular has a product written for Windows called "Message
Flash."  It was written with Visual Basic, so it might seem a little
slow on older systems, but seems to work pretty well. It also allows
the sender to distribute group messages as well. I am not sure of the
cost of the commercial product, but they have a smaller version
available for the free use of your friends and aquaintances.


Ron Wright

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Cantor)
Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself?
Organization: MV Communications, Inc.
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 13:17:15 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Joseph Herl <[e-mail].
uiuc.edu> wrote:

> Our family is moving to a new house next week, and we will have the
> same telephone number at both places for several days.  How can I call
> between them?

> Our phone company (Ameritech) representative doesn't think this is
> possible, but I remember that it used to be possible years ago to
> "call another party on the line," and this is similar.  We used to
> dial a code number, hang the phone up and wait for it to ring, then
> pick up the phone and talk when it stopped ringing.  Does anyone know
> whether this is still possible?

And TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's a great service that Illinois Bell
> provides, allowing a number to ring at multiple locations for simply the
> cost of two local services. Several years ago when I moved from one place
> to another I used that arrangement to keep my phone service intact during
> the move. After about a week, I had the old location discontinued. At
> least in the Chicago 312/708 area, ringbacks are accomplished thus:

[The Moderator went on to describe the actual method by which the
ringing of the calling number was accomplished.  DAC. ]

The service that the Moderator mentions used to be available in
Massachusetts (and it probably still is); I used it exactly as
described above several times over several moves within Massachusetts.
However, when I lived in San Diego, California, and moved within the
city, keeping the same telephone number, I found that I could not have
this service because in California it was not (and probably still is
not) tariffed.  The people at the phone company told me it was
impossible, and when I told them I didn't believe them because I used
to be able to have this done in Massachusetts, they said that it was
technically possible but _legally_ impossible because the tariff
didn't permit it.

Whether you can establish service in two different locations with the
same phone number depends not upon technical considerations, but upon
whether it is allowed by operating rules (tariffs, and perhaps local
office SOP).  If you can get the service, you should be able to get
the revertive dialing number, too.


David A. Cantor           [phone] (203-444-RANT)
453 Bayonet St., #16      Internet:  [e-mail]
New London, CT  06320     Foxwoods blackjack and craps dealer

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

From: [e-mail] (Russell E. Sorber)
Subject: Re: Cellular -> Analog Converter
Date: 23 May 1994 13:55:59 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group


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

> Does anyone know of an adapter/converter that connects to a cellular
> phone (most likely in place of the handset) and provides an analog
> RJ-11 jack?

Motorola sells several of these boxes depending on the type of
subscriber cellular unit you have.  One of the boxes simulates a
dialtone for use with a regular landline.  For a microtac, I think you
want part number S3027.  For more info contact the Motorola Cellular
information center: 1-800-331-6456.


Russ Sorber   Software Contractor
Motorola, Cellular Division  Arlington Hts., IL    [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 13:56:13 -0700
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button


Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]> said:

>>  even if the phone has a display, the contents of the blue Mercury
>>  button are not displayed during dialling or by any "display memory"

And the audio to the earpiece or loudspeaker should either be muted,
or replaced with confidence tones, when the contents of that memory
are being sent to line -- so that they cannot be tape-recorded by
users.


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, P.O. Box 111, Penarth, South Glamorgan, Wales:  CF64 3YG
Voice: 0956 700111 Fax: [phone]  VoiceMail: 0941 151515 Pager 0941 115555
E-mail address: [e-mail] - PGP2.3 public key available on request

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

From: [e-mail] (David Woolley)
Subject: Re: What is the Mercury Button?
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 10:07:19  GMT


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

[ Various descriptions of the Mercury button as a deep memory button, with
  LD to MF switching and pause capabilities deleted]
[ Reference to new 132 access code deleted ]

As I understand it, a true Mercury button is supposed to only be
useable as the first button dialed, to make it more difficult to
capture the account code.  But mainly it is a marketing gimmick.


David Woolley, London, England                     [e-mail]
Demon is an IP/SMTP/NNTP Provider.  *.demon hosts are independently managed.

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 94 17:44 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Bellcore to Assign NPA 500 codes
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


[In NPA 500 and 800, why not assign numbers of the form 1XX-XXXX and
0XX-XXXX]

Numbers in the 1XX and 0XX ranges have been used for a long time for
various sorts of dedicated and non-dialable circuits in regular area
codes, so I suppose they may be useful for those purposes in 500.

More practically, a lot of phone exchanges are programmed to trap
NXX-1XX and NXX-0XX and route them directly to an intercept.  Making
sure that they are all programmed to special case 500 and 800 seems
like a losing battle.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:29:22 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Mark E Daniel)
Subject: LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service


The person writing about this prompted me to try an experament.  I
believe it might be a nice idea if the LD carriers offering this
service automaticly detected the busy signal and offered me the option
of leaving a message or hanging up or dialing another number.  Sprint
offers a similar service to AT&T's costing the same as far as I can
tell.  At least delivery in the US is at the same price.  I was
unable to use AT&T's service.  I received a message stating that all
representatives were busy and that I should try my call again later.

Apparently, AT&T's service is handled by humans. *Hopefully* they
don't require me to *REENTER* the number to which I wish to have my
message delivered after disconnecting from a BUSY number and entering
the message system.  Again, I suppose that they have to make it
universal, since you can dial into at least Sprint's messaging system
by dialing [phone] and entering the #22 or #25 at the prompt
tone and then entering your FONCARD number, making it possible to have
messages automatically delivered to people when you won't be around a
phone to call them personally.  But the software ought to be written
to automatically detect BUSY signals in the appropriate situations,
and it could also give users the option of delivering the message to
the last number they dialed.  After all it is time consuming to have
to reenter a sting of digits that you just got done entering not ten
seconds ago. :)

I believe that I have seen *one* service that automatically detected
BUSY and that was Telesphere I believe, equal access code might have
been 10555 or somesuch.  But that service has disappeared.


Mark E Daniel                   (Loving SysOp of The Legend BBS)
Inet: [e-mail]   [e-mail] (Direct INet)

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

From: [e-mail] (DANIEL FINKLER)
Subject: Re: DTMF Decoding Help Needed
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 23:59:35 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> I am writing a program that needs to decode telephone touch tone
> signals.  The problem is that I am having trouble finding a DTMF
> decoder.  If anyone know where I can get ahold of one I would
> appreciate it.

You can use USRobotics courier modems' touch tone recognition feature.
They can recognize DTMF tones, including A,B,C,D.

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen Roberts)
Subject: Re: ANI by Calling 1 800 XXX XXXX
Organization: Ripco Internet BBS Chicago
Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 21:03:32 GMT


1-800-235-1414 was setup by Private Lines, Inc (of Beverly Hills), the
operator of 1-900-STOPPER (no record, no trace calling service) and Full
Disclosure.

It was a tremendous success. That is, except for paying the bill ... it
was generating some 600-1000 calls a day. I have a Caller-ID version setup
now on [phone] (Only a few percent of non-Chicagoland calls
get a number ... maybe that will change between now and next April).

Incidentially, there was an AT&T 1-800 ANI number, but they shut it
down due to an `over indulgence of hackers.'


Glen L. Roberts, author, How To Spy On Anyone Without Getting Caught
Host Full Disclosure Live (WWCR 5,810 khz - Sundays 7pm central)
Box 734, Antioch, Illinois 60002      Fax: [phone]
Surveillance Hotline: [phone]  Bust the Bureaucrats: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 23 May 94 14:25:20 -0500
Subject: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


{The Toronto Star} reports of a 14-month-old boy in Barrie, Ontario
who drowned while his mother attempted to dial 911. Unlike many
centres in Canada, Barrie does not have a 911 service, thus calls to
911 are usually completed to a not-in-service recording. The family
recently moved to Barrie and didn't realise that local emergency
numbers needed to be dialed direct.

Barrie Mayor Janice Laking did not feel an inquest into why there was
no 911 service in Barrie, but rather advised residents to keep lists
of emergency numbers or to program them into phones. Some complications
also exist with respect to surrounding communities, considering that
any 911 implementation would need to consider that exchange boundaries
and political boundaries do not necessarily coincide, not to mention
the need for accurate location maps from all communities involved.

Bell Canada intends to provide 911 throughout its entire service territory
over the next several years. Barrie is slated to get 911 in 1996.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suspect that a lot of Digest readers
are like myself and are sharing the grief the parents must be feeling
at this time. My first reaction on reading your article was one of
horror; I know how *I* would feel if anything -- anything at all --
happened to my little four year old nephew. But still, why in the $%*@!
didn't the parents -- immediatly on moving into their new community --
investigate such things as local emergency services and procedures. When
we first moved here to Skokie, one of the first things I did was check
out a phone directory for numbers and pay a visit to the Village Hall
to ask about emergency procedures. No one ever seems to think that a
tragedy will happen in their family; it is always someone else, and
that is simply not true as we sadly come to realize.

Throughout all of northern Illinois, we have the same hodge-podge
where police, fire and emergency medical assistance is concerned that
exist there in the Barrie area. Due to overlapping telephone exchange
boundaries and community political boundaries some communities have
911 for their village alone while others share 911 with a neighboring
village. For example, Skokie shares dispatch services with Lincolnwood,
while Evanston to our east does their own thing.  Where community bound-
aries and telephone exchange boundaries are not in synch, it becomes
necessary either for telco to create a database which successfully sorts
out calls or for the involved communities to reach an agreement with
each other. The trouble is, no one seems willing to let some other town
handle their emergency calls.  They seem to be afraid that if something
goes wrong, they'll be the ones to catch hell, and if something goes
right then someone else will be the ones to get the praise. As a result,
lots of communities here have 911 while the towns on either side of them
may require seven digit dialing to reach the police. Since community
boundaries are not always obvious in large metro areas, one might think
they were in Skokie while actually being in Wilmette. For example, where
I live is in Skokie, but merely three blocks south of Wilmette and about
the same distance west of the northwestern edge of Evanston. All three
of us have 911 service, but via different dispatchers and agencies.

A peculiar situation exists in an area south of us where a small area
of land is completely surrounded by the City of Chicago (on three
sides, and a couple other villages on the fourth side) but yet is not
part of any of them; it is an 'unincorporated' area of Cook County. It
looks like Chicago; it looks like Norridge/Harwood Heights, the towns
on one side of it. There are houses, stores, etc and driving through it
one cannot tell that one left Chicago or came back into Chicago a couple
blocks later driving down the same street, but Norwood Township is not
part of Chicago, nor is it part of anything else; it is just there.

Phone service there comes from the Chicago-Newcastle exchange, but it
has to be on its own prefix that no one else gets except the people in
that little tiny slice of land. Why? Well you see, 911 has to be blocked
out of it. If those people dial 911 it goes to intercept.  They have
to dial the seven digit number for the Cook County Sheriff, and he
does not have 911 yet.  Across the street (or sometimes the house next
door or across the alley!) *is* politically in Chicago, and they dial
911 successfully. Make sure *you and your kids* know the proper number
for emergencies in your town; how to report emergencies and *exactly*
what address is required, etc.  Your kid's life depends on it.   PAT]

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

Subject: Do You Believe in Lauren?
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 20:47:54 PDT
From: Lauren Weinstein <[e-mail]>


Responding to messages about my participation in the net during the
very early days in the middle to late 1970's:

The net was indeed a different place back then.  When you telnet'd to
SAIL (SU-AI) at Stanford, if you didn't have an account, it would ask
you if you wanted to create one -- on the spot.  Little by little of
course, all over the net, things tightened up -- as they had to, given
the influx of users.  A different era entirely.

When I tell people I was at UCLA when we were site 1 (one) on ARPANET,
they look at me like I had been using punched cards (well, actually, I
*had* been using punched cards too -- but that's a (//SYSIN DD *)
different story).

The incident regarding speculation about whether I was human or
machine occurred on HUMAN-NETS, one of the pioneering widely-read
digests back in the 70's.  My response to the public messages on the
topic went something like this:

   "I read with interest the various senders' messages speculating
   on my mode of existence.  You humans really amuse me sometimes."

 --Lauren--

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

Date: Mon, 23 May 94 13:56:36 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Long Distance Company is Advertising


Recently, I have heard occasional ads for Commonwealth Long Distance.
The number to call for information is given as 1-800-7000-CLD (which
translates to 1-800-700-0253) or "one 800 seven thousand CLD".

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven Bradley)
Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback
Organization: The Forest City Exchange, Forest City, Florida
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 01:09:03 GMT


Well, here is my two cents worth ... if you really want to aggravate
these legal con-artists, do this:

Call the service as much as you want and as often as you can from PAY
PHONES and see how easily they (don't) get their money then!  Someone
DOES have to pay the carriage of the call to the 800 line and that
same person will not be able to recover the charges to their service,
resulting in them taking a loss by using the 800 number approach.
Since pay phones permit 800 number calls without charge and the phone
companies see fit to permit them to go through since they are free,
there is no reason to prevent it passing.


Internet:        [e-mail]         Steven G. Bradley
                 [e-mail]
GEnie:           [e-mail]
CompuServe:      [e-mail]
America Online:  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What actually happens is that the
Information Provider has a database of pay telephone numbers and
yes, you will waste ten cents of his money dialing him and getting
him to answer but you certainly will not get him to part with any
of his valuable 'information'. In the event the payphone you use for
this is somehow not listed in his database (for example it might be
a COCOT using regular line service instead of being listed with the
telco as a coin line; all of those are in the database) then a call
might slip through a couple times. I think we (the Digest readers)
all tried this with the Astrologers down in Florida a couple years
ago when mention was first made of 800-chargeback calls in the
Digest. They got hit for a few grand in uncollectibles from pay phones
but bingo! ... a month or two later their database was brought up to
date and that was the end of it.  Actually, I am not sure the Astrology
people lost anything at all; I think through the intercompany billing
process the bills went to the local telcos as the 'subscriber' of the
phones used. No matter ... don't bother now, it won't work.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven Bradley)
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy?
Organization: The Forest City Exchange, Forest City, Florida
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 00:21:41 GMT


> Scott Townley ([e-mail]) wrote:

> political background.  As of April 26, 1994 (if I got that date
> right), it became illegal to manufacture in the US, or to import, a
> radio *capable* of receiving the cellular phone frequencies.  This
> includes radios that can be easily modified (e.g.  certain scanners
> that simply needed a diode clipped).

However there is no enforcement of the importation ban, since U.S.
customs are not an authority to pass judgement of the technical
capabilities of a receiver, that is the FCC's job.  But with the use
of FCC form 740, the FCC does not even need to see or certify a
receiver, hence there is no problem with importing these units.  That
includes receivers which directly receive cellular -and- units which
can be modified easily.

It is also legal to import receivers for the purpose of exporting
them.  Companies -can- import them and sell them to others in the U.S.
and stamp the invoice or have printed on the invoice the sale is for
export purposes.  If the purchaser fails to export it, the purchase
may be breaking the law, but the company that sold it with the
understanding the sale was for export would -not- be breaking the law.
If that person who was intending to "export" it fails to, no-one's
going to notice!

It is also legal to import or resell domestically the CPU/MPUs and
other components to rebuild and restore the sections since the FCC
does not regulate raw components.  If the design is considered not
modifiable or restorable where the CPU/MPU blocks it and that same
company can sell the parts to restore it as a separate item/package
since the parts do not need FCC approval.  Since the international
versions do not have this limitation, the parts should be readily
available.

Since we are talking MPU/CPU (since we are talking of two blocks in
the 800 mhz band), no re-tuning is needed.  In theory, if they made
the EPROM replacable for purpose of field upgrades, and sold the
cellular full access EPROM as an after-market item, it would certainly
get around the dumb restriction.  It does not stop you from getting
the scanners, nor does it stop the modifications, merely makes it more
difficult, but does not stop it.


Steven

Internet:        [e-mail]         |  Steven G. Bradley
                 [e-mail]            |----------------------------
GEnie:           [e-mail]  |  Don't you think it's about
CompuServe:      [e-mail]   |  time we FIRED the Federal
America Online:  [e-mail]          |  Communications Commission?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah yes, 'for export only' ... what a
laugh.  Years ago when CB radios were the latest rage, all the guys
would go to this one popular radio repair shop where they could buy
linear amplifiers which had been tuned for ten/eleven meters; an area
of the radio frequency spectrum where excessive power is expressly
forbidden. The guy running the shop always made the purchaser sign a
'declaration' which said the 'foot warmers' or 'pair of shoes' (as
they were called by their street name) were being purchased only for
resale and exportation outside the United States.  An examination by
federal agents of the shop records at one point showed all these
'declarations' signed in illegible scrawls which under close examination
appeared to be the name John Smith or similar.

No one ever could locate John Smith (or any of them, for that matter!)
but you sure could hear them out there every night, splattering their
signal all over the entire eleven meter territory. The feds finally
put the shop owner in the can, under the legal theory that he knew or
should have known what the purchasers were actually doing; he was
indicted as a co-conspirator with other co-conspirators as yet uniden-
tified to the government. After a day or two of virtual radio silence
here as everyone hid their linears in a secret place and stayed off the
air, things soon went back to 'normal'.  You're right ... a lot of worth-
less, unenforceable laws.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #247
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19197;
          25 May 94 17:43 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA06647; Wed, 25 May 94 13:30:16 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA06635; Wed, 25 May 94 13:30:13 CDT
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 13:30:13 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #248

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 25 May 94 13:30:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 248

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Equal Access is Not Available Here (Jeff Shaver)
    FedEx Tracking Software "Covers Up" Mistakes? (Alan Boritz)
    Software For Fraud Detection? (Sandra Oudshoff)
    Listing of Telecom EZines (Bob Allison)
    Book Review: "From Somaphore to Satellite" by ITU (Bob Allison)
    RBOCS and Video Remote Learning in Schools? (Gerry Moersdorf)
    Info Highway to Bypass Poor and Minorities (Anthony Wright)
    OSI Computer Based Training Package Available (Tom Worthington)
    ANI and Class of Service (was Re: 800 Number Billback) (Danny Burstein)
    Worldwide Areacode/Telex/Internet List Available by FTP (Paul Robinson)
    Miss Manners Replies to Call Return (Clarinet/AP via Steve Cogorno)
    Leaving a Message (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 including Compuserve and GEnie.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Shaver)
Date: 25 May 94 09:51:28 -0500
Subject: Equal Access is Not Available Here
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


My local telephone company is an independent cooperative.  I have very
few complaints regarding their service as a whole, except that they
won't offer equal access.  I can't even use the 10XXX codes, or
1-700-555-4141!  The only way to access a carrier other than AT&T is
to use calling cards, and that *really* adds up.

I've really bugged them about this in the last several years, but they
tell me the long distance carriers are "all the same, they all just
lease AT&T's lines."  I've called and written letters to the major
carriers encouraging them to make the first move, but to no avail.  I
know for a fact that my telco's equipment _has_ the capability to do
this, and US West customers only a few minutes away can access the
other carriers.

*Who* has to initiate the process -- my telco or the other carriers?
Who can I write to or call to complain?  I realize there are costs
involved, but I'm not willing to wait until December 31, 1999 (a
generic date, as quoted by an MCI representative).  Will the Public
Service Commission do anything about it?  Anything you can tell me
would be very helpful!


Jeff Shaver    [e-mail]

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

Subject: FedEx Tracking Software "Covers Up" Mistakes?
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 09:39:14 EDT
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


You've probably seen the commercial where the screaming obnoxious boss
is one-upp'ed by his clever secretary who uses the Federal Express
package tracking software to verify delivery of priority next-day
deliveries.  Well, it seems that if Federal Express screws up your
package delivery, the tracking software will be the LAST place you'll
find out about it.

I checked on a pretty important package destined for Oklahoma City,
OK, today.  As of 8:30 a.m. (EST) they only had it leaving Newark as
of last night.  When there was no update as of 11:30 a.m (the
"guaranteed" delivery time), I called a customer service rep and found
out that the package was actually in Denver, CO.  The tracking
software support people couldn't understand why none of the activity
since the previous night (showing the actual location of the package)
wasn't available.

Federal Express's high-tech tracking software surely hasn't improved
customer's efficient or cost-effective use of their services.  If they
mishandle your package, they'll keep the information from you and
won't make good on their guarantees.  Data censorship to only give
good news and nothing bad (at least in print)?  You bet. <grin>


[e-mail]  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 11:23:02 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Sandra Oudshoff)
Subject: Software For Fraud Detection?
Organization: PTT Research, Groningen, The Netherlands


Hi,

I'm looking for information about software available (freeware or
commercial) that performs fraud detection functionalities, particularly
in the area of telecommunications. If you have any information that
you think might be helpful, please share this information with me.

Thanks a lot in advance,


Sandra Oudshoff
replies preferably by e-mail to:   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Allison)
Subject: Listing of Telecom EZines
Date: 25 May 1994 09:17:38 -0500
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605


Here is a list of EZines that are related to telecom, either
specifically or generally.  They cover things like telecom privacy,
government telecom policy, etc.

    ______     __                             ___________   _
 /_  __/__  / /__  _________  ____ ___     / ____/__  /  (_)___  ___  _____
  / / / _ \/ / _ \/ ___/ __ \/ __ `__ \   / __/    / /  / / __ \/ _ \/ ___/
 / / /  __/ /  __/ /__/ /_/ / / / / / /  / /___   / /__/ / / / /  __(__  )
/_/  \___/_/\___/\___/\____/_/ /_/ /_/  /_____/  /____/_/_/ /_/\___/____/
   A N D   R E L A T E D   E L E C T R O N I C   N E W S L E T T E R S

   Here are some interesting electronic magazines and newsletters that
are currently available.  They cover telecom from the specific to the
general, on such topics as telecom privacy and government policy to
electronic communities and networks.

   Generally if an ezine is available on a news group, the publisher
prefers it to be obtained that way, especially if you are just looking for
a sample to read.


     EFFECTOR | The Electronic Frontier Foundation's membership newsletter.
              | It covers telecom policy updates.
              | E-mail: send request to [e-mail]
              |    FTP: ftp.eff.org
              | Usenet: comp.org.eff
              | Gopher: gopher.eff.org
              |
      EDUPAGE | Covers information technology and media.  Three times a week.
              | Short summaries of media articles.
              | E-Mail: [e-mail]
              |         SUB EDUPAGE YOUR NAME
              |
     COMPUTER | Covers happenings in cyberspace, such as government policy.
  UNDERGROUND | E-Mail: [e-mail]
       DIGEST |         [e-mail]
              |         SUB CUDIGEST YOUR NAME
              | Usenet: comp.society.cu-digest
              |    FTP: etext.archive.umich.edu:/pub/CuD/
              |
         HOTT | Gathers the latest info on computer, communications, and
              | electronics technologies from trade magazines, newspapers and
              | net resources.
              | E-mail: [e-mail]
              |         SUBSCRIBE HOTT-LIST
              |
PRIVACY FORUM | Bit and pieces on threats to privacy.
              | E-mail: [e-mail]
              |    FTP: ftp.vortex.com
              | Gopher: gopher.vortex.com
              |
     NETWORKS | Focuses on the 'community' more tha technology.
  & COMMUNITY | E-mail: [e-mail]
              |         SUBSCRIBE YOUR NAME)
              | Gopher: gopher.well.sf.ca.us
              |         gopher.nlc-bnc.ca
              |
 COM NET NEWS | Recently introduced newsletter on community networking on the
              | infobahn.
              | E-mail: contact [e-mail]


[e-mail]
Please vote for rec.arts.ascii - CFV is available on news.announce.newgroups,
news.groups, alt.ascii-art, rec.humor, comp.graphics, alt.bbs, and others.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Allison)
Subject: Book Review: "From Somaphore to Satellite" by ITU
Date: 25 May 1994 09:08:43 -0500
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605


   For those of you interested in the history of Trans-Atlantic
cobles, or the history of telecom, there's a book you might want to
search for.  My copy is rather old, so if there was no update to it;
you may have to look for an old edition.

   The book is called 'From Somaphore to Satellite'.  It was published
by the ITU (International Telecommunications Union) in 1963.  It
covers everything up to that year.

   It's a big format, 344 page volume.  The parts covering the history
of the Trans-Atlantic cable were very interesting, at least to me.
The book has some interesting old pictures too.

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

Please vote for rec.arts.ascii - CFV is available on news.announce.newgroups,
news.groups, alt.ascii-art, rec.humor, comp.graphics, alt.bbs, and others.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps you or someone else with a copy
of the book would like to quote some of the more interesting excerpts here
in the Digest. Please send them in.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerry Moersdorf)
Subject: RBOCS & Video Remote learning in Schools?
Date: 25 May 1994 13:19:36 -0400
Organization: Applied Innovation, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Does anyone have an opinion on what the RBOCS are trying to do by
pushing TV remote learning grants and equipment to school systems?
The schools in our district don't even have telephones in classrooms
let alone a LAN for a client server teaching tool.  To me the priorities
are all turned around.  What possible business could RBOCS build with the
"poor" school districts?


Gerry Moersdorf   --- Applied Innovation Inc  [e-mail]
614-798-2000        Dublin, Ohio 43017    The datacom pbx guys


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You raise an excellent point, and I would
refer interested readers to a related article which is presently circu-
lating in alt.dcom.telecom which discusses the 'information highway' and
how it seems to be bypassing a lot of poorer communities in the opinion
of the author of the article. I am attaching it as the next item in this
issue of the Digest. I do not agree entirely with the conclusions of the
article, but it is worth thinking about.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Center for Media Education)
Subject: Info Highway to Bypass Poor and Minorities, Groups Reveal
Date: 25 May 1994 00:03:20 GMT
Organization: Washington, DC


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Forwarded from alt.dcom.telecom FYI.  PAT]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: MAY 23, 1994

FROM:    Center for Media Education (CME)
    Consumer Federation of America (CFA)
    Media Access Project (MAP)
    National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
    National Council of La Raza (NCLR)
    Office of Communication, United Church of Christ (UCC)

For more information, see contact persons listed at the end of this note.

     "INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY" COULD BYPASS
       LOW INCOME AND MINORITY COMMUNITIES

Consumer and Civil Rights Groups Urge FCC To Prevent "Electronic
Redlining" by Baby Bells

WASHINGTON, DC -- A coalition of consumer and civil rights groups
today called upon the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to
outlaw "electronic redlining" as local telephone companies start to
construct the "information superhighway."  In two petitions filed
today, the coalition submitted to the Commission research documenting
that these companies are designing their advanced comunications
systems to bypass many low income and minority communities.  The
research was based on an examination of applications from each of the
Regional Bell Operating Companies which have filed video dialtone
proposals with the FCC.

"Our analysis reveals a clear pattern," concluded Jeffrey Chester,
Executive Director of the Center for Media Education.  "Low income and
minority neighborhoods are being systematically underrepresented in
these plans."

In their petitions, the groups urged the FCC to clarify the rules that
prevent such practices and to issue a policy statement reaffirming the
Commission's commitment to the goals of universal service and
nondiscriminatory deployment.  "At each phase of video dialtone
deployment," the coalition argued, "providers should be required to
make that service available to a proportionate number of lower income
and minority customers."  The groups also called on the FCC to revise
its policies to ensure greater public participation in the development
of these new communications networks.  For example, they urged the
Commission to require telephone companies to hold public hearings with
local officials and consumers in order to get permission to provide
video dialtone services.

"Right now," explained Bradley Stillman, Legislative Counsel of the
Consumer Federation of America, "the phone companies get to decide
when, where and how these networks will be built and paid for without
any input from the communities that will be served by them.  That is
not the way we deployed either telephone service or cable TV, which
are merged in the video dialtone proposals."  Added CME's Jeffrey
Chester, "These video dialtone networks could become the primary
communications system for millions of Americans.  They must be made
available in an equitable and nondiscriminatory manner."

"The building of the information superhighway is the civil rights
issue of the 21st century," stated Anthony Pharr of the Office of
Communication, United Church of Christ.  "As in the banking and
insurance fields, this sort of discrimination is patently wrong.  It
hurts the communities that need help the most."

"Redlining within the telecommunications industry is a front-line
challenge to the civil rights community and must be addressed in the
national telecommunications legislation now before Congress," added
Wade Henderson, Director of the Washington Bureau of the NAACP.

The research compared census tract data to maps and other documents
submitted to the FCC by the local telephone companies.  At least two
cities for each of four Baby Bells were analyzed: the Ameritech
applications in Indianapolis, IN and Chicago, IL; Bell Atlantic
applications in Toms River, NJ and the Washington, DC metropolitan
area; Pacific Telesis applications for the California areas of Orange
County, San Diego, and the South Bay of San Francisco; and U.S. West
applications for Portland, OR, Minneapolis, MN, and Denver, CO.  These
networks would intitially reach approximately 4 million homes.
Applications for the construction of these and other video dialtone
platforms are currently under review at the FCC.

The analysis revealed two patterns.  In some cases entire counties
were bypassed, while more affluent neighboring counties were selected
for service.  For example, Bell Atlantic chose the wealthier suburbs
of northern Virginia and Montgomery County, Maryland rather than the
District of Columbia and Prince George's County, Maryland both of
which contain large minority populations.  In other cases, the
unserved areas comprise a section carved out of the middle of a city.
For example, as one of the petitions explained, "The map of U.S.
West's scheduled deployment in Denver depicts a large slice running
through the center of the city where video dialtone facilities will
not be initially constructed.  Lower income and/or minority persons
are heavily concentrated in the excluded area."

A separate computer analysis of Ameritech's proposal for the Chicago
area, undertaken by the Office of Communication, United Church of
Christ, led to similar conclusions.

The Center for Media Education's "Future of Media" Project supported
the demographic research of Dr.  Mark Cooper, Research Director of the
Consumer Federation of America.

Groups supporting the petition include the Center for Media Education
(CME), Consumer Federation of America (CFA), National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), National Council of La Raza
(NCLR), and the Office of Communication, United Church of Christ
(UCC).  The Institute for Public Representation, Georgetown University
Law Center (IPR), and the Media Access Project (MAP) provided the
legal counsel in preparing the petitions to the FCC.

The issue of electronic redlining is expected to be discussed by the
Senate Commerce Committee in hearings sheduled for tomorrow, May 24.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:

Jeff Chester, Center for Media Education        [phone]
Bradley Stillman, Consumer Federation of America    [phone]
Anthony Pharr, Office of Communication, United Church of Christ
                            [phone]
Andrew Schwartzman, Media Access Project        [phone]

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

Anthony E. Wright                [e-mail]
Coordinator, Future of Media Project        Center for Media Education
1511 K St, NW, #518, Wash., DC 20005  Tel: [phone]  Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Worthington)
Subject: OSI Computer Based Training Package Available
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 05:22:01 GMT


THE ESSENTIAL GOSIP EDUCATION PROGRAM STANDARDS AUSTRALIA

The Essential GOSIP is an interactive training and development program
which provides a framework for developing a plan for GOSlP (Government
Open Systems Interconnection Profile) implementation.

THE ESSENTIAL GOSIP PROGRAM

Assists in the planning, development, implementation and management of
adopting GOSIP within your organisation.

The interactive GOSIP educational material provided allows the user to
work through the three key GOSIP planning stages. These stages - Where
are we now?, Where do we want to be? and How do we get there? are as
used in the Commonwealth Information Technology Planning Guidelines
(CITP).

A wide range of supporting theory and research information is
available on line:

* a library covering more than seventy topics
* a full glossary of terms
* case studies from Australia and overseas
* extra resources - such as access to on-line documents.

THE PURCHASE OPTIONS

The Essential GOSIP is available for purchase as a single user licence,
a site licence for up to eight users or as a customised program.

To obtain a free demonstration disk of the Essential GOSIP package,
contact:

    Standards Australia
    PO Box 1055, Strathfield NSW 2135
    Phone [phone] Fax [phone]

    X.400:     S=BASSETT;O=SAA;P=SA;A=TELEMEMO;C=AU
    Internet:  [e-mail]


Posted by TOM WORTHINGTON, Director of Information Management Policy
HQ Australian Defence Force, Fax: [phone]
<[e-mail]>
G=T;S=Worthington;OU=CM-DIMP;O=HQADF;P=ausgovdefencenet;A=telememo;C=au

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: ANI and Class of Service (was Re: 800 Number Billback)
Date: 25 May 1994 09:40:51 -0400


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steven Bradley)
writes:

> Well, here is my two cents worth ... if you really want to aggravate
> these legal con-artists, do this:

> Call the service as much as you want and as often as you can from PAY
> PHONES and see how easily they (don't) get their money then!

[some more stuff deleted}

to which our Esteemed Moderator added, in part:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What actually happens is that the
> Information Provider has a database of pay telephone numbers and
> yes, you will waste ten cents of his money dialing him and getting
> him to answer but you certainly will not get him to part with any
> of his valuable 'information'.

[stories of calling various 800-to-billing services deleted]

to which [e-mail] explains:

Not quite. The usual technique for sorting out incoming calls is to
have the telco provide teh phone number, -and- the 'class of service'.
This is part of feature group d and might be in 'c' as well.

This lets the tele-sleaze opertor know whether the call is coming from
a residential phone, a business, a telco coin phone, a cocot (if
properly registered at the local office), and a few other designations
such as prisons and, if I recall corectly, phones at a hospital.

BTW, some groups -do- use ANI for a related purpose, namely to reduce
'excess' calls to their number. (Remember the huge volume of calls
that were sent to Falwell's number?)

A good example of this is the 1-800-WHY-GUNS setup. If you call it you
get a recording describing the need for gun control, etc. Call it a
second time and you get the same message. Call it a -third- time and
you get a message saying something like 'because <descriptive
derogatory terms deleted> try to jam our phone lines, we have to limit
you to three calls to our number. Please call xxx-yyyy in the future'

Calling it a fourth time gets you a busy or intercept.

BTW #2: There is, sensibly enough, a time-out on the restriction. I
just called them again from a phone line which had been blocked in the
past and got through. Seems they figured out that a two week hold on
calls was a good compromise.


[e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 13:05:36 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Worldwide Areacode/Telex/Internet List Available by FTP
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


I am in the process of final submission of a replacement document for
my Internet RFC 1394.  This document contains a list of all
international as well as US Area codes, telex area codes in both
international and F.36 formats, time zones, data network numbers,
large Internet Gateways and Internet Base-Level domain names.  I would
like to request comments on the and content of the information (e.g.
is there related information I should have considered adding) as well
as any inaccuracies in the information I have provided.  This document
is, in my opinion, essentially finished but I would like to offer
members of the Internet Community the opportunity to view the document
and point out any possible errors.

The document is 141K in size uncompressed and is obtainable through
FTP at:

ftp.digex.net: /pub/access/tdarcos/newrfc.txt

or in compressed forms of: newrfc.txt.gz, newrfc.txt.Z, newrfc.zip and
newrfc.zoo, so you can grab whichever one is easiest to handle; the
compressed forms must be extracted with BINARY mode ftp.

Those without FTP access should write back to this address; the
FTPMAIL server at decwrl is probably too slow to provide a response in
time.  Indicate if you can accept a MIME coded document or UUENCODE,
or if you need plain text.

I intend to submit this document as a proposed RFC by June 7, e.g. in
a little over one week unless I receive reports of a "showstopping"
error in the document.  Corrections and comments will be appreciated.

Please feel free to forward this note elsewhere.  Thank you for your
interest and attention.


Paul Robinson

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

      SPECIAL NOTICE - READ CAREFULLY - ITEM HAS BEEN DELETED

Date: Fri, 27 May 94 12:28:31 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: telecom
Subject: Miss Manners Objects to Being Used


On Wednesday, May 25 in issue 14-248 of this Digest, a reprint of an
article by Miss Manners appeared as item 11 of 12.  Submitted by Steve
Cogorno, it originally appeared in Clarinet and apparently Steve had
not obtained permission to reprint it here. I made the erroneous
assumption he had. Although it ran intact, with some added commentary
by Steve, and the copyright notices, etc were all intact, with credit
given to Clarient and the syndicate which distributes Miss Manners,
Brad Templeton of Clarinet says it should not have appeared in TELECOM
Digest without his permission.

In a note to both Steve Cogorno and myself, Mr. Templeton demanded
that the article be removed from circulation. He also sent along a
little pre-printed apology form letter which everyone involved is
supposed to publish in a conspicuous place in the same manner in which
the original article was published. Steve sent me his copy of the
notice to be run under his name, and it is identical to the one sent
directly to me. Note that it includes a blurb on how one might subscribe
to Clarinet if one wishes to do so.

So, article 11 of 12, issue 248, volume 14 is being overwritten in the
archives with this note of explanation, and I must ask all readers to
likewise remove the Miss Manners article on 'Call Return' and substitute
this message in its place. There now follows Mr. Templeton's suggested
notice, for the record submitted by Steve Cogorno and myself. He says
this will serve as our pennace for violating his copyright.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: ClariNet News
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 20:08:07 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: [e-mail]

Recently I posted an article from Miss Manners regarding the use of
Call Return to this newsgroup from the ClariNet electronic newspaper.
This was a copyrighted item that I should not have posted without
permission.  It has been deleted. Those wishing to know how to get
such articles legitimately for their site can contact ClariNet at
[e-mail].

Steve
[e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015


From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: ClariNet News
Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 12:00:00 CDT
Cc: [e-mail]

Recently I posted an article from Miss Manners regarding the use of
Call Return to this newsgroup from the ClariNet electronic newspaper.
This was a copyrighted item that I should not have posted without
permission.  It has been deleted. Those wishing to know how to get
such articles legitimately for their site can contact ClariNet at
[e-mail].

Patrick Townson

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

It would be best in the future I think if readers would simply refrain
 from sending me stuff that has appeared in Clarinet. There are lots
of other sources for the same news.  Thank you.

PAT

             WE NOW CONTINUE WITH ITEM 12 OF 12 IN THIS ISSUE

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

Date: Wed, 25 May 94 16:30:56 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Leaving a Message


I saw the blurb about call-return.  I don't have that feature.
However, I wonder what sort of calls are getting filtered out when
they reach the answering service operator at my Delaware and Maryland
telephone numbers.  I know there are calls going to there from both
numbers, because they cost me on my phone bills (message units in
Delaware and tolls in Maryland).  Pos- sibly those are unwanted sales
calls that get filtered out, but I had a case several years ago where
someone reached that answering service and left only a message that
(making up the name) "George Smith called".  I had no way of knowing
who that was, so I could do nothing until that person called again a
week later and left a telephone number as well.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #248
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19900;
          25 May 94 19:17 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10186; Wed, 25 May 94 15:11:05 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10174; Wed, 25 May 94 15:11:03 CDT
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 15:11:03 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #249

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 25 May 94 15:11:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 249

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    "Erlang" the Programming Language (Steven King)
    Report on Synchronization Status Messages (Jim Burkitt)
    Book Review: "NetPower" by Persson (Rob Slade)
    Can a Unix Box Work as an Internet Router? (Mike McLeish)
    Internet Access at Home? ([e-mail])
    Internet Access From the Solomon Islands? (Jarlath J. Lyons)
    Vertical Blanking Interval Capacity (Noel Moss)
    Long Range "Cordless" Telephones (Al Cohan)
    Seeking "Informing Ourselves to Death" Article (Jay Bonnet)
    SMDI Question ([e-mail])
    Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) (David Taylor)
    Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) (Steven King)
    Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) (John Levine)
    Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was Re: Lexus Cellular Phones) (Dan Declerck)
    Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Richard Urmonas)
    Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Rob Lockhart)
    Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Dan J. Declerck)
    Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager? (Sam Spens Clason)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven King)
Subject: "Erlang" the Programming Language
Date: 25 May 1994 19:44:15 GMT
Organization: Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Does anyone have any information on a programming language called
"Erlang"?  Yes, I know, erlang is a measure of traffic capacity.
Apparently it's also a programming language.

A snippet from the "Overbeek's Outlook" column from the newsletter of
Books & Bytes (a local computer bookstore) mentions it as an
"interesting language that has many intellectual roots in the logic
programming community."  It goes on to say that it was developed at
the Ericsson Computer Science Laboratory in Sweden to offer a model
for programming concurrent real-time systems.  And, since Ericsson is
a large switch manufacturer, prototyping telephony applications was
one of the language's central design objectives.

Since this is a bookstore newsletter, it mentions the book "Concurrent
Programming in Erlang", by Armstrong, Virding, and Williams.  Anyone
have information on either the book or the language?


Steven King <[e-mail]> -- Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group

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

Date: 25 May 1994 14:41:14 GMT
From: JIM (CC120E) BURKITT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Report on Synchronization Status Messages


Press Release:

From: Committee T1
Contact:  Jim Burkitt, T1X1 Chairman
          [phone]
          [e-mail] (Internet)

Subject:  Technical Report on Synchronization Status Messages

Committee T1 just published a technical report "Synchronization
Network Management Using Synchronization Status Messages".  This new
technical report (Report #33) provides techniques and procedures for
synchronization message use in SONET and DS1 networks.  While ANSI
T1.105 (SONET) and T1.403 (DS-1) standards provide codes that pass
status information in the synchronization network, this new technical
report explains a number of ways to use these status messages to
maintain a network.

All digital networks require the distribution of what is commonly
known as network clock.  This network clock starts with a primary
reference source at the stratum 1 level.  Three other stratum levels
subtend off these primary clocks.  In addition to the current clock
distribution networks, SONET fiber optic rings need to prevent timing
loops.  In order to help maintain these synchronization distribution
networks, T1X1 developed a technical report on how to use Synchronization
Status Messages.

Committee T1 is sponsored by the Alliance for Telecommunications
Industry Solutions (ATIS) and is accredited by the American National
Standards Institute (ANSI).  Copies can be purchased from ATIS or
obtained by anonymous ftp from test.t1bbs.org with the file name
/pub/techrpts/tr33.wwn (Word for Windows 2.0) or tr33.ps (Postscript).

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

Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 09:56:34 MDT
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "NetPower" by Persson


BKNETPWR.RVW  940207

Fox Chapel Publishing
Box 7948L   Lancaster, PA  17604-7948
Phone#: [phone]
Fax#: [phone]
"NetPower", Persson, 1993, 1-56523-031-0, U$39.95
[e-mail] [e-mail]

Apparently the subtitle used to be, "Educators Resource Guide to
Online Computer Services."  It certainly deals with online services.
*All* of them.  The Internet, private bulletin boards, commercial
online services, commercial database services, Fidonet, educational
networks and a number of others.

The educational title is being de-emphasized but this is still, quite
obviously, a book for teachers.  Two chapters are devoted to classroom
projects, two more to a "Kid's Participation Network," and "Kid
People."  Much of the material will be of interest to others, but the
style and the eclectic nature are definitely for educators.

Not all resources are listed here, of course.  There is, however, an
extraordinary wealth of material.  Some of it is available online,
such as the Inter-network Mail Guide, but this is handy if you are
only starting online access.

Guidance could use some work.  There does not seem to be a lot of
order to the chapters.  Also, material is sometimes duplicated from
chapter to chapter.  (K12net gets two fairly extensive citations and a
chapter by itself, to boot.)

If you are a teacher or an educational researcher, this book is very
definitely for you.  If you have extensive dealings with online
resources, you may also find a lot of useful material here.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKNETPWR.RVW  940207. Distribution
permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Can a Unix Box Work as an Internet Router?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Indiana State University
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 16:15:40 GMT


I'm trying to justify our school system getting access to the
internet, and have been challenged to get these answers *from* the
internet. Of course, we have very little money, but do have a few
computers. So the question is, can a computer (ie Unix) function as an
Internet router, or must we buy one of these routers like CISCO or
WellFleet?

If so, what's the *cheapest* router available?

Can a Unix box connect to a digital comm line (56k)?

Please help, your prompt answer will contribute (however so slightly)
to the quality of the American education system :)


Mike McLeish   Vigo County School Corp.
Terre Haute, IN   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 12:06:58 MST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Internet Access at Home?
Organization: Arizona State University


Greetings,

    I am interested in getting a internet link to my home. I'm not
talking about a call up service, but am referring to an actual link to
my house. I am thinking of setting up a server. I need to know where
to start. How does one go about getting a line set up and what
hardware is required? Any response will be appreciated.

Thank you all.

Virtually Yours,

Mike


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Questions like the above two from Arizona
and the Vigo Schools are all too commonplace in my mailbox these days.
Everyone wants on the internet! Some I answer, some I forward elsewhere
but these two I decided to put out to the readers here. They're very
typical of what I get in the mail, and hopefully answers from readers
will be seen by many others who are asking the same thing.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jarlath J. Lyons)
Subject: Internet Access from the Solomon Islands?
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 20:36:36 GMT


I have a friend who will be in the Solomon Islands for at least the
next year, and he would dearly love to be able to email his discourse
drafts around the ether while there.  Any suggestions would be most
appreciated.

FYI, local legends report cannibalism is still practiced on some of
the remote islands there.  I wasn't adventuresome enough to pursue
verification on my trip there in '89.


Jarlath Lyons               Voice [phone] W  [phone] Home/fax
Boeing Commercial Airplane  PO Box 3707  M/S 19-MJ
Seattle  WA  98124-2207     E-Mail: [e-mail]

    Lyons' First  Law : Never rule out basic greed or stupidity
    Lyons' Second Law : My Laws (and opinions) are my own ...


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well ... the Solomon Islands are a long
way from home. Maybe readers have an answer to your question also, along
with that from wolverine and the fellow at the Vigo Schools.

In response to your side note, I certainly hope your comments were not
driven by any cannibalphobic attitudes on your part. If the Solomon Islands
do join the Internet and get a news feed, will someone issue a Call For
Votes on a newsgroup devoted to cannibalism? I wonder where such a news-
group would go in the Usenet hierarchy?  Probably under rec.food.cannibalism.
Perhaps there would also be a 'soc' group for it also where the politics
involved could be debated forever. Then as the newsgroup became very pop-
ular and overrun with off-topic postings (sort of like the Editor Notes
here in TELECOM Digest) with the on-line Avon Lady doing her thing and the
Make Money Fast letter appearing every day or two, someone would issue a
call to make it a moderated group. Jeffrey Dahmer (our resident cannibal
here in the USA, of late being persecuted by the government and held
prisoner in a maximum security mental health facility in Wisconsin) would
volunteer to be the Moderator. Exciting times ahead for the net!   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Vertical Blanking Interval Capacity
Organization: SLACC STACK BBS - St. Louis, Missouri
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 06:26:21 CST


Paul Robinson recently wrote to TELECOM Digest inquiring about the
capacity of the vertical blanking interval (VBI) in television frames
and was also looking for sources of equipment to utilize the VBI.

A recent issue of Circuit Cellar Ink (published by Steve Ciarcia,
Vernon, CT) contained an article called "Investigating the Vertical
Blanking Interval" or something similar. This article contained
schematics for building a device to extract teletext, time codes and
other information from the VBI.


Best regards,

Noel Moss

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

Date: Wed, 25 May 94 12:35 EST
From: Al Cohan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Long Range "Cordless" telephones


Pat, someone recently asked about long range (ten to twenty mile)
"cordless" telephones -- not cellular. Yes, there are several illegal
high power full duplex cordless phones, but there are also rural
systems that are perfectly legal.

Ritron, located in Carmel, Indiana manufactures a full duplex UHF
system they call TeleNexus. It connectes to a regular telco at the
"end of the line" from there it generates ringing forward to the rural
location and in turn decodes and regenerates DTMF. At the far end, a
similar unit has an standard RJ-11 Jack. You plug a regular phone into
it and it rings as if the phone was directly connected to the telco.
The bandwidth is actually greater than a standard telco line. It costs
about $7,500 retail.

One drawback: You gotta have power at both ends!

Maybe Scott Fybush will jump on this thread and tell us how it worked
when he attended Deep Springs College here in CA. I actually saw and
heard their unit in a radio shop in Bishop, CA where the telco line
was connected.  Didn't sound bad, but has now been replaced with
cellular.


AL

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

From: [e-mail] (Jay Bonnet)
Subject: Seeking "Informing ourselves to death" Article
Organization: Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 15:26:46 GMT


I am trying to find a paper that I think was mentioned here (back
around Jan or Feb maybe?) that was presented at a conference in Europe
and I believe the title was something like "Are We Informing Ourselves
to Death?"  It was a very interesting presentation about the value of
continued and increased use of computers in society.  I believe there
were some follow-on discussions in TELECOM Digest pro and con but my
interest is in finding the original paper again.  Any help appreciated.


Thanks,

Jay


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Check the Telecom Archives, in the sub-
directory devoted to special reports, essays, etc.  Access the archives
using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu, then 'cd telecom-archives'.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 02:27:55 EDT
Subject: SMDI Question


With the explosion of better computer to PBX intergration schemes for
voice processing apps, I have seen more switches and voice mail
machines using SMDI (Simplified Message Desk Interface) signaling as a
means of signaling between the two systems.  Since this is a Bellcore
standard, used for Centrex voice mail integrations, does anyone have
the data for the signal packets coding scheme?  All I know so far is
that it is a 1200 baud serial data link and it provides calling and
called party ID from the switch to the voice mail.


Please reply to [e-mail].

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

From: lhdsy1!chevron.com![e-mail] (David S. Taylor)
Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones)
Date: 25 May 94 15:39:32 GMT
Organization: Chevron Information Technology Company


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Harry P. Haas) writes:

> I have a Motorola flip-phone with the hands free kit/3watt amp. It
> makes for the same setup as the lexus, without muting the stereo.
> BUT, my stereo has a mute input wire, and the CELLULAR 3-WATT
> VEHICULAR ADAPTER has a wire yellow-black wire labeled "Auxilary
> Alert".  Hmmm.

> So does anyone know what the "Auxiliary Alert" wire is used for?  If
> it is not an "activity" signal, does anyone know how to get an "activity"
> signal from the Motorola system so that I can mute my stereo?

The auxiliary alert is usually used to activate a horn or light relay
so you can tell when your phone if ringing if you are outside your
car.  I believe that is only activated when the phone is ringing.


David S. Taylor   Texas A&M '87         Engineer, RF Systems
Chevron Information Technology Co.      Base Technology Dept.
1300 South Beach Blvd. Rm 2187          [e-mail]
La Habra, CA 90631                      310-694-7280

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones)
Date: 25 May 1994 16:33:09 GMT
Organization: Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Harry P. Haas) publicly declared:

> I have a Motorola flip-phone with the hands free kit/3watt amp. It
> makes for the same setup as the lexus, without muting the stereo.
> BUT, my stereo has a mute input wire, and the CELLULAR 3-WATT
> VEHICULAR ADAPTER has a wire yellow-black wire labeled "Auxilary
> Alert".  Hmmm.

> So does anyone know what the "Auxiliary Alert" wire is used for?  If
> it is not an "activity" signal, does anyone know how to get an "activity"
> signal from the Motorola system so that I can mute my stereo?

I'm guessing here (Ignore my Organization: line!  I know nothing about
the subscriber units!) but it sounds like the "Auxilary Alert" line is
probably to sound an external ringer, like your car horn.  I doubt
that it's an activity sensor suitable for muting your stereo.

But hey, I could be wrong.


Steven King <[e-mail]> -- Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group

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

Date: Wed, 25 May 94 11:38 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones)
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> So does anyone know what the "Auxiliary Alert" wire is used for?

It's usually used to make the horn blow when the phone rings.  That
comes in handy for people at construction sites and other places where
they're near but not in their car or truck.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan J. Declerck)
Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Phones (was: Re: Lexus Cellular Phones)
Date: 25 May 1994 17:47:27 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group


Aux Alert is characteristically used for a "horn and lights" option.
If you are not in the vehicle when a call is received, Aux_alert will
be grounded in a pattern which will mimmick ringing.  Using a two-pole
relay, you can control the Lights and horn simultaneously.  This will
give an external alert.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Urmonas)
Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager?
Organization: I.C.P. Design & Development, NEC Australia
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 07:14:09 GMT


[e-mail] (Greg Alexander) writes:

> I am interested in buying a GSM phone, and was hoping to learn a
> little more about the short message service offered in some.

(stuff deleted)

> Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone is
> in range? My interest is because I will often be in No service areas
> (eg Asia Pacific -- Thailand, and non city areas of Australia). If its
> a pager -- cool, I will still be contactable. If it relies on being in
> the area -- good too (I will NEVER miss the message).

> So both have strengths, but I'd like to know what I'm getting. (Both
> would be great -- but very unlikely ;)

My undestanding of how the SMS works is that if you are out of range
or the phone is off etc. the message is held until the phone is
detected to be "back on the system".  Hence the message "will be
delivered".

What will be the big variable is how the system will be implemented
within various countries, and if it will be supplied to international
roamers (i.e. if you are in Thailand and someone within Thailand
phones you will they be able to leave you a message ?).  I guess this
will be one of those big "suplier decides" issues.


Richard Urmonas, ICP Group, NEC Australia,
649 Springvale Rd, Mulgrave 3170, Australia
EMAIL: [e-mail]
PHONE: [phone]   FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (RLockhart)
Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager?
Date: 25 May 1994 06:35:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Mike Lyman) writes:

> For a "normal" paging service, pages are sent to the subscriber's
> pager without any indications in return as to successful delivery
> (spray> and pray service) although there is a movement afoot to provide
> "ack-back" paging services. I dont think there are any spec's or
> functional systems (are there ?).

We've talked somewhat openly 'bout our two-way *real* paging technology
as has Mtel on their NWN system, probably the first such system to hit
commercial service (currently slated for mid next year). If you'd like
to follow up, give me a shout.


Rob Lockhart, Resource Manager, Interactive Data Systems
Paging Products Group, Motorola, Inc.
Desktop:  [e-mail]
Wireless (<32K characters):  [e-mail]
Wireless (< 1K characters):  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan J. Declerck)
Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager?
Date: 25 May 1994 17:40:06 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group


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

> GSM, which is similar to the MIRS/ESRM technology in North America, is
> an integrated system.  That is, one single system provides a variety
> of\ wireless connections.  These include two-way voice, one-way
> acknowledgement alphanumeric messaging, two-way data and in some cases
> push-to-talk dispatch broadcast.  The key here is that all these
> features are coming through the same system, using the same transmitters,
> switches and mobile receivers.  Therefore the range/coverage on all the
> services will be exactly the same.  If you're in range to get an alpha
> message, you will also be in range for a voice connection, and vice
> versa. (Actually, in practice there might some minor discrepancies in
> fringe areas, but the usual case will be true the vast majority of the
> time.)

The GSM spec does not have a minimum limit on call setup time.  (at
least one that is less than 250 ms) ergo, GSM cannot be used for PTT
(Push-To-Talk) dispatch services.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Sam Spens Clason)
Subject: Re: GSM "Short Messages"==Pager?
Date: 25 May 1994 09:58:00 GMT
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden


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

> [e-mail] (Greg Alexander) asked:

>>  I am interested in buying a GSM phone, and was hoping to learn
>>  a little more about the short message service offered in some.

>>  Is it a pager -- or a digital message that appears when your phone
>>  is in range?

> We've just got the first "workable" SMS system in the UK, on the new
> DCS1800 (PCN) system known as "ORANGE".  Essentially it is a message
> transfer system that uses a form of handshaking between the mobile
> switch and the handset: so error-free receipt of the message can be
> guaranteed.

> We do not *just* have a message bureau, however: we also have the
> ability to send messages *directly from handset to handset* and these
> messages cost less to send than it would cost to make a phone call to
> say the same thing!

Yes, but wouldn't [e-mail] be nicer?!  Is there any such
service out there?

> In the future there are plans to provide notebook computer access to
> the handset (using PCMCIA cards) and this will substantially increase
> the functionality of the message service.  It will become possible to
> send text messages from the handset (or computer) to any other GSM/PCN
> system, to any of the old analogue paging networks, or as an X400
> message or a facsimile document.

Wait a minute, isn't SMS defined a max of 160 characters?  I am pretty
sure that what you are talkin about is ordinary datatransfer that
occupies a 9600 bit voice channel.  Actually the rate of transfer is
sligtly higher but I've never heard of a 11.4kbit modem :-)

> If a SMS message contains a phone number with a request to be called
> back, the handset will (on a key-push) grab that number and store it
> in the phone's memory, ready to be called back by the user.  Oh, and
> we also have full Caller-ID and last call return.

Like if your voice-mailbox or fax-mailbox sent you an SMS every time
it receives a message.  We have that in Sweden to, at least Comviq
does.

We have Caller-ID to, but only within Comviq since lame-ass Telia (to
be privatised "after" 1996) won't supply the necessary information
when routing calls to Comviq.


Sam Spens Clason, <A HREF="http://www.nada.kth.se/~d92-sam/">Web</A>

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #249
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa03266;
          26 May 94 11:06 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22502; Thu, 26 May 94 06:55:11 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22492; Thu, 26 May 94 06:55:09 CDT
Date: Thu, 26 May 94 06:55:09 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #250

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 26 May 94 06:55:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 250

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Itemized Billing in UK (Peter Campbell Smith)
    Re: Itemized Billing in UK (Jonothan Green)
    Re: Itemized Billing in UK (John Slater)
    Re: Itemized Billing in UK ([e-mail])
    Re: Itemized Billing in UK (Clive D.W. Feather)
    Re: Hunting Service From GTE (Joe Collins)
    Re: Hunting Service From GTE (Steve Forrette)
    Re: LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service (Nathan N. Duehr)
    Re: LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Cellular Privacy? (Neil Weisenfeld)
    Re: Cellular Privacy? (Bennett Z. Kobb)
    Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns (Ed Ellers)
    Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns (Rob Levandowski)
    Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts (Steven Bradley)

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.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    *
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   *
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter Campbell Smith)
Subject: Re: Itemized Billing in UK
Organization: Logica, London
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 08:40:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
COM wrote:

> An episode of "Eastenders," shown last week in Southern California
> (which runs about a year or more behind the U.K.) featured a character
> quite shocked to learn that his phone calls to his mistress now show
> up as itemized call detail on their phone bill.  These were local toll
> calls from the East End to the West End, which I assume are expensive
> calls.

> Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing?

BT offers itemised billing for calls that cost more than 9 units, a
unit costing about 5p (7 US cents) and buying varying numbers of
seconds according to distance and time of day.  If you choose that
(free) option, these calls are itemised and the rest lumped together
as some (large) number of units.  The local calling area from London
covers all of Greater London, plus the neighbouring suburbs (about 10
million people or so).  'Local' calls are not toll-free however, so a
long local call will show up as an itemised one: to be precise, a unit
buys 80 seconds from 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday and 220 seconds at
other times, so we may deduce that your character spent over 12
minutes by day or 33 minutes in the evening chatting to his floozie.
The rival operators (Mercury and the cable-TV lads) offer itemised
billing on all calls.


Peter Campbell Smith, Logica plc, London.  Voice: [phone]
Fax: [phone]  Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonothan Green)
Subject: Re: Itemized Billing in UK
Date: 26 May 1994 07:51:12 GMT
Organization: BNR Europe Limited, Harlow, GB


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

> An episode of "Eastenders," shown last week in Southern California
> (which runs about a year or more behind the U.K.) featured a character
> quite shocked to learn that his phone calls to his mistress now show
> up as itemized call detail on their phone bill.

> Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing?

I don't watch Eastenders, but I do have a 'phone :-)

In my case, I automatically get itemised billing of any calls over a
certain **COST** (can't remember what the figure is) regardless of
what type of number I'm calling, this means that if I made a **LONG**
call on a local tariff it would be shown as a seperate item on the
bill, but if I made a very short call on a low cost tariff (eg BT's
super-cheapo weekend rate) then it wouldn`t ... confused? You will be :-)

I make all my long distance calls through Mercury, which does give
full details of **ALL** calls made, (so it's a good job I haven't got
a mistress in Manchester :-)


Jonathon Green. BNR Europe Ltd, London Road, Harlow, Essex  CM17 9NA, UK
Email: [e-mail] (Work)      [e-mail] (Home)
Fax:   [phone]       Phone: [phone] (direct line)

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

From: [e-mail] (John Slater)
Subject: Re: Itemized Billing in UK
Date: 26 May 1994 05:38:53 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems (UK)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article [e-mail],  [e-mail] writes:

> An episode of "Eastenders," shown last week in Southern California
> (which runs about a year or more behind the U.K.) featured a character
> quite shocked to learn that his phone calls to his mistress now show
> up as itemized call detail on their phone bill.  These were local toll
> calls from the East End to the West End, which I assume are expensive
> calls.

First of all, East End and West End are areas of London, so it's a
local call.  (I believe Greater London is the largest geographic
calling area in the world).

Now on the the charging and billing system : British Telecom charges
by the unit. 1 unit costs around 5p (7c in your Earth money) and buys
a length of time that varies according to distance and time of day.
For instance, on a local call at off-peak times, a unit buys 220
seconds (3min40sec). On a call to the USA a unit charge buys between 8
and 10 seconds.  An Intelsat call, to give an extreme example, uses up
a unit every 0.7 seconds or so.

BT offers itemised billing for calls over 10 units (= 50p cost). A
local cheap-rate call of over 33 minutes falls into this category, so
would appear on the bill.  At standard rate during the day, a shorter
call than this would do it.

A lot of people don't like the unit charging system because callers
are charged in whole units even if they only use part of it. (for
example a 221 second off-peak local call costs 2 units). This
translates to an average overcharge of half a unit per call, at 2.5p
each, which adds up to many millions of pounds per year. (Does anybody
have the call volume numbers to work out just how much?)


John

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

From: [e-mail] (Anne's Fiance)
Subject: Re: Itemized Billing in UK
Date: 26 May 1994 00:43:19 -0400
Organization: International Internet Association


> Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing?

Yes.  Not all of the country has itemised billing availabkle.  The
itemisation is based on the cost/number of units of the call, not the
physical distance.

If the call is more than 50p cost or more than 5 units in length or if
the call was made halfway through another call (via 3 way calling)
then it will be itemised.

Calls less than 50p or 5 units are not itemised, though for a small
fee users can dial a prefix to have calls itemised on a per-call
basic.

A scam around this is to dial an 800 number (pick one with a robot
voice, not a human on the end) and then immediatly interrupt that call
to place your legitimate call, which will therefore be itemised.

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

Subject: Re: Itemized Billing in UK
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 09:00:46 BST
From: Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]>


> An episode of "Eastenders," shown last week in Southern California

You admit to watching "Eastenders"? That's your street-cred gone.

> (which runs about a year or more behind the U.K.) featured a character
> quite shocked to learn that his phone calls to his mistress now show
> up as itemized call detail on their phone bill.  These were local toll
> calls from the East End to the West End, which I assume are expensive
> calls.

> Did the U.K. implement itemized local billing?

East End to West End [of London; note that these are not the east and
west edges of the London area] is a local call. Assuming he has normal
BT phone service, this call will be charged at between 3 and 8 minutes
per unit (I forget the exact numbers); a unit costs about 5p (7.5
cents) including tax.

If he has "full itemization", then all calls of 10 or more units are
listed, giving the complete number called, time, date, duration, and
cost; I often see local calls itemized on my bill. If the call was
special in some way (for example, it was the second call of a
three-way call, or was dialed with the "call me back afterwards with
duration and cost" prefix code), then it will be listed no matter how
many units it took.

Other phone companies have different policies: I use Mercury for my
non-local calls, and they itemize all calls (and are cheaper). I
access Mercury by dialling "1320aaannnnnn" instead of "0aaannnnnn".


Clive D.W. Feather     | Santa Cruz Operation
[e-mail]          | Croxley Centre
Phone: [phone] | Hatters Lane, Watford
Fax:   [phone] | WD1 8YN, United Kingdom

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

Date: Thu, 26 May 94 14:52:04 -0400
From: Joe Collins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Hunting Service From GTE


I hope GTE can solve your problem because Bell Atlantic can't solve
ours. We have a large multiline dial-in network and wanted to break
our lines down into multiple dial-in groups. We also wanted to be able
to control the number of lines in each group so as the situation
demanded we could change the group size. Enter Bell Atlantic, one
droid says "Sure, we can do that", another does not know and the last
says "Yes, except that you can't control the call forwarding feature
only WE can program the number". Yes, Call Forwarding on Busy, Don't
Answer is a solution for many but sadly Bell Atlantic does not care
enough to offer the service. Just send them money, they are the only
game in town.


Joe Collins

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Hunting Service From GTE
Date: 26 May 1994 19:13:39 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Paul Callahan) writes:

> I want to get a second line and have it hunt to the first, or vice-versa.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is called rotary hunting service.
 .....
> Please note there is a more expensive (and charged-for) service
> called 'transfer on busy/no answer'.  'Transfer on busy' does about
> the same thing as hunting does, but the way it is done -- the
> mechanics of it -- are a little different.  PAT]

There are a couple of other issues here.  In many states, GTE does not
offer hunting to residential customers at any price (here in Washington
State is an example), even though the RBOC in the same area does.
Another issue is that on measured rate lines, busy transfer will rack
up message units, whereas hunting does not.  Also, the monthly charge
for hunting sometimes applies to all lines in the hunt group, including
the terminating line that doesn't do any hunting itself (and only termin-
ates hunting calls from the previous line).  Pacific Bell bills this
way. Busy transfer is only charged on the lines where the tranfserring
originates.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What an odd way to go about billing for
hunting. We don't have any charge for hunting at all, residence, business
or otherwise. Hunting can go either direction you want, backward or
forward. For example, I have my second line hunt to my first when it is
busy. My first line then has call-waiting. You can't have both call-waiting
and hunting on the same line however; the two are incompatible, but we
can hunt from one end of our group of lines to the other at no charge and
have call-waiting on the final line for just the small fee charged for
the call-waiting feature.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nathan N. Duehr)
Subject: Re: LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 10:39:17 GMT


Mark E Daniel ([e-mail]) was talking about LD Carrier's
Message Delivery Services:

MCI is offering one of these services via their calling cards, and in
the three occasions I have tried it, all three parties have not
received their messages.  In one case, the party may not have been
home within the allotted eight hour time frame in which the call must
have been completed.  In another case an answering machine answered
the phone.  I am personally very unimpressed with MCI's service, and
will not be using it again.


Regards,

Nate Duehr     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: LD Carrier's Message Delivery Service
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 03:55:18 PDT


Said by: Mark E Daniel

> The person writing about this prompted me to try an experiment.  I
> believe it might be a nice idea if the LD carriers offering this
> service automaticly detected the busy signal and offered me the option
> of leaving a message or hanging up or dialing another number.  Sprint
> offers a similar service to AT&T's costing the same as far as I can
> tell.  At least delivery in the US is at the same price.  I was
> unable to use AT&T's service.  I received a message stating that all
> representatives were busy and that I should try my call again later.

On an AT&T call, if it is busy or no answer, all you have to do is hit
#123 and you will be connected to AT&T Message Service.  It is not
handled by live operators unless you hit 0 to request one.  Also, if
you use the #123 mode to access Message Service, you do not need to
enter the calling number, nor chargeback number (because the original
call was placed with a calling card).


Steve   [e-mail]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015

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

From: [e-mail] (Neil Weisenfeld)
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy?
Organization: NIH Div of Comp Rsrch and Technology
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 20:59:32 GMT


Steven Bradley ([e-mail]) wrote:

> However there is no enforcement of the importation ban, since U.S.
> customs are not an authority to pass judgement of the technical
> capabilities of a receiver, that is the FCC's job.  But with the use
> of FCC form 740, the FCC does not even need to see or certify a
> receiver, hence there is no problem with importing these units.  That

I can't comment on the enforcement side of things, but I do want to
point out that it is important to oppose an unenforcable law if you
oppose what the law says.  You never know when the law may become
enforcable.

About form 740, I was told that form 740 could not be used to get
around the law.  Again, maybe not enforcable, but still illegal.

> the 800 mhz band), no re-tuning is needed.  In theory, if they made
> the EPROM replacable for purpose of field upgrades, and sold the
> cellular full access EPROM as an after-market item, it would certainly
> get around the dumb restriction.  It does not stop you from getting
> the scanners, nor does it stop the modifications, merely makes it more
> difficult, but does not stop it.

I doubt that this would work as the ready availability of plug-in
parts to reenable cellular on the radio would render the radio "easily
modifiable" and, therefore, supposedly illegal to import/manufacture.


Neil Weisenfeld, Computer Engineer       Internet: [e-mail]
Nat'l Insts. of Health, 12A/2033         Voice:    301/402-4030
Bethesda, MD  20892                      Fax:      [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bennett Z. Kobb)
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy?
Organization: New Signals Research
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 13:46:57 GMT


> However there is no enforcement of the importation ban, since U.S.
> customs are not an authority to pass judgement of the technical
> capabilities of a receiver, that is the FCC's job.

Say what?

The Customs Service's role is to bar importation of RF products
illegal to market in the U.S. Customs does not have to pass technical
judgement on a receiver. They have only to examine the importer's
declaration of the FCC's permitted import categories for the device.

As the rules put it:

"Failure to properly declare the importation category for an entry of
radio frequency devices may result in refused entry, refused
withdrawal for consumption, required redelivery to the Customs port,
and other administrative, civil and criminal remedies provided by
law."

> But with the use of FCC form 740, the FCC does not even need to see or
> certify a receiver, hence there is no problem with importing these units.
> That includes receivers which directly receive cellular -and- units which
> can be modified easily.

Form 740 had nothing to do with the ban on cellular-capable scanners,
which the FCC and Customs are bound to enforce if they don't want to
hear from the Hill and cellular industry lawyers.

The FCC does have to see it and certify it unless you can straight-faced
claim other pretenses and get away with it. And Form 740 was superseded
by Customs ABI (Automated Broker Interface) -- more efficiently barring
funky import attempts. Why risk breaking Customs and FCC regs to get a
scanner that can pick up cellular? Buy a spectrum analyzer or a scanner
that is already in the country under the previous rules, should you
have a compelling need to do this.

> It is also legal to import receivers for the purpose of exporting
> them.  Companies -can- import them and sell them to others in the
> U.S. and stamp the invoice or have printed on the invoice the sale is
> for export purposes.

But this is an ancient scam with which the enforcement folks are well
acquainted.


BK

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

Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 12:57:55 CDT
From: "Andrew C. Green" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns


[e-mail] (Dave Leibold) writes:

> {The Toronto Star} reports of a 14-month-old boy in Barrie, Ontario
> who drowned while his mother attempted to dial 911. Unlike many
> centres in Canada, Barrie does not have a 911 service, thus calls to
> 911 are usually completed to a not-in-service recording.

I have encountered this myself occasionally in the past when I had to
call 911 from some unfamiliar location, and precious seconds would be
wasted slamming down the phone and redialing for the Operator. This
sort of begs the question, naive though this may be: Instead of
routing the call to an intercept, can't it be routed to an operator
instead? Any operator anywhere would probably be better than a
recorded intercept telling the caller to hang up and guess again.


Andrew C. Green   Datalogics, Inc.  Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron  Chicago, IL  60610-3498

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

From: Ed Ellers <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 13:55:11 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


Dave Leibold <[e-mail]> writes:

> {The Toronto Star} reports of a 14-month-old boy in Barrie, Ontario
> who drowned while his mother attempted to dial 911. Unlike many
> centres in Canada, Barrie does not have a 911 service, thus calls to
> 911 are usually completed to a not-in-service recording. The family
> recently moved to Barrie and didn't realise that local emergency
> numbers needed to be dialed direct.

Seems to me that they should have let 911 calls go through to the
local operator.  South Central Bell used to do that with ESSs in
non-911 areas (since 911 was built into the software), but not with
SXS or crossbar (which would have had to be modified).

We have a small-area situation in the Louisville area as well; a few
homes in neighboring Oldham County are served by a CO in Jefferson
County.  SCB was apparently unable to break out those customers as
being across the county line, so if they dial 911 they get the
Jefferson County center.  (Which is nothing more than a clearinghouse
that forwards calls to the appropriate agency, so they just pass
Oldham County stuff to the 911 center in LaGrange.)

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Levandowski)
Subject: Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 13:11:26 GMT


[article about child drowning because parents dialed '911' in an area
with no '911' service deleted]

My parents have a cottage in southern New Hampshire, in a town whose
full-time population is perhaps 500, but whose population swells to
around 5000 in the summer because of the summer homes on the lakes.
That region -- Cheshire County -- does not have widespread 911 service.
There is a regional emergency dispatch center in Keene, but you have to
dial 352-1100 to reach it.

This is probably in part due to the fact that the equipment in the
region seems pretty antiquated; only recently was the local office
switched from mechanical switches to electronics (perhaps four or five
years ago). This was in large part due, no doubt, to the presence of
PC Connection/MacConnection in a neighboring town -- soon thereafter
they started using ANI to speed orders.

In any case, I'm sure the following bit of information is as true in
other rural non-911 areas as it is in Cheshire County: If you can't
get through to 911, you should try dialing 0 for the operator. The
operator can connect you more quickly than it would take you to look
up the number in a phone book or try to dredge it out of memory when
you're in a panic.

The gossip I've heard is that Cheshire County will jump directly to
Enhanced 911 once all of the local offices install modern switches.
Since virtually all emergency calls are handled out of the Mutual Aid
center in Keene as it is, the political-boundaries question Pat
mentioned is already resolved.


Rob Levandowski   [e-mail]
Computer Interest Floor associate / University of Rochester

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven Bradley)
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts
Organization: The Forest City Exchange, Forest City, Florida
Date: Wed, 24 May 1994 22:19:27 GMT


John Harris ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Quoting [e-mail]:

>> I was trying out new modem software yesterday, and under the option
>> where one can specify the number of redial attempts before giving up,
>> somthing like the following reads: "Governement regulations may limit
>> you to 10 redials maximum."

> The rules apply to any telephone device, fax or modem.  The TIA should
> be petitioning the FCC for adoption of the new Part 68/CS-03 any time
> now.

Actually, there is a way around this, if it is software for a faxmodem,
such as a fax server, the card itself in firmware is under government
regulation, therefore, if you are a developer, do NOT use the internal
redial option in the faxmodem, use the BUSY, VOICE, NO ANSWER result
codes to re-dial it using the software command to redial last number
or even A/ if the last was a dial attempt.  This way the meddling FCC
can keep its nose out it and allow unlimited and unregulated re-dialing.

This is possible because the FCC regulates DEVICES, not SOFTWARE,
therefore you can program software to redial 100s of times and the FCC
could do nothing to prevent it.  That is why they have BUSY, NO ANSWER,
RRING, VOICE, etc.


Internet:        [e-mail]         |  Steven G. Bradley
                 [e-mail]            |----------------------------
GEnie:           [e-mail]  |  Don't you think it's about
CompuServe:      [e-mail]   |  time we FIRED the Federal
America Online:  [e-mail]          |  Communications Commission?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I hope you are the next victim of someone's
'unregulated and unlimited redialing' rather than me. And no, I do not
think 'it is about time we fired the FCC ...'. I think it is time we gave
the agency even greater enforcement powers in a few instances that I will
not go into here at this minute.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #250
******************************